The URL can be used to link to this page

04/02/2007 - Packet • I • TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA • II TIGARD CIVIC CENTER 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD T I GARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 APRIL 2, 2007 NOTE: The Planning Commission will meet at 6:00 p.m. in Red Rock Creek Conference Room to greet new Planning Commissioners and to discuss meeting protocol. 7:00 p.m. —Town Hall 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 4. APPROVE MINUTES 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2006-00010/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2006-00003/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2007-00001 WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a 27-lot subdivision and planned development on a 2.38 acre site. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached (duet) single-family homes. The average size of the proposed lots is approximately 1,926 square feet. Two pocket parks and a pedestrian tract/open space are proposed totaling approximately 54,681 square feet. LOCATION: The project is located north of Pacific Hwy. at the southern terminus of SW 74th Avenue involving three (3) parcels at 11625 and 11645 SW Pacific Hwy. and 11030 SW 74th Avenue; WCTM 1S136DB, Tax Lots 01000 and 02300 and 1S136CA, Tax Lot 01700. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium-Density Residential District. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT g Tigard lfannin Commission -toll Call Hearing Date: - 2- -1)7 Starting Time: 47 ; D3/0 we COMMISSIONERS: ✓ Jodie Inman (President) VTom Anderson Rex Caffall Margaret Doherty Karen Fishel Stuart Hasman Matthew Muldoon Jeremy Vermilyea David Walsh STAFF PRESENT: '/ Dick Bewersdorff Tom Coffee Gary Pagenstecher t/ Ron Bunch Cheryl Caines John Floyd Emily Eng Duane Roberts -/ Kim McMillan Sean Farrelly Gus Duenas Darren Wyss Phil Nachbar • • CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes April 2, 2007 The Planning Commission met at 6:00 p.m. in Red Rock Creek Conference Room to greet new Planning Commissioners and to discuss meeting protocol. 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, Fishel, Muldoon,Vermilyea, and Walsh Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Hasman Staff Present: Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner; Ron Bunch,Long Range Planning Manager;Kim McMillan, Development Review Engineer; Jerree Lewis, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Ron Bunch invited the Commissioners and the public to open houses on the Comprehensive Plan on April 18th and April 21st. The open houses will provide the public an opportunity to become familiar with the Comp Plan Update process, provide input on the Tigard 2007 Resoune Report, confirm community values, review draft goals, and sign up to participate further. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES It was moved and seconded to approve the March 19, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0. Commissioners Fishel, Muldoon, and Vermilyea abstained. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2006-00010/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2006-00003/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2007-00001 WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 1 • • REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a 27-lot subdivision and planned development on a 2.38 acre site. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached (duet) single-family homes. The average size of the proposed lots is approximately 1,926 square feet. Two pocket parks and a pedestrian tract/open space are proposed totaling approximately 54,681 square feet. LOCATION: The project is located north of Pacific Hwy. at the southern terminus of SW 74th Avenue involving three (3) parcels at 11625 and 11645 SW Pacific Hwy. and 11030 SW 74th Avenue;WCTM 1S136DB, Tax Lots 01000 and 02300 and 1S136CA, Tax Lot 01700. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium- Density Residential District. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. Commissioner Vermilyea and President Inman declared conflicts of interest and recused themselves. Vice-President Walsh took over as Chair for the public hearing. Commissioners Muldoon and Walsh reported site visits. STAFF REPORT Gary Pagenstecher provided a general overview of the structure of a staff report, followed by specifics for this application. He noted that a new Planned Development Code was adopted last November. This application would be processed under the old code. He advised that this applicant has asked for a private street to serve more than 6 units and lots that average significantly less than the minimum allowed in the R-12 zone. To get both of those things, they have proposed to save a significant tree and provide several open space tracts. They also propose a pedestrian pathway from the development out to Hwy. 99W. Issues that arose during the review included density computation, landscaping and screening, and street improvements. The density computation question for the Commission is if the applicant should be allowed 27 units as proposed or 23 as staff found to be allowed in the standards. For landscaping and screening, the Commission has the discretion to require greater screening than would otherwise be allowed under the standards. For street improvements, the public street was proposed as a "skinny street" and our standards require a full section — a difference from 44' to 52'wide. The density calculations revolve around the definition of flag pole and whether or not the flag pole that extends from Hwy. 99W to the development can be included or should be excluded from the net developable area. Also, our standards require that the pedestrian access in the flag pole be public right-of-way. We also require a utility easement to the water quality swale. These requirements have caused disagreement between staff and the applicant with regard to the density allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 2 • • Pagenstecher referred to a memo from Dorothy Cofield dated March 30th and a memo from Clean Water Services dated March 22nd (Exhibits A and B). The Cofield memo includes a revised density calculation which has increased from what was in the staff report. Pagenstecher has not had a chance to review the new calculations; however, he agrees with the basis of the calculations. Staff is in agreement with the second scenario (without the flagpole in net area); so 25 lots would be appropriate with the revised numbers. Pagenstecher noted that parking on the 20' wide private street would not be allowed. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Dorothy Cofield, 12725 SW Millikan Way, S-300, Beaverton, OR 97005 and Kirsten Van Loo,Alpha Planning, 9200 SW Nimbus, Beaverton, OR 97008 spoke for the applicant. Cofield advised that the applicant is in agreement with the staff report except for the density issue. She presented a new density analysis (Exhibit C). She referred to the 1994 Dolan case about whether or not the company could be made to constitutionally give a bike path to allow the public to go on their property and not use that property for development. The U.S. Supreme Court said there must be rough proportionality. In this case, the developer is being asked to dedicate open space, easements, and right-of-way. About 50% of the land that the developer owns is being given to the public. The developer agrees to do all of this, but in exchange, he would like to develop it with 27 lots. The development will be innovative and should be allowed to develop at maximum density (27 lots). Kirsten Van Loo provided details of the proposed development (Exhibit D). She noted that the long pathway to Hwy. 99W was the original access point to the property. She advised that the applicant has been granted an easement from an adjacent property owner for an access point to SW 74th Ave. The proposed public street would also connect to the property to the west. It could provide access to that property if it ever redevelops. The units will be duet homes —there's a shared property line that runs through each pair of homes. Each home is on a separate, individually owned lot. It's similar to a townhouse, but they are all "end units". The plan shows extra head-in parking spaces along the public street; however code standards do not allow them so they will have to be removed. Van Loo said that once they build the public right-of-way, the project is no longer a flag lot. Approximately 25% of the property will be in open space tracts. The circulation system adds up to another 25% of the site. A planned development allows flexibility in exchange for benefits for the City. The applicant believes the duet units provide an affordable ownership opportunity. Protecting the existing oak tree is a mandate and the park space in tract C is a good size piece of land for this zoning district. It's designed so that when the adjoining property develops, the park can continue. Van Loo reviewed the newest density analysis (Exhibit C) and advised that staff believes the flag pole cannot be counted for density. Their attorney does not agree, saying that all the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 3 • • land within the legal description is included in the parcel. Taking the flag pole out of the computation gives them 24 units for a base density. With all the amenities included in the project, the applicant believes they should qualify for density bonuses. Possible density bonuses include 3% for undeveloped open space, 3% for developed open space, 3% for focal points or creating vistas, and 3% for architectural style, housing types, unique character of the development. The maximum allowed for density bonuses is 10%. With the maximum density bonus, this development should be allowed 26.88 units. Van Loo said that most jurisdictions round up with the units. Tigard rounds down. She encouraged the Planning Commission to round up and give the development 27 units. The Planning Commission discussed the density bonus issue. Commissioner Doherty does not believe that duet homes qualify as being unique. She sees this type of development in other parts of Tigard. Van Loo said that the uniqueness lies in the fact that the duet homes are close to an arterial, shopping, employment, etc. Homeowners can walk to shopping or church, plus they have access to public transportation. Commissioner Muldoon referred to the memo from the applicant's attorney saying that people could access 99W through a neighboring commercial parking lot. He does not believe this is a viable option. He asked if the applicant believes the pathway to 99W makes the development unique and, without that designation as a right-of-way (ROW), it would not be unique. Van Loo agreed. Gary Pagenstecher noted that the matrix provided by the applicant is helpful. There is still disagreement about the new public ROW calculation. A marginal difference in the calculation might make a difference with the unit number. The applicant is asking for a 9% density bonus, but staff is only in agreement with the open space and focal point density bonuses (6%). It's up to the Commissioners to decide if an architectural style has been met to award another 3% bonus. Nothing has been submitted to make that determination; however the Commission could consider the option of"innovative building orientation or building grouping" for the additional 3%. Pagenstecher advised that the public pedestrian access is required by the code under Section 18.810.040.B.2. In addition, water quality access is also required by code. Dick Bewersdorff said that the Commission could dispense with the argument of the parcel being a flag lot or not. It's not relevant in this case. What's relevant is the issue of public easement that's required by the code. Dorothy Cofield agrees that there is a code requirement for the public pedestrian path for connectivity; however, that does not mean it's constitutional. The property owner does not have to dedicate to the public's use land that isn't related to the impact of what he is creating. The impact of what this applicant is creating is about 270 vehicle trips. The whole impact area is about 12,000 trips. The amount of land he is being asked to dedicate compared to what he has is over the allowable ratio. The applicant may have to dedicate the public pedestrian path, but he doesn't have to do it for free— he has to be compensated. Staff responded that the issue is if they meet the standards; this applicant has not met the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 4 S . standards. If they argue proportionality on that basis, the only option the Commission has is to deny the application because they have not met the standards. Co field disagreed, saying that the developer can say he believes it's unconstitutional, but go ahead and make a dedication and then make a claim for just compensation. This applicant agrees with the dedication and is asking for 27 lots as compensation. Van Loo referred to a memo from their traffic engineer (Exhibit E) that substantiates a 46' ROW. The ROW dedication is based on the vehicle trips that will be carried on a portion of a public street. They believe that this project plus the potential development of the adjacent property will generate less than 500 vehicle trips per day. Having less ROW will give the applicant a little more land for their density calculations. Kim McMillan disagreed with the 46' ROW. The City also takes the existing neighborhood into account. The adjacent parcels have 32 dwelling units and this development is proposing 27. Added together, it is already over 500 trips. Having 54' for the public street will absorb the head-in parking, but will allow for some parallel parking. Commissioner Muldoon asked about the net gain and loss for parking and if there was a gain in green space. Van Loo said there is a potential total loss of 9 spaces and a potential gain of maybe 5. She advised that the Development Code requires 1 parking space per unit. The applicant is proposing 2 spaces per unit. Over the long term, the public street will build out to full development which will allow for more parking. Commissioner Walsh said that the parking spaces are not realistic for this development. It was also noted that there will be no parking allowed on the private street. Van Loo said that reciprocal parking arrangements with neighboring properties have not been considered. Also, eliminating some of the units to put in more parking is not feasible. The Commissioners expressed major concern about the lack of parking. Van Loo suggested that people could park in neighboring businesses. Going back to the number of units recommended by staff, it was advised that staff is agreeable to 25 units. With regard to the access on 74th Street, Van Loo said that it will be repaved to 24' wide to a section that meets City standards —approximately 500 lineal feet to Spruce Street. Len Dalton, White Oak Village, LLC, 7955 SW Hall Blvd., Beaverton, OR 97008, owner of the property, reported that he is following the recommendations in the arborist's report to care for the Oak tee. Screening and buffering were discussed. It was advised that there will be a 6' wall between the development and the bus storage lot. Commissioner Muldoon doesn't think this will be enough screening. He asked if the developer would consider planting higher vegetation. Van Loo said that a final landscaping plan would be submitted as part of the final development plan. If the Commission wants, the developer will put in higher vegetation. It was advised that the tree is probably over 200 years old and in very healthy condition. The homeowner's association will maintain the park and protect the tree. Also, the developer will comply with the Police Department's request for lighting along the pathway. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 5 • • Marty Weil, Remax, 9790 SW Nimbus Ave., Beaverton, OR spoke about the affordability of the proposed homes. He noted that end units are very desirable and add a lot of value to the property. Regarding style of the units, Len Dalton advised that every unit will have some sort of stone veneer on the front elevation as a unifying theme. Vice-President Walsh asked about the 3% bonus for architectural quality and style concept. He asked if there were any examples of how that has been applied in the past. Staff answered that, typically, drawings showing unique architectural details would be submitted. The Planning Commission would approve the drawings agreeing that they were unique. With this application, no drawings were submitted. Walsh noted that with the new PD code (which does not apply with this application), that aspect of the bonus could include such features as environmentally friendly materials, impervious pavements, etc., which would be over and above the standard. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN FAVOR Susan Frohnmeyer, 10900 SW 76th Place #24, Tigard 97223 testified that she lives on the other side of fence adjacent to the proposed development. She is supportive of the project but expressed some concerns about density, traffic, and protection of the tree. The developer has assured her that they will keep the tree. She hopes that all the other issues can be resolved so that a quality project can be constructed. There will be more noise; however, there is already noise night and day from the Raz buses. Mitch Gensman, PO Box 1626, Sherwood, OR 97140, testified that he owns property to the south of the proposed development. He is pleased about the development and asked the Commission to consider allowing development to fullest extent possible. He had questions about the setback for the one way street next to his property. Van Loo advised that the setback is 4' from the curb to the property line; the Uniform Building Code requires that they stay at least 2' back from the property line during grading and construction. Also, there will be a masonry wall and buffer to separate a portion of the site from the adjacent property. Staff provided details on the drainage and detention system that will be on the site. The water quality facility will be maintained by the City. Mr. Gensman asked that after the subdivision is recorded, if it would be possible to release a current access easement that runs along his property to the proposed development site. The applicant agreed. The Planning Commission advised that this is a matter that needs to be resolved between the two parties outside of the public hearing; the City does not have authority over this. Mr. Gensman is concerned about public access through the area next to the Union Gospel Mission. He noted that there are homeless people living in the back of the building. He asked if two fences could be tied together to prevent pedestrian egress in that area. Van Loo PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 6 • • believes that because the adjacent parcels are not part of this application, the City cannot mandate offsite conditions. The Planning Commission advised that this is beyond the scope of this application. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN OPPOSITION Ken Zsoka, 10945 SW 74th Ave., Tigard 97223 spoke about the impact on 74th Ave. with overflow parking from the development. He asked if there are any provisions for the construction equipment and contractor vehicles. He does not want to see their dead end street flooded. He also asked who will be responsible for the sidewalks, curb, and gutters. Staff answered that the applicant has to provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for the project. They will come down 74th and will be expected to park on their site to do all their work for the bulk of development. There will only be street paving on 74th; no curbs and sidewalks will be put in. The homeowners won't be tagged for any improvements. Anyone can park along a public street, but they can't block driveways. Neighbors can call the Engineering inspector if there are problems with construction vehicles. Sandi Moxley, 11005 SW 74th, Tigard 97223, is concerned about lighting in the park area. She thinks that it will become a high crime rate because it will be boxed in with a fence. People could congregate there after dark and cause problems. APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL Kirsten Van Loo advised the following: • Regarding the 200 year old tree, the client is not opposed to putting the tree on the historic register in order to provide maximum protection. • There currently is poor connectivity on 74th; the continuation of 74th will provide the next link to eventually connect to 78th. • Parking and construction management concerns were answered by staff. • The 24' wide paving on 74th will be an improvement to the street. It will provide more encouragement for people to park on the street rather than on people's yards. • Issues about fencing were discussed; the client will do the best he can to restrict unauthorized passage on private property while maintaining balance with the community. The new pedestrian pathway may be longer, but will be a more pleasant experience. • Regarding lighting in park—if places are lighted at night, they become attractive nuisances and people tend to congregate there. The client will defer to the Police Department and follow their recommendations to the best of his ability. • The two lots next to the park will be fenced. Dorothy Cofield said that they would like to conclude tonight if possible, or to have some inclination as to what the decision will be. She feels they have met the burden of proof for 27 lots. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 7 • • PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Doherty does not think that public access to Hwy. 99W warrants going against the staff recommendation for density. She is very concerned about the lack of parking and the small yards. She is leaning toward the staff recommendation of 25 lots. Commissioner Muldoon disagrees with diverting access to the north. He believes that the pedestrian access and the ROW are indisputable. He thinks that cutting through the adjoining Mexican restaurant's parking lot is not adequate. The screening by Raz still needs to be addressed; higher vegetation could help with screening. There's a huge amount of work involved to rip up the entire walkway and change the pathway to something that's wheelchair accessible. He doesn't see anything in the code that allows for granting an extra 3%in recognition of all this work. Commissioner Caffall believes that to get the extra 3%, the applicant needs to come back with additional drawings showing the type of architectural design that will be used. Commissioner Anderson agreed. He thinks it could be a great project, but the Commission just can't tell yet. He's leaning toward staff's recommendation of 25 lots, or possibly even 26. Commissioner Caffall suggested continuing the hearing to give the applicant a chance to re- present the material. Dick Bewersdorff said the hearing could be continued to a time certain (April 16th). The applicant can come back with architectural drawings and revised density calculations. Staff cannot recommend using the pathway for density calculations—the code requires that public right-of-way be excluded. They will also have to deal with the street width that the Engineering Division recommends. Commissioner Fishel agreed with Commissioner Doherty on the parking issue. Vice-President Walsh said that there are a lot of positive aspects to the development with the parks and open space. The tree is great,but it won't live forever;the Planning Commission has to look beyond that. He thinks there could have been more work done with staff before the hearing to get some of the details worked out. As far as the number of lots, staff has given guidance as to what is allowed and what is not allowed. To him, it's clear that the public ROW cannot be included. He noted that it's the Planning Commission's discretion whether to grant density bonuses or not. Given the information presented at this time, he does not see how they can go beyond 25 lots. He is also very concerned about the parking. It was noted that the Commission wants more parking, but the applicant already meets the code. Commissioner Doherty moved to recommend approval of the application as submitted,with the staff recommendation of 25 lots; everything else would stay the same. The Commission was reminded that the applicant had asked to speak again before the decision was made. PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 8 • • Dorothy Cofield asked to either 1) continue the meeting for 2 weeks so the applicant can return with design drawings, or 2) get approval for 25 lots with the ability to get 1 additional lot with a plan showing that it is feasible to meet the design bonus. For#2, the Commission would make a finding there is enough evidence in the record, in terms of the stonework and type of design that could be done, that the density bonus could be met. Commissioner Doherty still had concerns about lack of parking and lighting in the park. Cofield noted that the parking standards have been met and that transit is also available. Len Dalton said that,with either 24 units or 27 units, the parking issue won't change. Vice-President Walsh noted that the applicant is requesting to put a lot of units on the site, using the Planned Development process. The PD process allows the Planning Commission to use their discretion about granting density bonuses. The Commission wants to have a livable neighborhood. Commissioner Muldoon asked staff if diagonal parking could be allowed on the far southeast corner lot or if the lot was too small. Staff responded that all the cars would have to back out, which doesn't work on that lot. Kim McMillan said that if the 2 homes by the oak tree were taken out, the applicant might be able to gain a couple of spaces. Dick Bewersdorff noted that it's also possible to take out the 2 units by the horseshoe and put in angled parking. The cars would still have to back out onto the private street. Cofield asked the keep the record open for 2 weeks so the applicant can come back. The Commission said that they would like to see something unique. The applicant noted that one of the standards the Commission could consider is building grouping. He feels that having duet units could qualify as a unique grouping of homes. Staff agreed that innovative building grouping is one of the standards listed in the code. If the Commission determines that duet homes satisfy that language, they could award the additional 3%. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Doherty moved again to recommend approval of the application as submitted, with the staff recommendation of 25 lots. Commissioner Fishel seconded the motion. Staff advised that the applicant has submitted sufficient information to show that the original 23 units recommended should be changed. Two additional units would be consistent with the findings; however, that number would be subject to additional information which would verify that the calculation was accurate. Dick Bewersdorff recommended giving the applicant the opportunity to re-compute the numbers and provide the evidence to the Commission along with evidence to warrant more density bonuses. The Commission could then make their decision. Commissioner Doherty withdrew her motion. Commissioner Caffall moved to continue the hearing to April 16th. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Vice-President Walsh asked staff to check the records to see how density bonuses have been applied in the past. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 9 • • 6. OTHER BUSINESS None 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:36 p.m. Jerree Le , Planning Co 'ssion Secretary A'1"1EST: Vice:-7.'•.ent David W. sh r • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 2,2007—Page 10 • • COFIELD LAW OFFICE Dorothy S. Cofield, Attorney at Law TO: Tigard Planning Commission Members FR: Dorothy S. Cofield, Attorney at Law RE: White Oak Village (SUB 2006-00010) DT: March 30, 2007 MEMORANDUM This memorandum will respond to the staff report dated April 2, 2007 in regards to the density calculations on page 23 of the staff report. The main difference between the allowable density as calculated by the developer and the allowable density as described in the staff report lies in the staff recommendation to remove the "flagpole" portion of the tract configuration from being considered as part of the area to be used for the density calculations. See Attached Site Plan. The flagpole portion of the parcel totals about 6,784 square feet, and its removal from consideration results in a net loss of two units from the project. We believe that staff has misinterpreted the regulations for the following reasons. The Proposed Subdivision Will Not Include a Flag Lot The staff report states that Tax Lot 1700, as it is presently configured and developed, is defined as a flag lot under TDC 18.120.030.89.c. Staff reasoned that because Tax Lot 1700 is a flag lot, TDC 18.730.050.E.2 applies and the flag cannot be included in the net buildable area. Under that provision a flag lot is: "Flag Lot"—A lot behind a frontage lot, plus a strip of land out to the street for an access drive. A flag lot results from the subdivision of a residential lot or parcel which is more than twice as large as the minimum allowed in the underlying zone, but without sufficient frontage to allow two dwellings to front along a street. There are two distinct parts to a flag lot: the "flag" which comprises the actual building site located at the rear portion of the original lot, and the "pole" which provides access from a street to the flag lot. The flag pole can either be part of the rear lot or granted as an easement from the front lot." Tax Lot 1700 as it will be developed does not meet any part of this definition. First, the frontage for the proposed subdivision will be on newly extended SW 74th Ave. to the north, not SW Pacific Hwy. to the south. Secondly, the resulting flag lot has sufficient frontage to the north to allow all the dwellings to front along SW 74th (via the private loop street). Third, the pole does not provide the primary access to the building site which is via SW 74th Ave. The pole is an open space tract with a secondary, pedestrian path access to SW Pacific Hwy and is not used • • Tigard Planning Commission Memorandum Page 2 as the main access to each building site. Therefore, the lot area exclusions in TDC 18.730.050.E.2 do not apply. It seems clear from reading all of the section regarding the definitions of"flag lots" that the definitions are meant to give direction on when and whether someone may create a flag lot. Staff should not exclude the flagpole portion because upon approval and development, the flagpole portion will no longer serve as the access to the parcel. In a similar case interpreting a local government's flag lot regulation the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), affirmed the county's interpretation that whether a flag lot exists is shown by the future use of the property as shown on a proposed plat. Central Bethany Dev. Co. L.P. v. Washington County, 33 Or LUBA 463 (1997). In that case, the central dispute was whether a lot was a flag lot as defined in the county's code. The applicant replaced the "flagpole"portion of a residential lot with a "separate tract for access purposes" and the county found the lot was no longer a flag lot. LUBA found that the county was correct in finding the separate tract attached to the lot was no longer a flag lot because there was no "pole." In looking at the proposed subdivision plat for White Oak Village, the pedestrian path is proposed to be within Tract A. As shown, Tract A could be made into two separate tracts and there would no longer be the "pole"portion of TL 1700. See Attached Site Plan. Staff's conclusion that TL 1700 is a flag pole lot is "clearly wrong"because there will not be any pole. Id. at 474. (where there is no pole, there is no flag lot). Or, the developer could go through the exercise of a Property Line Adjustment/ Consolidation (PLA), and when approved, the parcel would no longer meet the definition of a flag lot. Access to the site would then be through the northeast corner of the site, and the flagpole portion would no longer be the access point. While the developer could clearly get rid of the flag pole problem by doing a property line adjustment, the fact that the flag pole does not exist on the site plan already achieves that result. Therefore, the planning commission should find the net density of the project includes the pedestrian pathway in Tract A and the allowable density with the 6% bonus is 28.26 dwellings. See Attachment. The Density Computation Ordinance Should Not Apply to a Public Pedestrian Easement The staff report concludes it is appropriate to exclude the "pole" from the net development area because "it can only be used for access and is not functionally proximate to the buildable area." The staff report does not specifically address whether land that can only be used for access must be excluded from the net development area pursuant to TDC 18.715.020 (Density Calculation). That regulation excludes the following land from counting toward a developer's allowed density as follows: 1. All sensitive land areas: a. Land within the 100-year floodplain; b. Land or slopes exceeding 25%; The Round •12725 SW Millikan Way•Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofield @hevanet.com • • Tigard Planning Commission Memorandum Page 3 c. Drainage ways; and d. Wetlands. 2. All land dedicated to the public for park purposes 3. All land dedicated for public rights-of-way. 4. All land proposed for private streets; and S. A lot of at least the size required by the applicable based zoning district, if an existing dwelling is to remain on the site. With staffs proposed condition of approval that the pedestrian path be a public easement, it is unclear whether the Planning Commission will exclude it from the developer's net density on the basis of it being a public right-of-way rather than a flag pole. The developer urges the planning commission to find it is not proper to exclude the pedestrian path easement on Tract A from the net development area for the following reasons. By making the pedestrian pathway a public easement, the developer will lose two lots if the public pathway is considered a public "right-of-way"I and excluded from the net development area. The loss of two lots, worth approximately $200,000, as well as constructing the pathway and related infrastructure and dedicating the land for the pathway results in a $300,000 exaction. Even considering the unmitigated impacts of$94,242, the public easement requirement is not roughly proportional.2 Nor is it related to the impacts of the proposed subdivision. Assuming a 27-lot subdivision creates the need for a connection to SW Pacific Hwy., it does not create an impediment to the public's access to SW Pacific Hwy. which will continue to have access through the Fred Meyer shopping center. Any impacts from the proposed 27-lot subdivision to create the need for a pedestrian connection to SW Pacific Hwy can be met by a private pedestrian pathway. A private pathway is clearly not a "public right-of- way" and would count toward the net development area, thereby increasing density to 28.26 lots (with the 6% density bonus). Requiring the public pedestrian pathway and also subtracting the public easement from the net development area results in a double impact to the developer: He has to dedicate the land for the path, construct the path and then lose two lots because the pedestrian pathway land area can no longer be included in the net density. We urge the planning commission to find a fair result when determining if the public pedestrian pathway is subtracted from the net development area. The developer is willing to provide a public access easement, but not at such a severe cost to him as losing two lots. TDC 18.120.12.122 defines right-of-way as a strip of land occupied by a pedestrian path which must be shown as separate and distinct from the adjoining lots and not included within the dimensions of such lots. 2 By using the staff's"Rough Proportionality"analysis,the applicant reserves the right to challenge it during these proceedings as to certain errors that were made. The Round •12725 SW Millikan Way • Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofield @hevanet.com • • These numbers came from DL Designs changes to ROW `Pith the Flagpole in Net Area 103,811.12 Gross area of site (10,510.00) New Public R.O.W. (12,16'7.00) New Private R.O.W. 81,50012 Net Developable Area 26.66 Number of allowable lots 25.26 Number of Lots w/ 6% density bonus 2c1.06 Number of Lots w/ q% density bonus mithout the Flagpole in Net Area 1O5,17112 Gross area of site (10,510.00) New Public R.O.W. (12,16'7.00) New Private R.O.W. (6116.00) Flagpole '74,524.12 Net Developable Area 24.43 Number of allowable lots 25.clO Number of Lots w/ 6% density bonus 26.65 Number of Lots w/ ci% density bonus • • MEMORANDUM DATE: March 22, 2007 FROM: Bill Baechler, Clean Water Services TO: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner City of Tigard Planning Division SUBJECT: Review Comments — White Oak Village Subdivision, 2006-00010 SUB, PDR 2006-00003, ZON 2007-00001 GENERAL COMMENTS • This Land Use Review by Clean Water Services (CWS) does not constitute approval of storm or sanitary sewer compliance with the NPDES permit held by CWS. CWS must review and approve final construction plans prior to issuance of any construction and/or connection permits. • All provisions of the development submittal shall be in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards, (presently R&O 04-09), the Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Manual, December 2000 edition, and all current Intergovernmental Agreements between the City and CWS. • Final construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by CWS for conformance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards prior to issuance of any construction permits. • A Stormwater Connection Permit shall be required, as approved by CWS, prior to construction of sanitary sewer, storm and surface water systems, and any work within sensitive area buffers and vegetated corridors. • Public sanitary and storm sewer easements shall be required in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards. Public easements shall extend over the entirety of the private street"Tracts B, G & E" and"Tract A", Water Quality/Access/Park. SANITARY SEWER • Each lot in the development shall be provided with a direct gravity side sewer(service lateral) connection to a public sanitary sewer mainline in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards. Each sanitary lateral shall provide service to only one lot and shall be contiguous with pubic right-of-way or public sewer easement. V • • • The engineer shall verify public sanitary sewer availability to adjacent properties and extend public sanitary sewer to provide service to adjacent properties in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards, (presently R&O No. 04-09). STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY • Each lot in the development shall be provided with a gravity service lateral and individual connection to a public storm conveyance. Privately owned and maintained storm sewers, including water quality facilities, serving multiple lots shall not be approved. • A hydraulic and hydrological analysis of the existing drainage and downstream storm conveyance system, in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards (presently R&O 04-09), is required. The applicant is responsible for mitigating downstream storm conveyance if the existing system does not have the capacity to convey the runoff volume from a 25-year, 24-hour storm event. • The Developer shall provide a public water quality facility, in accordance with current CWS Design and construction Standards, to treat all impervious surfaces being constructed or preserved as part of this development. The facility shall be placed in a separate `Tract' with public easements and not part of any buildable lot. Stormwater filter vaults (stormwater management manhole), shall not be approved as a public water quality facility. • Maintenance access shall be provided for water quality and/or detention facilities in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards (presently R&O 04-09). • Final construction plans shall show all existing and proposed public and private storm conveyance and easements. SENSITIVE AREA • CWS has reviewed this proposal for Tax/Lot Map 1S136DB-01000, 02300, and 1S136CA- 01700 and issued a Service Provider Letter(SPL), CWS File Number 06-001852, for the proposed development dated August 1, 2006. EROSION CONTROL • A NPDES 1200 C Erosion Control Permit is required in addition to meeting all CWS erosion control requirements in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards. • • V White Oak Planned Development Density Analysis Original Site Design Revised Site Design Revised Site Design (Staff Report) Private Sidewalks in Private Sidewalks in Easements Easements Incl. Ped. Link Gross Area of Site 103,977.72 103,977.72 103,977.72 New Public ROW 28,585.00 10,510.00 10,510.00 New Private ROW (combined above) 12,167.00 12,167.00 Area in Ped. Link 6,776.00 6,776.00 Net Developable Area 68,608.00 81,300.72 74,524.72 Net Developable Area 68,608.00 81,300.72 74,524.72 Divide by 3050 for 22.49 26.65 24.43 base density units units units With 3% Density 23.16 27.45 25.16 Bonus units units units With 6% Density 23.83 28.25 25.89 Bonus units units units With 9% Density 24.51 29.05 26.62 Bonus units units units With Max. 10% 24.73 29.31 26.88 Density Bonus units units units r ' •• :.• • , 1 •• •:•• , .1\ li ::::•4"- i ' • : •• , ..::::•••::,::::!::.:.:::„. • :• .• /••:,• . ,••• , f....'.• ..::::.:::::•::::::•::: •::::::: •••••• ..•.... . . • •••••••• :•:•••: • • •• • . . . •.........,... • •••• . . • .•:.::•: • ••••••:• ..... • . ::. • .... .....::!1::::••I •: : • . ...... .c.:::: ..,.... 0 • • :. : : , .r,„/)-/ ..., /11 ;., ,/.--;::4+ -44.. -• •••••4',.;;,,-,,,,,,.,,,,f-,..M. ,,,,,:: ;;`'.'''•' .. Aik. 1 ,...,•,;;/•;././ q4 . 4 • : 4 :••:•••.t. :: 4:11 1: L.._ ...: 1•:. (c...:4 , ....1 '.!:' a.. : •i 1 : . • • . ... ..... : , If,' • • , A , ,..i. q . .............................. 1.1 :,....i. ...... , : ': •: • ••••• •,--- 0........j:::: T..-..... ' -..........................1 *., aiti. p• ! i-- -i•• :— 4 •:. 0 :, : „4:.: . .: • ...:• . . • • : 1:••••44: Tr 01 :1,::::••••1: •• 1: : : .. , : • • ••– : • .: . : /A::::•• ii:::: 11 • • ..1.: •• 1 ' 1: , • • — -: 1 -...... 4 : 1. •?......7 I •••'* • • • ' i';•A „.„,,•• ' -1 1 • . •••••• ' . i ,.t:::: • •: - . . ii !..r f......,'.:,...,,, ......... .., - • •• • •• • -- .• . ', , • > , :•• ir i 1 • 1•••••, :: 1 ... 6 i• :. • •,...i , ':',.. . ....:,..f I.........(— ---!, (1. f :/"." 4.1.'.11 .! ........... ..... ....... 1 ;lc i i . .....: . ...• *—.....:"..','",;`,.......... "::::::".',E.„ .1`.:.:::::7°1..... '.....f.-.' ...'.. ,--- .........! ....': . . 1 :;.,;; ..• ,t`1:::::;' 0::::;;;; J -- -••• :: .• i, ,, ,,,,, .:;;;;;;;:: ' ; 3. • . . ... 1.) : .4•-•••r::?—.....--•••4!"----1,,,,.r....:::;.' - ••••••••••••••-••••••••••-•-••••••--• A •• '•••••mit..4..4........de, 1: 4....... i.. ....' :' ,• :' ti,. . -,•••,4k."-, I • ••• 1 01, ••• .' I , , ,• : • :•:':: ..4,-••--1.:',I? • 4, •.• I, • , . •• .,,,•••.4 .„,,,,,, , , iii, •••.....,....., '1/4,........'.........ii:it...4Q.j;i: ..; i.,...i.i.,, , 1::...„...• .e.,4:. ::• ... , . .. •• 4,,• 4. : I:::.!.:••..1'.. ..,•,,:44. :, 4, 44„.:::.• ., (...IP.' ' •• 0 c'• i ':::::: 1. - • i, W .kg: a:) 0 ........ ........ • ..„„„Y : -....4. • 44.., v..... .*V. :.......' :5... • MEMORANDUM qFi�• MEM ,co engineering Q 4853 j cam To: Len Dalton, The Dalton Company �, OREGON C/4Y9,,O0 From: Todd Mobley, PE, PTOE 00 E. MOg� kto� Date: April 2, 2007 I EXPIRES: 12 ist/24* I Subject: White Oaks Village Daily Trip Generation —Skinny Streets Len, This memo is written to discuss the expected trip generation of the 27 townhomes proposed to be constructed as part of the White Oaks Village development in Tigard, Oregon. The memo will also address the development of the property to the west and the additional traffic generated by this future development. City of Tigard Development Code allows the proposed 24-foot street width (measured curb to curb) inside of a 46-foot right of way in instances where the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) does not exceed 500 vehicles per day. To estimate the trips generated by the subject development as well the future development of the property to the west, trip rates were used from the manual Trip Generation, Seventh Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE). Specifically, trip rates from land- use codes 210, Single-Family Detached Housing, and 230,Residential Condominium/Townhouse were used. Based upon the size and zoning of the property to the west, it is expected that a maximum of 40 dwelling units could be constructed. To attain this density, some form of com- mon-wall housing would have to be used. If the parcel were to be developed with detached homes, the density would decrease, although the minimum allowed density would be 32 dwell- ing units. The table on the following summarizes the results of the calculations and the expected ADT vol- umes with development of the property to the west as either 40 townhomes or 32 detached sin- gle-family homes. 321 SW 4th Avenue. Suite 400•Portland. OR 97204• Phone 503.248.0313 • Fax 503.248.9251 • • [..1c7.J Len Dalton April 2, 2007 Page 2 of 2 SCENARIO 1 Type # Units Trip Rate Weekday Trips White Oaks Village Townhomes 27 5.86 158 Property to West Townhomes 40 5.86 234 TOTAL: 392 SCENARIO 2 White Oaks Village Townhomes 27 5.86 158 Property to West Sngl-Fam Detached 32 9.57 306 TOTAL: 464 As shown in the table above, the ADT volume from development utilizing the subject portion of street that is being proposed as a skinny street will not exceed 500 vehicles per day. • _ -- -- - -• - — PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning • , COMMUNITY 4UNITY Commission on Monday April 2.2007 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard SPAPERS Civic Center-Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland,OR 97222• PO with the Tigard Municipal Code and the rules of procedure adopt- ' Box 22109• Portland, OR 97269 ed by the Planning Commission and City Council and available at Phone:503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Chapter 18.390. Email: legals @commnewspapers.com Testimony may be submitted in writing prior to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is depose and say that I am the Accounting directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submit- Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of general circulation, published at Beaverton, in ted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are the aforesaid county and state, as defined by available for inspection at no cost. If you want to inspect the file, ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that please call and make an appointment with either the project plan- ner or the planning technicians. A copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven (7) days City of Tigard prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided Public Hearing Item at a reasonable cost. TT10927 Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., a copy of which is hereto annexed, was Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503-639-4171, or by email to published in the entire issue of said garypn tigard-or.gov. newspaper for SUBDIVISION (SUB)2006-00010/PLANNED DEVELOP- 1 MENT REVIEW(PDR)2006-00003/ successive and consecutive weeks in the ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2007-00001 following issues -WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION- REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a 27-lot subdivi- sion 14, 2007 sion and planned development on a 2.38 acre site. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached (duet) single-family homes. The average size of the proposed lots is approximately CIkaJVLOIe 1,926 square feet. Two pocket parks and a pedestrian tract/open space are proposed totaling approximately 54,681 square feet. Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Man ger) LOCATION: The project is.located north of Pacific Hwy. at the southern terminus of SW 74 Avenue involving three( ) parcels March 14, 2007 at 11625 and 11645 SW Pacific Hwy.and 11030 SW 74 Avenue; WCTM 1 S 136DB,Tax Lots 01000 and 02300 and 1 S 136CA,Tax Illb . Lot 01700. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: _ Q�f�/� Medium-Density Residential District. ZONE: • R-12: Medium- OTARYr'UBLIC FOR OREGON Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot My commission expires '`-� ovi ^¢ �� size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional d o i uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, Acct#10093001 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, ATTN:A/P 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. Publish 3/15/2007 Patricia Lunsford TT10927 City of Tigard ---'' ne 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 1T1- I ! ' T ii 1 —Sr', — !— I VICINii7VM.tP 11 Tigard, OR 97223 1-1_ 1-F1 ;`i 1. 1, — —I�ixzax,naoin _ L _ �1 L I . I , L , — 11 )Jt'u0G-WUU3 1 1 _ 1 i C11 F 70v200,rani = — —L I 11,= - — — ncrrrf:()AK Size:2 x 11 -i-r , 1 ° E =1-1 1 L7l - - -- - 11-, 1J-J_.\G1 Amount Due$183.70 uT 1;0 - '_' - si xnnTSrcJN _ — ) :L — ,`�\, i)u'.r..NTk 'Remit to address above I- I r - g 9 _ . - s n f'+z, OFFICIAL SEAL - _ - i `� _- SUZETTE I CURRAN Ii' £ 1! 3�4 NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON 1 L i _ -`J -- r f 1,✓ 1� COMMISSION NO.373063 ( G y I- :I ' r ,.� I,i''` 11 I � , ,} l MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV.28 2007 I _ I� - 1 1 fr J y 1 i 1' ' • • V Tigard Planning Commission TrOGAED NOTE: If you would like to speak on this item, please print your name &address on this form. Agenda Item# 5.. / Page I of Date of Hearing L/_a- 0 7 Case Number(s) S l,( B 61J ( - 000 10 Case Name (,v t ,--I- Cal( Di.I I a 1,_e__ / fa ,Location � 1 l,d S f/ (u `l 5.) _ge M� /1 030 7 — ave._ Please PRINT your name, address, and zip code Proponent (for the proposal): Opponent (against the prop(osal): Name: �J� rr 0 PPK V i t-L-P & ., Lc Name: b 6 i0„ 1Z;LK �9 Len Oal f Oh i CA7 S� 7�-1r)AUr Address: 5S 5 W tiA� 8 LV b Address: City,State, Zip: O R City, State, Zip: �► qq A 1 t�Eit JaRTOfJ, `i-7008 , Name: b l tom, -C. Co Co ft c L Name: 3-1 i`.t d d U J E dciress J� �° 6�1: L/Mae_ {-t—G Address. t J 12- SW it"4+ (70� p j - c S/A) le i i 1, 14 Lau _C--3C0 o w N E.-v.- DF-�era .LNG C (.e2r� AUtW City, ate, Zip: City, State, Zip: V Skate, tier IYt t 6YC q' �00�� Pair-Z 4-Kv 7 C2--Q '7 2D r Name: 04-04-1 k�eaiL Ferri , ,, - ,— Name: /< ) Vitt l+- QL&, 4 Address: 7g0 W. A(/A4 Address: /Oc/LS Sco -7(..17 A ,& 4 City, State, Zip: , e)kt/e2xe, (5,2e-'(o rg City, State,Zip: l 9 C A rm c77 ZZ2 Name: K i l,2 ii. Lid, ti Name: s i>/ /vio 44 Addre 0 kGl te lad Pi K I Address: 1 I o05 S IV -Z c/fl - 1210-C7 City,State, Zip: C'Vi-riA, 7( . G'(l'O0S City,State,Zip: 7, G 47z2,3 Name: I"V,° V,Jyl ) Name: 4 Address: f'd 1X I (026 Address: City, State, Zip: C Z.ux)v-O B'(Z- '7)+0 0 City,State, Zip: 0 • a Tigard Planning Commission V 11,3/A+1AP NOTE: If you would like to speak on this item, please print your name &address on this form. Agenda Item# ,, I Page of Date of Hearing il( tI G-1 Case Number(s) I Case Name t,()k,p, DJ' ( ; 11 6 4 Cu c di(/r S/ Location Please PRINT your name, address, and zip code Proponent (for the proposal): Opponent (against the proposal): Name: u.�� o Name: Address: /04 6 O S()) ,`1()VI^ i e..,4 Address: C i t y,State, Zi p: r l o 2O G(1Z� City State,Zi p: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City,State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City,State, Zip: City, State,Zip: • • Agenda Item: 5.1 • Hearing Date: April 2.2007 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION rc, FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Tr a 120 DAYS = 5/21/2007 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION CASE NOS.: Subdivision (SUB) SUB2006-00010 Planned Development Review(PDR) PDR2006-00001 Zone Change (ZON) ZON2007-00001 APPLICANT/ Len Dalton APPLICANT'S Kirsten Van Loo OWNER: White Oak Village,LLC REP: Alpha Community Development 7955 SW Hall Blvd 9200 SW Nimbus Avenue Beaverton, OR 97008 Beaverton, OR 97008 REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a 27-lot subdivision and planned development on a 2.82 acre site. The lots are proposed to be developed with, detached and attached (duet) single- family homes. The average size of the proposed lots is approximately 1,926 square feet. Two pocket parks and a pedestrian tract/open space are proposed totaling approximately 23,189 square feet(18%). Note: This application was submitted on November 16, 2007,prior to the November 23, 2006 effective date of the revised Planned Development chapter. Therefore, the original PD code applies. The main PD development issues are summarized on page 10. ZONE/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATIONS: R-12,Medium Density Residential. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. [Applies to majority of the site] C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. [Applies to the flag pole connection to Highway 99W] LOCATION: The project is located north of Pacific Hwy at the southern terminus of SW 74th Avenue involving three (3) parcels at 11645 and 11625 SW Pacific Hwy and 11030 SW 74th Avenue; Tax Lots WM1S136CA01700, WM1S136DB01000,and WM1S136DB02300,respectively. APPLICABLE REVIEW •CRITERIA: Community. Development Code Chapters: 18.350, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the proposed Planned Development will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards as outlined in this report. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended Conditions of Approval and Findings within this staff report: WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-000111) PAGE 1 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING GRADING,EXCAVATION AND/OR FILL ACTIVITIES: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION , ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EXT 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 1. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows a maximum of 23 lots. 2. Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall submit construction drawings that include the approved Tree Removal, Protection and Landscape Plan. The plans shall also include a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing,grading, and paving. A note shall be placed on the final set of plans indicating that equipment, vehicles, machinery, grading, dumping, storage, burial of debris, or any other construction-related activities shall not be located inside of any tree protection zone or outside of the limits of disturbance where other trees are being protected. 3. Only those trees identified on the approved Tree Removal plan are authorized for removal by this decision. The following note shall be placed on the final construction documents: Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, any party found to be in violation of this chapter pursuant to Chapter 1.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to$500 and shall be required to remedy any damage caused by the violation. Such remediation shall include, but not be limited to, the following: A. Replacement of unlawfully removed or damaged trees in accordance with Section 18.790.060 (D) of the Tigard Development Code;and B. Payment of an additional civil penalty representing the estimated value of any unlawfully removed or damaged tree, as determined using the most current International Society of Arboriculture's Guide for Plant Appraisal. 4. Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall establish fencing as directed by the project arborist to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the Planning Staff for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits and any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant shall ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the Planning Staff, at least, once every two weeks, from initial tree protection zone (TPZ) fencing installation, through building construction, as he monitors the construction activities and progress. These reports must be provided to the City Arborist until the time of the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy. The reports shall include any changes that occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and location of the tree protection fencing. If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arborist shall justify why the fencing was moved, and shall certify that the construction activities to the trees did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted or received by the Planning Staff at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan is not being followed by the contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the Planning Staff and the Project Arborist. This inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection fencing, determine if the fencing was moved at any point during construction, and determine if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 6. Prior to commencing onsite improvements, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover the construction of the public street and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-0001( PAGE 2 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • City's web page (www.tigard-or.gov). 7. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 8. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. 9. Any necessary off-site right-of-way and construction easements shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and shall be submitted to and accepted by the City prior to issuance of a PFI permit. This pertains to the construction of the eyebrow corner, as shown on the applicant's plans, on Tax Lot 1S136DB01100. 10. The applicant's plans shall be revised, removing the rolled curb notation for the public improvements and replacing it with City Standard Drawing 126. 11. The PFI permit shall include the 24 foot wide minimum pavement improvement on SW 74th Avenue from the development to Spruce Street meeting the minimum public street section standard. 12. The applicant's plans shall be revised to provide 5 foot wide, not including curb, sidewalks along the private streets. These sidewalks may be placed in an easement rather than a tract. 13. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit,which indicate that they will construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of Tax Lot 1S136DB01100. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for a local street from curb to centerline equal to 16 feet plus 8 feet from centerline to the north; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb, or curb and gutter as needed; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. 5 foot concrete sidewalk with a 5 foot planter strip on the south side; F. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; G. street striping; H. streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City Engineer; I. underground utilities; J. street signs (if applicable); K. driveway apron (if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW 74th Avenue extension in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 14. The applicant's Public Facility Improvement permit construction drawings shall indicate that full width street improvements per Figure 18.810.4.A, including traffic control devices, mailbox clusters, concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphalt concrete pavement, sanitary sewers, storm drainage, street trees, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed within the interior subdivision streets. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to local street standards west of Tax Lot 1S136DB01100 to the west property line of the development. 15. The applicant's plans shall be revised to remove the head-in parking along the public street. Parallel parking only will be allowed where width requirements are satisfied. 16. A profile of the 74th Avenue extension shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 17. The applicant's plans shall be revised to provide manholes at the terminus points of the public sewer. An 8" stub shall also be provided from the manhole at the southwest corner to the west. 18. Prior to issuance of the PFI permit, the applicant shall obtain a permit from the State of Oregon Highway Division, to perform utility and street improvement work within the right-of-way of Highway 99. A copy of WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISSION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 3 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. 19. The applicant's construction drawings shall show that the pavement and rock section for the proposed private street(s) shall meet the City's public street standard for a local residential street. 20. Prior to issuance of the PFI permit, the applicant shall obtain an ODOT Drainage Permit for connection to the drainage facility in Highway 99. 21. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. 22. Final design plans and calculations for the proposed public water quality/detention facility shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) as a part of the Public Facility Improvement plans. Included with the plans shall be a proposed landscape plan to be approved by the City Engineer.. The proposed facility shall be dedicated in a tract to the City of Tigard on the final plat. As a part of the improvement plans submittal, the applicant shall submit an Operations and Maintenance Manual for the proposed facility for approval by the Maintenance Services Director. The facility shall be maintained by the developer for a three-year period from the conditional acceptance of the public improvements. A written evaluation of the operation and maintenance shall be submitted and approved prior to acceptance for maintenance by the City. Once the three-year maintenance period is completed, the City will inspect the facility and make note of any problems that have arisen and require them to be resolved before the City will take over maintenance of the facility. In addition, the City will not take over maintenance of the facility unless 80 percent of the landscaping is established and healthy. If at any time during the maintenance period, the landscaping falls below the 80 percent level, the developer shall immediately reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity. 23. The applicant shall provide a maintenance access road to the facility and any drainage structures within the facility to accommodate City maintenance vehicles. The access road shall be paved and have a structural section capable of accommodating a 50,000-pound vehicle. The paved width shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide, and there shall be two-foot rock shoulders rovided on each side. If the maintenance roadway is over 150 feet in length, a turnaround shall be provided. 24. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the 'Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." 25. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of all lots, and show that they will be graded to insure that surface drainage is directed to the street or a public storm drainage system approved by the Engineering Department. For situations where the back portions of lots drain away from a street and toward adjacent lots, appropriate private storm drainage lines shall be provided to sufficiently contain and convey runoff from each lot. 26. The applicant shall obtain a 1200-C General Permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EXT 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 27. Prior to final plat, the applicant shall provide the city with a copy of the restrictions and covenants for the development project. 28. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the Planning Staff, at least, once every two weeks, from initial tree protection zone (TPZ) fencing installation through site work, as he monitors the construction activities and progress. These reports should include any changes that occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and location of the tree fprotection fencing. If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arborist shall justify why the encing was moved, and shall certify that the construction activities to the trees did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted or received by the City WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-0001( PAGE 4 OF 35 PLAiNNING COMniISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • Forester at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan is not being followed by the contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the Planning Staff and the Project Arborist. This inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection fencing, determine if the fencing was moved at any point during construction, and determine if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. 29. Prior to final plat, visual clearance areas for the proposed intersections of private and public streets shall be shown on a revised plat. 30. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit a revised plat identifying a public access easement over the proposed Tracts "A" and "B" extending from the proposed public street to Highway 99W The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 31. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering). 32. Prior to final plat approval,additional right-of-way shall be conveyed to the State of Oregon, by and through its Department of Transportation, Highway Division, along the frontage of Highway 99 to increase the right-of- way to 64 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. Verification that the conveyance has been submitted to the State shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. (For additional information, contact Martin Abero, Oregon Department of Transportation, Right-of-Way Section, 123 NW Flanders,Portland,OR 97209-4037;Phone: 731-8425). 33. The applicant shall execute a Restrictive Covenant whereby they agree to complete or participate in the future improvements of SW Highway 99 adjacent to the subject property,when any of the following events occur: A. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for by the formation of a Local Improvement District, B. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for in whole or in part by the City or other public agency, C. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be constructed by a third party and involves the sharing of design and/or construction expenses by the third party owner(s) of property in addition to the subject property,or D. when construction of the improvements is deemed to be appropriate by the City Engineer in conjunction with construction of improvements by others adjacent to the subject site. 34. The applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the final plat to indicate that the proposed private streets will be jointly owned and maintained by the private property owners who abut and take access from them. 35. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall prepare Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) for this project,to be recorded with the final plat, that clearly lays out a maintenance plan and agreement for the proposed private street(s). The CC&R's shall obligate the private property owners within the subdivision to create a homeowner's association to ensure regulation of maintenance for the street(s). The applicant shall submit a copy of the CC&R's to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) prior to approval of the final plat. 36. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have formed and incorporated a homeowner's association. 37. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic control network (GC 22) as recorded in Washington County survey records. These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 5 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: • GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. • By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. 38. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. B. Attach a check in the amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Planning/Engineering Permit Technicians,at(503) 639-4171,ext. 2421). C. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. D. The right-of-way dedication for the east-west extension of SW 74th Avenue shall be made on the final plat. E. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from the Engineering Department indicating that the City has reviewed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's surveyor. F. After the City and County have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final plat for City Engineer signature (for partitions), or City Engineer and Community Development Director signatures (for subdivisions). THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EX I' 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 39. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate that the dwellings with reduced 3-foot side yard setbacks meet the Uniform Building Code (UBC) requirements for fire walls. 40. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall sign a copy of the City's sign compliance agreement. 41. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a letter from TVF&R stating that the proposed development is consistent with TVF&R standards. 42. Prior to issuance of building permits,visual clearance areas for driveways intersecting the proposed private and public streets shall be shown on construction drawings. 43. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised Signing and Lighting Plan that specifies lighting sufficient to meet the performance standards provided by the Tigard Police Department. 44. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Project Arborist shall submit a final certification indicating the elements of the Tree Protection Plan were followed and that all remaining trees on the site are healthy, stable and viable in their modified growing environment. 45. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicating the location of the trees that were preserved on the adjacent lots, location of tree protection fencing, and a signature of approval from the project arborist regarding the placement and construction techniques to be employed in \VHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-0001( PAGE 6 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • • building the houses. All proposed protection fencing shall be installed and inspected prior to commencing construction, and shall remain in place through the duration of home building. After approval from the Planning Staff, the tree protection measures may be removed. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 46. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a "photomylar" copy of the recorded final plat. 47. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar,2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format,if available;otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). 48. The applicant shall provide signage at the entrance of each shared flag lot driveway or private street that lists the addresses that are served by the given driveway or street. 49. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant's engineer shall submit final sight distance certification for the three private street intersections along the east-west extension of SW 74th Avenue. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE;THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: 18.430.080 Improvement Agreement: Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: 1. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and 2. Include in the agreement provisions that if such work is not completed within the period specified, the City may complete the work and recover the full cost and expenses from the subdivider. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to be paid and may also provide for the construction of the improvements in stages and for the extension of time under specific conditions therein stated in the contract. 18.430.090 Bond: As required by Section 18.430.080, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following 1. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; 2. A surety bond executed by a surety company authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon which remains in force until the surety company is notified by the City in writing that it may be terminated; or 3. Cash. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Engineer an itemized improvement estimate, certified by a registered civil engineer, to assist the City Engineer in calculating the amount of the performance assurance. \WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-0001( PAGE 7 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. 18.430.100 Filing and Recording: Within 60 days of the City review and approval, the applicant shall submit the final plat to the County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS Chapter 92. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.430.070 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington County,and by the City of Tigard. STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: Centerline Monumentation In accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes 92.060, subsection (2), the centerline of all street and roadway rights-of- way shall be monumented before the City accepts a street improvement. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 1. All centerline-centerline intersection points; 2. All cul-de-sac center points; and 3. Curve points,beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. Monument Boxes Required Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points,and curve points. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.810 Street&Utility Improvement Standards: 18.810.120 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. 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required All improvements installed by the subdivider shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.810.180. 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 8 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefore have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 18.810.180 Notice to City Required Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. If work is discontinued for any reason,it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 18.810.200 Engineer's Certification The land divider's engineer shall provide written certification of a form provided by the City that all improvements, workmanship and materials are in accord with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade, prior to the City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for operation and maintenance. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-00010 PAGE 9 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The proposed development involves three parcels. Tax Lot 2300, zoned R-12, is a developed .44-acre parcel over which the extension of SW 74th Avenue is proposed. Tax Lot 1000, zoned R-12,is a 1.052-acre undeveloped parcel. Tax Lot 1700, a 1.335-acre parcel, zoned primarily R-12 with a 16 x 430-foot segment zoned C-G that provides frontage onto SW Pacific Highway, is developed with a dwelling built in 1937 and with outbuildings, which are proposed to be removed. The residential development surrounding the site was built from the mid-1940s through the 1950s. More recent multi-family housing borders the site to the north. Vicinity Information: The site is located within a massive block bounded by Highway 99W, SW 78th Avenue, SW Spruce Street, and SW 71"Avenue and, specifically, at the terminus of SW 74`''Avenue south of Spruce Street. The subject site is bordered by developed land zoned R-25 and R-4.5 to the north and C-G to the south. SUMMARY OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: Proposal: The applicant requests approval of a 27-lot subdivision and planned development on a 2.82 acre site. The lots are proposed to be developed with detached and attached (duet) single-family homes. The average size of the proposed lots is approximately 1,926 square feet. Two pocket parks (Tracts C and D) and a pedestrian tract/open space (Tract A) are proposed totaling approximately 23,189 square feet (18%). The northern open space tract includes a large, approximately 45-inch diameter,white oak tree. Planning Objectives: The planned development process is required to accommodate the proposed private street that serves more than six dwellings and the sub-standard lot sizes averaging 1,926 square feet, when the R-12 zone requires 3,050 square feet. In exchange for flexibility of the applicable standards under the PD process, the applicant proposes public benefits which include two opens space pocket parks, a landscaped pedestrian pathway connection to Hwy 99W, and retention of a significant oak tree. Density Computations: The proposed 27-lot density does not meet the density established for the underlying zoning district (max=22/min = 17) as shown later in this report in the Density Computations section on page 15. However, the applicant has requested a density bonus as allowed. The applicant's Narrative (page 13) is contradictory in that it claims three bonus criteria are met, yet specifically requests only a 6% density bonus. Staff finds that the applicant's proposal meets bonus criteria #2 for the provision of developed open spaces, pedestrian pathways, and retention of existing vegetation (3%), and #3 for the creation of a visual focal point and the use of an existing physical amenity with the retention of the oak tree (3%). The applicant's proposal does not include undeveloped open space or architectural quality and style to earn any additional bonus. Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission may further authorize a density bonus of 6%, or one additional unit (.06 x 22 = 1.32 lot). Landscaping and Screening: The existing commercial uses to the west, south and east are likely to have the most impact on proposed lots 7, 17 through 23, 24 and 25. Proposed lots 7, 24 and 25 border commercial parking lots, where the applicant has proposed 6-foot walls/fences, buffering, and landscaping to mitigate for these impacts. However, the greatest impact to the proposed development and to proposed lots 17 through 23 in particular will be the Raz Transportation service yard to the west. The applicant proposes a 4-foot high masonry wall and a 4-foot landscaping bed in addition to the buffer provided by the proposed private street. Dust and noise will be the main impacts to the development. Even though the landscaping and screening standards have otherwise been met, the Commission may consider increasing the screening to further mitigate for the bus noise and dust. [Page 16] Street Improvements: This site will have access from SW 74th Avenue, which is classified as a local street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The development will extend SW 74th Avenue to the west to serve this development, requiring a 54 foot ROW dedication. The applicant's narrative states they are proposing to construct 2/3 of a public street. However, it appears they are proposing to construct 2/3 of a skinny street that is only appropriate when the vehicle trips per day are expected to be less than 500. The applicant provided no data to support this request and did not address the skinny street option criteria. This development will generate approximately 270 trips and with future development to the west and any through trips, the skinny street criterion will be exceeded. Therefore, the applicant will be required to provide the standard local street as shown in figure 18.810.4.A. [Page 28] WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 10 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 . • • SECTION V. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE USE CLASSIFICATION: SECTION 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is seeking approval of a 27-lot subdivision on 2.83 acres. The lots are to be developed with attached and detached single-family homes. The existing single-family home on site is to be removed. The site is located within the R-12 zone, Medium Density Residential District. Planned Developments are permitted in all zoning districts. Household living includes detached and attached single-family housing types,which is a permitted use in this zone. SUMMARY OF LAND USE PERMITS: CHAPTER 18.310 Defines the decision-making type to which the land-use application is assigned. This is a Subdivision/Planned Development,which is defined as a Type III-PC Application. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES: CHAPTER 18.390 Describes the decision-making procedures. Type III procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain predominantly discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission with appeals to the City Council. SECTION V. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity for written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. Staff received one written comment from an interested party and one phone call from a neighbor about this application. One neighbor, Nathan Murdock, called regarding added traffic that will adversely impact the already deteriorated condition of SW Spruce Street. RESPONSE: The applicant's plans and narrative indicate they will be providing a minimum of a 24-foot wide paved section along SW 74th Avenue from the site to SW Spruce Street. This off-site improvement is the responsibility of the applicant because of the increased traffic associated with the development. In addition, the applicant must pay Transportation Impact Fees to offset impacts to the city-wide transportation system. John Frewing submitted written comment with concern for pedestrian access through the site to connect Hwy 99W with SW Spruce Street. RESPONSE: The applicant has proposed a 5-foot pedestrian path through Tract A to connect the proposed private street with Highway 99W. However, the applicant's narrative does not address the connectivity standard and its requirement for public easements for public use of connecting pathways. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the applicant has been required to revise the plat identifying a public access easement over the proposed Tracts "A" and "B" extending from the proposed public street to Highway 99W. SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The applicable review criteria are addressed in this report in the following order: 18.350 (Planned Developments) 18.430 (Subdivisions) 18.510 (Residential Zoning Districts) 18.705* (Access, Egress and Circulation) 18.715* (Density Computations) 18.725 (Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745* (Landscaping and Screening) 18.765* (Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.780* (Signs) WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-0001( PAGE 11 OF 35 PLANNING CORN ISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • 18.790 (Tree Removal) 18.795* (Vision Clearance) 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvements) 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures, Impact Study) *According to Section 18.350.100 of the Planned Development Chapter, these chapters are utilized as guidelines, and strict compliance is not necessary where a development provides alternative designs and methods that promote the purpose of the PD Chapter. The proposal contains no elements related to the following provisions of these Specific Development Standard Code Chapters. These chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.710 (Accessory Residential Units) 18.720 (Design Compatibility Standards) 18.730 (Exceptions to Development Standards) 18.740 (Historic Overlay) 18.742 (Home Occupations) 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste &Recyclable Storage) 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations) 18.775 (Sensitive Lands Review) 18.785 (Temporary Uses) 18.798 (Wireless Communication Facilities) 18.350—(PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS) The applicant has requested a Planned Development (PD) overlay zone change for the subject property. The Planned Development chapter provides for flexibility in development design and allows deviation from certain standards of the base zone. The following standards address compliance with the process and applicable base zone standards. Note: This application was submitted on November 16, 2007, prior to the November 23, 2006 effective date of the revised Planned Development chapter. The Planned Development Process: Section 18.350.020 states that there are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: ♦ The approval of the planned development overlay zone; ♦ The approval of the planned development concept plan; and ♦ The approval of the detailed development plan. This application is for all three elements of the planned development process including an overlay zone, concept plan, and detailed plan. The applicant has applied for concurrent review of the overlay zone, conceptual plan, and subdivision of the subject property, consistent with the planned development process in TDC 18.350.020. Allowed Uses Section 18.350.060 allows single-family attached residential units in residential zones, subject to the density provisions of the underlying zone. Attached single-family housing is proposed for the subject property, which is zoned R-12. As described in the Density Computations section later in this report, the proposal is not consistent with the density provisions of the base zone. Therefore, although the proposed use is allowed, the density has been conditioned to not exceed 23 lots. Applicability Of The Base Zone Development Standards: Section 18.350.070 requires compliance to specific development standards: The provisions of the base zone are applicable as follows: Lot dimensional standards: The minimum lot size, lot depth and lot width standards shall not apply except as related to the density computation under Chapter 18.715; In the R-12 zoning district the minimum lot size is 3,050 square feet, with no average lot width. The zone has no minimum lot depti. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes,with lot sizes between 1,836 and 2,748 square feet (averaging 1,926 square-feet/lot). The proposed number of lots (27) is more than the maximum (22) density requirement, for which the applicant has requested a density bonus as provided for in WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 12 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • . Section 18.350.100 and addressed later in this report. Site coverage: The site coverage provisions of the base zone shall apply; The maximum lot coverage allowed in the R-12 zone is 80%. The applicant has proposed several building floor plans (A, B, D, and E) with this application. Building envelopes are shown on sheet C6.1. The proposed floor plans including patios, porches, and driveways total approximately 1,266 square feet, or 65% coverage on the average lot size of 1,926 square feet, consistent with the R-12 zone coverage standard. Building height: The building height provisions shall not apply; and The base development standard height limit in the R-12 zone is 35 feet, but does not apply to this planned development application. The applicant has proposed specific buildings with this application, which are approximately 30 feet tall to the peak of roof, consistent with the base zone height development standard. Structure setback provisions: Front yard and rear yard setbacks for structures on the perimeter of the project shall be the same as that required by the base zone unless otherwise provided by Chapter 18.360; The applicant submitted supplemental Sheet C2.1 (Received March 16, 2007) which shows building envelopes on each lot within the development consistent with this standard. The applicant's narrative states that the proper perimeter front and rear yard setbacks of 15.feet on all dwellings in this zone will be met, consistent with this standard. The side yard setback provisions shall not apply except that all detached structures shall meet the Uniform Building Code (UBC) requirements for fire walls; The applicant's narrative states that 3-foot side yard setbacks will be used on all internal side yards, subject to compliance to firewall standards. Provided dwellings associated with these reduced side yard setbacks meet the UBC requirements for fire walls, the proposed setbacks are consistent with this standard. The applicant shall be required to demonstrate that this requirement is met during the building permit process. Front yard and rear yard setback requirements in the base zone setback shall not apply to structures on the interior of the project except that: (1) A minimum front yard setback of 20 feet is required for any garage structure which opens facing a street; (2) A minimum front yard setback of eight feet is required for any garage opening for an attached single-family dwelling facing a private street as long as the required off-street parking spaces are provided The applicant's architectural plan (C6.1) and narrative (pages 10 and11) describe interior front and rear yard setbacks of 10 to 14 feet and a 20-foot minimum garage set ack for all lots, consistent with these standards. Other provisions of the base zone:. All other provisions of the base zone shall apply except as modified by this chapter. The proposed street side yard setbacks shown in the architectural plans (Sheet C6.1) as being three (3) feet for all units may not comply with the 10-foot base zone standard for street side yard setbacks. However, the applicant submitted a supplemental site plan (C2.1) that shows building envelopes and 10-foot street side yard setbacks for corner lots 8, 15, 16, and 23. The supplemental site plan also shows building envelopes of approximately 20 feet in width for the corner lots. However, the architectural plans only show plans for 24-foot wide units. A telephone call on March 21, 2007, the applicant's representative confirmed that the applicant intends to build within the twenty-foot envelope shown on the supplemental site plan.Therefore,the proposed street sideyard setbacks are consistent with the base zone standard. FINDING: The base zone standards related to the previously discussed criteria have not been met, but can be met with the following conditions. CONDITIONS: • Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate that the dwellings with reduced 3-foot side yard setbacks meet the UBC requirements for fire walls. PD Conceptual Plan Requirements: 18.350.090 The applicant shall submit the following: WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 13 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include a description of the character of the proposed development and the rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant. The applicant's narrative includes a Project Description. The 5lanned development process is required to accommodate the proposed private street that serves more than six dwellings and the sub-standard lot sizes averaging 1,926 square feet,where the R-12 zone requires 3,050 square feet. In exchange for flexibility of the applicable standards under the PD process, the applicant proposes resident benefits including the two pocket parks of 3,917 and 10,000 square feet, a landscaped pedestrian path/open space of 11,665 square feet, and retention of a significant oak tree. A development schedule indicating the approximate dates when construction of the planned development and its various phases are expected to be initiated and completed. According to the applicant's supplemental narrative (March 13, 2007), the applicant proposes an unphased construction schedule to be initiated as soon as building permits can be obtained from the City. The schedule anticipates building 6-8 units at a time. Depending on the market,the construction phase will last from 18 to 24 months. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the planned development. According to the applicant's supplemental narrative, the applicant proposes to put all the units up for sale. This however,does not preclude leasing or rental of the units,as is the case with any residential home. A narrative statement presenting information, a detailed description of which is available from the Director. The narrative statement for the proposal was included with the application materials. A supplemental narrative was submitted on March 13,2007. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in Subsection A above, the conceptual development plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information,the detailed content of which can be obtained from the Director: Existing site conditions, A site concept, A grading concept, A landscape concept,A sign concept and A copy of all existing or proposed restrictions or covenants. The applicant has submitted all of the required information except for proposed restrictions and covenants. The applicant states that these will be provided at a latter time upon establishment of the Home Owners Association. A condition of approval shall require the applicant to provide the City with a copy of any proposed restrictions or covenants. FINDING: The planned development conceptual plan criteria have not been fully met, but can be met with the following condition. CONDITION: Prior to final plat, the applicant shall provide the city with a copy of the restrictions and covenants for the development project. PD Approval Criteria: 18.350.100 Specific planned development approval criteria. The Commission shall make findings that the following criteria are satisfied when approving or approving with conditions, the concept plan. The Commission shall make findings that the criteria are not satisfied when denying an application. All the provisions of the land division provisions, Chapters 18.410, 18.420 and 18.430, shall be met; The applicant has applied to subdivide the property concurrently with the planned development approval; therefore, all subdivision criteria must be satisfied. Compliance with the subdivision approval criteria is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 18.430. The application has met or can be conditioned such that the subdivision provisions are satisfied. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. Except as noted, the provisions of the following chapters shall be utilized as guidelines. A planned development need not meet these requirements where a development plan provides alternative designs and methods,if acceptable to the Commission, that promote the purpose of this section. In each case, the applicant must provide findings to justify the modification of the standards in the chapters listed in WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 14 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • Subsection 3 below. The developer may choose to provide or the Commission may require additional open space dedication and/or provision of additional amenities, landscaping or tree planting. Chapter 18.715, Density Computation and Limitations. Unless authorized below, density shall be governed by the density established in the underlying zoning district. The Commission may further authorize a density bonus not to exceed 10% as an incentive to increase or enhance open space, architectural character and/or site variation incorporated into the development. These factors must make a substantial contribution to objectives of the planned development. The degree of distinctiveness and the desirability of variation achieved shall govern the amount of density increase which the Commission may approve according to the following: • A maximum of 3%is allowed for the provision of undeveloped common space; • A maximum of 3% is allowed for landscaping; streetscape development; developed open spaces, plazas and pedestrian pathways and related amenities; recreation area development; and/or retention of existing vegetation; • A maximum of 3% is allowed for creation of visual focal points; use of existing physical amenities such as topography,view, and sun/wind orientation; • A maximum of 3% quality of architectural quality and style; harmonious use of materials; innovative building orientation or building grouping; and/or varied use of housing types. The proposed 27-lot density does not meet the density established for the underlying zoning district (max=22/min = 17) as shown later in this report in the Density Computations section (page 23 . However, the applicant has requested a density bonus as allowed above. The applicant's Narrative (page 13) is contradictory in that it claims three bonus criteria are met, yet specifically requests only a 6% density bonus. Staff finds that the applicant's proposal meets bonus criteria #2 for the provision of developed open spaces, pedestrian pathways, and retention of existing vegetation (3%), and #3 for the creation of a visual focal point and the use of an existing physical amenity with the retention of the oak tree (3%). The applicant's proposal does not include undeveloped open space or architectural quality and style to earn any additional bonus.Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission may further authorize a density bonus of 6%, or one additional unit (.06 x 22 = 1.32 lot). Chapter 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standards; No exceptions are requested with this application Chapter 18.795,Visual Clearance Areas; Visual clearance areas must be shown on revised plat. Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; Meets standards, but Commission may wish to augment. Chapter 18.765, Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements; Meets standards Chapter 18.705,Access,Egress and Circulation; and Sight Distance and TVF&R approval required for access. Chapter 18.780, Signs. Application for detailed sign is required for proposed monuments. Sign compliance agreement required. Complete findings for each of the above guideline chapters can be found below under their respective chapter headings. In addition, the following criteria shall be met: Relationship to the natural and physical environment: The streets, buildings and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible; The subject site slopes gently from the northeast to the southwest. The single non-hazardous tree, a large 46-inch DBH white oak, is identified for preservation within an 8,558 square foot open space. In general, the applicant has sited the proposed streets and building locations to preserve the natural features of the site, consistent with this standard. Structures located on the site shall not be in areas subject to ground slumping and sliding; The slopes on the subject site are gentle and would not give concern for slumping or sliding. There shall be adequate distance between on-site buildings and other on-site and off-site buildings on adjoining properties to provide for adequate light and air circulation and for fire protection; WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 15 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • The proposed subdivision in the R-12 zone is subject to the setback provision of the zone. As allowed by the applicable setback standards, adequate distance between on-site and off-site buildings for light and air circulation and for fire protection will be ensured. The structures shall be oriented with consideration for the sun and wind directions,where possible; and The site is located on a southwest facing gentle slope. The density of the proposed dwellings limits the opportunity for orientation to the sun and wind directions. Trees preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790,Tree Removal. The applicant has submitted a Tree Plan prepared by David Halstead, a certified arborist. The report includes an inventory and identification of all trees on site over 6" in diameter. Tracts C is proposed to protect the significant 45-inch DBH white oak, the single tree proposed to be retained. The report also includes tree protection measures. Staff concludes that, with the Planned Development design and implementation of the prescribed protection measures, the white oak will be preserved to the greatest extent possible. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, e.g., between single-family and multi- family residential, and residential and commercial uses; Adjacent uses to the subject site include multi-family dwelling units to the north, single family to the north and south, and commercial uses to the south, west and east. The applicant's proposed buffering and screening as indicated on the Landscape Plan (Sheet L1) and in the narrative,is consistent with this standard. In addition to the requirements of the buffer matrix (Table 18.745.1), the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy and extent of the buffer required under Chapter 18.745: • The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; • The size of the buffer needs in terms of width and height to achieve the purpose; • The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; • The required density of the buffering; and • Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. The existing commercial uses to the west, south and east are likely to have the most impact on proposed lots 7, 17 through 23, 24 and 25. Proposed lots 7, 24 and 25 border commercial parking lots. The applicant has proposed 6- foot walls/fences, buffering, and landscaping to mitigate for these impacts. However, the greatest impact to the proposed development and to proposed lots 17 through 23 in particular will be the Raz Transportation service yard to the west. The applicant proposes a 4-foot high masonry wall and a 4-foot landscaping bed in addition to the buffer provided by the proposed private street. Dust and noise will be the main impacts to the development. Even though the landscaping and screening standards have otherwise been met, the Commission may consider increasing the screening to further mitigate for the bus noise and dust. On-site screening from view from adjoining properties of such activities as service areas, storage areas, parking lots and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: (a) What needs to be screened; (b) The direction from which it is needed; and (c) Whether the screening needs to be year- round. There are no specific service areas, storage areas, parking lots or mechanical devices proposed with this development. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Privacy and noise: Non-residential structures which abut existing residential dwellings shall be located on the site or be designed in a manner, to the maximum degree possible, to protect the private areas on the adjoining properties from view and noise;-Private outdoor area -- multi-family use: Shared outdoor recreation areas - - multi-family use: These criteria relate to non-residential or multi-family structures and are not applicable to the proposed single- family development. Therefore, these standards do not apply. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 16 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • Access and circulation: The number of allowed access points for a development shall be provided in Chapter 18.705; The proposed private streets (Tracts B and G) are paved 20 to 24 feet wide, respectively, with occasional bulb-outs for street parking. The plan shows a 5-foot wide walkway on one side of tracts B and G in easements on adjoining lots, consistent with the City Engineer's standards for private streets serving more than six units. All circulation patterns within a development must be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles; and Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue commented on the subject proposal. The comments are included in their entirety at the end of this report. The applicant is conditioned later in this report to revise the preliminary plat to meet any applicable TVF&R standards. Provisions shall be made for pedestrian and bicycle ways if such facilities are shown on an adopted plan. The Transportation Plan shows a bike and pedestrian way adjacent to the site on Highway 99W, improvement of which have been conditioned in the Streets and Utilities section of this report. Landscaping and open space: Residential Development: In addition to the requirements of subparagraphs (4) and (5) of section a of this subsection, a minimum of 20 percent of the site shall be landscaped; According to the applicant's narrative, the proposed development will preserve approximately 25% of the subject site in open space in proposed Tracts A, C, D, and E. However, based on the information submitted, staff calculates that a more accurate figure would be 18%. In addition, each lot will be required to maintain a minimum of 20% of the lot in landscaping. Staff's calculation, based on the information submitted shows that each lot will be approximately 35% landscaped. Therefore, the applicant's proposal accounts for greater than 20% of the total site area to be landscaped, consistent with this standard. Public transit: Provisions for public transit may be required where the site abuts a public transit route. The required facilities shall be based on: • The location of other transit facilities in the area; and • The size and type of the proposed development The required facilities shall be limited to such facilities as: • A waiting shelter; • A turn-out area for loading and unloading; and • Hard surface paths connecting the development to the waiting area This site abuts Hwy 99W, a public transit route. The proposed development includes a 5-foot concrete sidewalk connection from the internal private street to the public sidewalk on Hwy 99W. Bus stops for westbound travel are located 400 feet east and 600 feet west of the sidewalk access connection on Hwy 99W. Bus stops eastbound are located 600 feet east and 400 feet west. The proposal is consistent with this standard. Signs: A sign concept is proposed with this application. However, no specific sign design is proposed. Any future signage will require a sign permit in compliance with the sign code. Therefore, standards for signs do not apply to this application. Parkin : All parking and loading areas shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.765; Up to 50% of required off-street parking spaces for single-family attached dwellings may be provided on one or more common parking lots within the planned development as long as each single-family lot contains one off-street parking space. According to the applicant's narrative, parking for the proposed single-family attached and detached dwellings will be in a single space in garages and a second space in driveways in front of garages. Additionally, nine parking spaces are proposed in three locations within the planned development off of the private streets. Although the applicant WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-00010) PAGE 17 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • has shown an additional 5 spaces off of the public street, these will not be allowed in the proposed configuration but will be made up as parallel spaces along the public street, consistent with this standard. Drainage: All drainage provisions shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.775, and the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; Storm drainage complies, or will be conditioned to comply with applicable City of Tigard and Clean Water Services (CWS) requirements. For a more detailed discussion of storm drainage, see the discussion of compliance with the requirement of Chapter 18.810 later in this report. Floodplain dedication: Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. The subject site is between 250-feet and 240-feet elevation. The nearest floodplain is approximately 1/4 mile south of the subject site at elevation 170.Therefore, this standard does not apply. Shared Open Space: Requirements for shared open space: Where the open space is designated on the plan as common open space the following applies: • The open space area shall be shown on the final plan and recorded with the Director; and • The open space shall be conveyed in accordance with one of the following methods: By dedication to the City as publicly-owned and maintained as open space. Open space proposed for dedication to the City must be acceptable to it with regard to the size, shape, location, improvement and budgetary and maintenance limitations; By leasing or conveying title (including beneficial ownership) to a corporation, home association or other legal entity, with the City retaining the development rights to the property. The terms of such lease or other instrument of conveyance must include provisions suitable to the City Attorney for guaranteeing the following: • The continued use of such land for the intended purposes; • Continuity of property maintenance; • When appropriate, the availability of funds required for such maintenance; • Adequate insurance protection; and • Recovery for loss sustained by casualty and condemnation or otherwise. By any method which achieves the objectives set forth in Subsection 2 above of this section. The applicant proposes that the open space tracts indicated on the preliminary plat, be conveyed to the proposed homeowner's association. The use and maintenance of these areas is generally addressed in CC&R's. The applicant has not submitted CC&R's but has been conditioned to do so earlier in this report. FINDING: The planned development approval criteria have all been met. However, the Commission may wish exercise its discretion to authorize a density bonus to allow an additional lot and/or require additional screening and/buffering from neighboring commercial impacts. 18.380— (ZONE CHANGES): Standards for Making Quasi-Judicial Decisions: A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi- judicial zoning map amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; The Development Code implements the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Planned developments (PD overlay designations) are permitted in all districts when they meet the applicable criteria of the Development Code. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-0001( PAGE 18 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • This criterion is satisfied. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and According to the analysis in this report, all applicable standards in the code are met or can be conditioned to be met. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. There is no change in circumstances or inconsistencies to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Map that warrants a zone change from the underlying zone. The underlying zoning remains in effect for allowable uses, density, and other general requirements. Specific deviations are requestec and authorized within the planned development overlay, as set forth in this staff report. A zone change application is necessary to place the PD overlay designation on the subject site. This criterion, as related to a mistake,inconsistency or change,is inapplicable. FINDING: The proposal satisfies the criteria for a zone change to place the Planned Development Overlay zoning onto the subject property. 18.430— (SUBDIVISIONS): Approval criteria: The Approval Authority may approve, approve with conditions or deny a preliminary plat based on the following approval criteria: The proposed preliminary plat complies with the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations; It is feasible that with appropriate conditions, the proposed plat can be made to comply with the zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations. The proposed plat name is not duplicative or otherwise satisfies the provisions of ORS Chapter 92; The applicant has provided documentation of a plat name reservation (White Oak Village) with Washington County, approved May 31, 2006. Therefore, this standard is met. 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; and SW 74th Avenue is the only street adjacent to the subject site. The applicant's proposed public and private street design is consistent with the alignment of SW 74th Avenue and with the general direction of the future streets plan that will eventually connect the proposed 74th extension to SW 78`h Avenue. The proposed public street extension includes a 46-foot right-of-way, which is less that the standard local street width of 54 feet. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the applicant has been required to submit a revised site plan showing the improvement of the full 54-foot right-of-way along the western extent of the proposed street. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. The applicant's plan set and narrative provide an explanation for all common improvements. Therefore, this standard has been met. FINDING: Staff finds that the subject proposal satisfies the applicable criteria for subdivisions. 18.510— (RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS) R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. Single-family attached and detached residential units are permitted in the R-12 zone. Planned Developments are WHI'1 h OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 19 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • permitted in all districts. The proposed average lot size of 1,926 square feet can be permitted under the PD standards. Development Standards: Section 18.510.050.B states that Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2 below: The subject site is predominantly designated R-12, Medium-Density Residential, with a long access strip leading to Hwy 99W zoned C-G. In this application, the applicant has applied for a planned development overlay over the subject site. TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES R-12 PD STANDARD Proposed SF DU** Minimum Lot Size NA/ - Detached unit 1,926 sq.ft. 3,050 sq.ft. Consistent -Attached unit avg/unit per unit with density - Duplexes in 18.715 - Boarding,lodging,rooming house Average Lot Width Approx. 28 ft. None NA/18.715 Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 10/14/15 ft*. 15 ft. NA/Base Zone (P) - Side facing street on corner& through lots 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. - Side yard 3 ft. 5 ft. [1] NA/UBC - Rear yard 13/15 ft*. 15 ft. NA/Base Zone (P) - Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district NA 30 ft. 30 ft. - Distance between property line and garage entrance 20 ft. 20 ft. 20/8 ft.[3] Maximum Height 30 ft. (to peak) 35 ft. NA Maximum Lot Coverage [2] 80% 80% 80% Minimum Landscape Requirement 20% 20% 20% [1] Except this shall not apply to attached units on the lot line on which the units are attached. [2] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] Minimum setback for garages/minimum setback for garages for attached sfd facing a private street with required off-street parking met. * Housing types A,D/B,E/Perimeter;A,B,D,E/Perimeter ** Single-family dwelling unit (P)Perimeter FINDING: Since the proposed development is a Planned Development, some of the base zone standards can be altered to fit a specific design (see discussion in the Planned Development section, above). Lot size, width and depth are governed only by the density computations chapter in TDC 18.715. As reviewed in that section, the proposed 27-unti development is inconsistent and has been conditioned to a maximum 23 units. The applicant has submitted a Site Plan that specifies the general building envelopes and associated setbacks for each lot. The setback requirements are consistent with the planned development and base zone standard, where applicable. Height standard of the base zone does not apply under the planned development criteria. However, the 30-foot (to peak) proposed height is less than the maximum base zone development standard height. The maximum lot coverage and minimum landscape requirements have been met as proposed. Therefore, the applicant's proposed development, as conditioned for density, otherwise meets the development standards for the R-12 residential zone as allowed under the planned development provisions. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-00010) PAGE 20 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • 18.705— (ACCESS AND EGRESS): *PD Guideline Chapter 18.705.030 (C) 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. No joint access is proposed. Individual access from private streets will be utili7ed. This criterion is inapplicable. Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. All lots within the development have direct access to private streets, consistent with this standard. Required walkway location. On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The applicant's proposal includes sidewalks along the new public street and along the proposed interior private streets. In addition, the applicant proposes a 5-foot wide concrete pedestrian path the length of Tract A from the Tract B private street to the Highway 99W right-of-way. This path would be otherwise required to meet the City's connectivity standards as reviewed in the Streets and Utilities section of this report. A light pole is proposed for the private street access to the path in addition to and two low-level lights that are proposed along the approximately 500 foot length of the path. The Tigard Police Department reviewed the proposal and raised concerns that the proposed lights do "not appear adequate to support efforts of crime prevention. Tigard Police would support further emphasis on Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) elements. It is therefore stTgested the developer revisit the lighting plan to include better enhancement of lighting along the approximate 500 path. The revised lighting plan should be adequate enough to maintain consistent levels of illumination from end to end. Lighting levels should be similar to what is typically available today in most public areas such as parking lots in busy commercial areas. It appears the pedestrian path does not border any light sensitive residential areas. To that end, illumination levels can be increased to support better visibility and safety to the users without any negative impact to neighboring areas." Accordingly, as a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a revised Signing and Lighting Plan that specifies lighting sufficient to meet the performance standards provided by the Tigard Police Department. Inadequate or hazardous access. Applications for building permits shall be referred to the Commission for review when, in the opinion of the Director, the access proposed would cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles; or in any other way cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a clear and present danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue submitted a comment letter describing one issue with the proposal wherein the fire district does not endorse the design concept if twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. As the proposed private street is 20-foot paved, it is consistent with this standard provided it is properly signed to prevent parking on the street. Direct individual access to arterial or collector streets from single-family dwellings and duplex lots shall be discouraged. Direct access to collector or arterial streets shall be considered only if there is no practical alternative way to access the site. If direct access is permitted by the City, the applicant will be required to mitigate for any safety or neighborhood traffic management (NTM) impacts deemed applicable by the City Engineer. This may include, but will not be limited to, the construction of a vehicle turnaround on the site to eliminate the need for a vehicle to back out onto the roadway. Access for each of the proposed.lots will be from the proposed private streets. Neither of these streets are an arterial or collector. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Access Management Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that 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. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SL3B2000-0001 PAGE 21 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • Lancaster Engineerin submitted a preliminary sight distance certification for the intersection of 74" Avenue and Spruce Street, dated June 16, 2006. The posted speed on Spruce Street is 25 mph, requiring a minimum sight distance of 280 feet in each direction. The measured sight distance is 361 feet to the east and 393 feet to the west. The sight distance at this intersection is adequate. The project has three intersections of private streets with the proposed east-west public street. The applicant's engineer shall provide final sight distance certification for these three private street intersections upon completion of the street improvements and prior to issuance of building permits. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. This standard does not apply because the proposal does not access to either a collector or an arterial. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The proposed private streets are 166 feet apart, measured centerline to centerline, thereby meeting this criterion. Minimum access requirements for residential use. Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units on individual lots and multi-family residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2; The proposed private street, Tracts `B" and "G" are 25 to 28 feet wide with 5-foot wide sidewalks on one side, consistent with the City Engineer's standards for private streets. According to the applicant's narrative, each detached single-family dwelling unit will be served by a 15-foot access with 10 feet of paving, consistent with this standard. Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code; This will be ensured during the construction document review period. The individual homeowners through the homeowner's association and its CC&R's will maintain the access drives once the property is developed and sold. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus by one of the following: • A circular, paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured from center point to outside edge of 35 feet; • A hammerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet;. • The maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%. The applicant proposes a private loop road. Otherwise, no access drives are proposed in excess of 150 feet. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Vehicle turnouts, (providing a minimum total driveway width of 24 feet for a distance of at least 30 feet), may be required so as to reduce the need for excessive vehicular backing motions in situations where two vehicles traveling in opposite directions meet on driveways in excess of 200 feet in length. No driveways are proposed in excess of 200 feet in length. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Where permitted, minimum width for driveway approaches to arterials or collector streets shall be no less than 20 feet so as to avoid traffic turning from the street having to wait for traffic exiting the site. \WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-0001( PAGE 22 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • The site is not adjacent to a collector or arterial. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Director's authority to restrict access. To facilitate pedestrian and bicycle traffic, access and parking area plans shall provide efficient sidewalk and/or pathway connections, as feasible, between neighboring developments or land uses; The applicant has provided a 5-foot wide pedestrian path within Tract "A" which connects the Tract `B" private street to the sidewalk on Highway 99W. However, the applicant's narrative did not address the connectivity standard in the Streets and Utilities chapter (see page 29, below),which requires connecting pathways to be in public easements for public use. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the applicant is required to submit a revised plat identifying a public access easement over the proposed Tracts "A" and "`BB ' extending from the proposed public street to Highway 99W, consistent with this standard. FINDING: All of the Access and Egress standards have not been met. However, with the following conditions of approval, the standards can be met. CONDITIONS: • Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a letter from TVF&R stating that the proposed development is consistent with'1'VF&R standards. • Prior to issuance of building permits, and upon completion of the street improvements, the applicant's engineer shall provide final sight distance certification for the three private street intersections • Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised Signing and Lighting Plan that specifies lighting sufficient to meet the performance standards provided by the Tigard Police Department. 18.715 (DENSITY COMPUTATIONS): Density Calculation: 18.715.020 Definition of net development area. Net development area, in acres, shall be determined by subtracting the following land area(s) from the gross acres,which is all of the land included in the legal description of the property to be developed: • All sensitive land areas: a. Land within the 100-year floodplain; b. Land or slopes exceeding 25%; c. Drainage ways; and d. Wetlands. • All land dedicated to the public for park purposes; • All land dedicated for public rights-of-way. When actual information is not available, the following formulas may be used: Single-family development: allocate 20% of gross acreage; Multi-family development: allocate 15% of gross acreage. • All land proposed for private streets; and • A lot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an existing dwelling is to remain on the site. Calculating maximum number of residential units. To calculate the maximum number of residential units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of square feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district. Calculating minimum number of residential units. As required by Section 18.510.040, the minimum number of residential units per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the maximum number of units determined in Subsection B above by 80% (0.8). The net development area is determined by subtracting from the gross area the land needed for public and private streets as well as areas for sensitive lands. In this case, as a planned unit development in the R-12 zone, the minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet is used to calculate density. No portion of the property is identified as sensitive lands. Therefore, the net is determined by subtracting the land needed for public and private streets. However, pursuant to TDC 18.120.030.89.c,Tax Lot 1700 is defined as a flag lot. Pursuant to TDC 18.730.050.E.2, the pole of a flag lot is not included in the net buildable area for the purposes of determining density since the pole can only be used for access and is not functionally proximate to the buildable area. Therefore, in addition to the public and private street dedications, the approximately 6,784 square foot (16 feet x 424 feet) pole area must also be WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-0001( PAGE 23 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 . • subtracted from the gross lot area. The applicant provided the following density computation: 1) Project Acreage = 2.387 Acres (please refer to the existing conditions plan C1.1) 2) Project Sq. Ft. = 103,977.72 s.f. 3) Minus ROW = 28,585 s.f. 4) Net Dev. Area = 75,392.72 5) Max: Div. 3,050 s.f. = 24.72 6) Min: (24.72 x .8) = 19.776 Lots As the narrative states on page 12& 13, this PUD is taking advantage of the density bonuses. As noted,we meet 3 of the 3% bonus criteria. Meaning that there is a total of 9% availability for bonus density. Meaning we are allowed to take 100% of our density plus an additional 9% (or a 1.09 multiplier). 1.09 x 24.72 lots = 26.945 lots Staff's computation is as follows: GROSS LOT AREA 103,977 square feet (2.387 acres x 43,560 square feet/acre) Flag Pole -6,784 Public/Private Streets - 28,585 square feet NET DEVELOPABLE AREA: 68,608 square feet NUMBER OF LOTS: 68,608 square feet/3,050 square feet/lot = 22.49 lots Maximum density 22.49 lots Minimum density (22.49 x .80 =17.99 lots) Density Bonus 1.32 Total lots 23.81 (round down to 23 lots) FINDING: In the R-12 zone, as shown above, the maximum number of residential lots is 22. The minimum, at 80%,is 17 lots. In addition, as allowed in the PD standards and reviewed above, a 6% density bonus can be granted (.06 x 22 lots = 1.32 lots) adding one additional lot totaling 23. The applicant has proposed a 27-lot subdivision, four more lots than the maximum allowed. Therefore, the proposed 27-lot development must be conditioned to not exceed 23 lots. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows a maximum of 23 lots. 18.725—(ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS) These standards require that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 (Performance Standards) regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. 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. 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. Odors. The emissions 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. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 24 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • . Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. This is a detached and attached single-family residential project,which is permitted within planned developments in the R-12 zone. There is nothing to indicate that these standards will not be met. However, ongoing maintenance to meet these standards shall be maintained and any violation of these standards will be addressed by the City of Tigard's' Code Enforcement Officer. FINDING: The Environmental Performance standards are met. 18.745—(LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING): *PD Guideline Chapter Establishes standards for landscaping, buffering and screening to enhance the aesthetic environmental quality of the City. The R-12 zoning district has a minimum requirement of 20%of the site to be landscaped. Section 18.745.040. states that all development projects fronting on a public street, private street, or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length after the adoption of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040C. The applicant has provided a Landscape plan (Sheet L1) that includes the planting of street trees which are included on the City of Tigard Street Tree List along the proposed public and private streets, consistent with this standard. Buffering and Screening- Section 18.745.050 Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter(Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). Adjacent uses to the subject site include multi-family dwelling units to the north, single family to the north and south, and commercial uses to the south, west and east. The applicant's proposed buffering and screening as indicated on the Landscape Plan (Sheet L1) and in the narrative,is consistent with this standard. FINDING: The applicable requirements of the Landscaping and Screening chapter have been met. 18.765—(OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS): *PD Guideline Chapter This Chapter is applicable for development projects when there is new construction, expansion of existing use, or change of use in accordance with Section 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements. FINDING: The proposed project will create 23 lots for single-family attached and detached dwellings. Table 18.765.2 requires that each single-family detached unit have one off-street parking space and that each attached dwelling have 1.75 spaces for a three bedroom unit. The proposal anticipates development of single-family attached and detached housing, all of which would include garages and garage aprons with a 20-foot setback for off-street parking,consistent with this standard. 18.780—(SIGNS): *PD Guideline Chapter Chapter 18.780 regulates the placement, number and design criteria for signage. The applicant's narrative and plan set show a conceptual plan for monument entry signs for the proposed development located within a pocket park at the beginning of the development. Any future signage will be subject to the sign permit requirements in Chapter 18.780. In addition, there has been a proliferation of sign violations from new subdivisions. In accordance with policy adopted by the Director's Designee, all new subdivisions must enter into a sign compliance agreement to facilitate a more expeditious court process for citations. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB200o-00010) PAGE 25 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • S FINDING: To expedite enforcement of sign violations, a sign compliance agreement will be required. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall sign a copy of the City's sign compliance agreement. 18.790—(TREE REMOVAL): A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper,which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The applicant has submitted a Tree Plan for the proposed White Oak Village planned development and an arborist report prepared by David Halstead, a certified arborist. Staff has reviewed the applicant's tree plan and finds that the lan contains all four of the required items, and, is therefore, acceptable. The report includes a survey (Sheet C1.2)) with a summary describing 43 total trees on site over 6" in diameter. Thirty-one (31) trees are less than 12 inches DBH. Eleven (11) trees greater than 12 inches DBH are deemed hazardous. One tree greater than 12 inches DBH is preservable. The roposal is to remove all trees except for the white oak. Pursuant to TDC 18.790.030.B.2, no mitigation is required. The arborist report includes preservation measure for the white oak. FINDING: The tree removal standards are met and compliance will be ensured through the following applicable conditions of approval. CONDITIONS: • Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall submit construction drawings that include the approved Tree Removal, Protection and Landscape Plan. The plans shall also include a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. A note shall be placed on the final set of plans indicating that equipment, vehicles, machinery, grading, dumping, storage, burial of debris, or any other construction-related activities shall not be located inside of any tree protection zone or outside of the limits of disturbance where other trees are being protected. • Only those trees identified on the approved Tree Removal plan are authorized for removal by this report. The following note shall be placed on the final construction documents: Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, any party found to be in violation of this chapter pursuant to Chapter 1.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $500 and shall be required to remedy any damage caused by the violation. Such remediation shall include,but not be limited to, the following: Replacement of unlawfully removed or damaged trees in accordance with Section 18.790.060 (D) of the Tigard Development Code;and Payment of an.additional civil penalty representing the estimated value of any unlawfully removed or damaged tree, as determined using the most current International Society of Arboriculture's Guide for Plant Appraisal. • Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall establish fencing as directed by the project arborist to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Forester for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. • Prior to issuance of building permits and any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant shall ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the Forester, at least, once every two weeks, from initial tree protection zone (TPZ) fencing installation, through building construction, as he monitors the construction activities and progress. These reports must be provided to the City Forester until the time of the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy. The reports shall include any changes that occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and location of the tree protection fencing. If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB20o6-00010 PAGE 26 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • Arborist shall justify why the fencing was moved, and shall certify that the construction activities to the trees did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted or received by the City Forester at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan is not being followed by the contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the City Forester and the Project Arborist. This inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection fencing, determine if the fencing was moved at any point during construction, and determine if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. 18.795—(VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS): *PD Guideline Chapter Clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center grade, except the trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. For arterial streets the visual clearance shall not be less than 35 feet on each side of the intersection. FINDING: The applicant's narrative states that the visual clearance is met as proposed on the Site Plan (Sheet 2.10). However, the Site Plan does not show the visual clearance areas at the intersection of the proposed private street and the proposed public street. Visual clearance for the proposed Intersections of private and public streets shall be shown on a revised plat. Visual clearance for driveways intersecting the proposed private and public streets shall be shown on construction drawings for approval during building permitting. CONDITIONS: Prior to final plat, visual clearance areas for the proposed intersections of private and public streets shall be shown on a revised plat. Prior to issuance of building permits, visual clearance areas for driveways intersecting the proposed private and public streets shall be shown on construction drawings. • STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS: CHAPTER 18.810 Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires an arterial street to have a 128-foot right-of-way width and a variable width paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways,underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Highway 99, which is classified as a 7-lane Arterial on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 100 feet of ROW, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The standard section is 128 feet. Therefore, the applicant should dedicate additional ROW to provide 64 feet from centerline to account for remaining right-of-way required north of the centerline adjacent to the subject property. SW Highway 99 is currently improved to the 5-lane section. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should enter into a restrictive covenant for future street improvements. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a local street to have a 54 right-of- WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 27 OF 35 PLANNING COMMIISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • way width and 32-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways,underground utilities, street lighting,storm drainage, and street trees. This site will have access from SW 74th Avenue, which is classified as a local street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The development will extend SW 74th Avenue to the west to serve this development, requiring a 54 foot ROW dedication. The applicant's narrative states they are proposing to construct 2/3 of a public street. However, it appears they are proposing to construct 2/3 of a skinny street that is only appropriate when the vehicle trips per day are expected to be less than 500. The applicant provided no data to support this request and did not address the skinny street option criteria. This development will generate approximately 270 trips and with future development to the west and any through trips, the skinny street criterion will be exceeded. Therefore, the applicant will be required to provide the standard local street as shown in figure 18.810.4.A. Along the portion of the SW 74th Avenue extension that abuts Tax Lot 1S136DB01100 the applicant will be required to construct the half-street section to the south of centerline plus a minimum of 8 feet of additional paved width north of centerline. This provides a minimum of 24 feet of paved width and 35 feet of ROW. The applicant shall construct the full street improvement, as shown in Figure 18.810.4.A, to the west of Tax Lot 1S136DB01100,providing 54 feet of ROW,32 feet paved with, sidewalks and planter strips. The head in parking off of a public street will not be allowed as it presents a safety hazard on backing into the street. Parallel parking is allowed along public streets on both sides where the paved width is 32 feet. The applicant's plans indicate the construction of a Washington County eyebrow corner where 74th Avenue will transition from a north-south street to an east-west street. A portion of the proposed improvements are on the adjacent property, which is owned by the applicant, who will have to dedicate ROW before the PFI permit will be issued. The applicant's plans also indicate the construction of rolled curb in the public ROW. This will not be allowed as the City's engineering design standards only provide for a rolled curb in cases where a cul-de-sac design must allow trucks to mount the curb. The applicant shall revise the construction plans to meet the City Design Standard Drawing 126 for Curb and Gutter. The applicant's plans and narrative also indicate they will be providing a minimum of a 24-foot wide paved section along SW 74th Avenue from the site to SW Spruce Street. Two-way access requires a 24-foot paved section, pursuant to Table 18.705.2. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. The applicant has provided a future street plan that shows the extension of the proposed east-west public street from the site to SW 78th Avenue. The submittal included a proposed profile of the extension, thereby meeting this criterion. Street Ali gnment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre- existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDMSION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-00010) PAGE 28 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • The applicant has proposed the extension of SW 74th Avenue to the west through their development along with a future street plan that will allow for a future connection to SW 78th Avenue. The full street connection spacing between Spruce Street and the proposed east-west street is approximately 575 feet. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. The proposed public street grade is less than 3%,thereby meeting this criterion. Private Streets: Section 18.810.030.T states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a recorded maintenance agreement. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned developments,mobile home parks, and multi-family residential developments. The applicant has proposed a private street loop and a private street to serve two residential lots and a tree lot. The streets are required to be placed in private tracts. The sidewalks, which must be 5 foot in width, not counting curb width,can be placed in a private easement. The applicant shall revise the private street detail to show a full 5 foot wide sidewalk in addition to the curb. The applicant may choose to revise the plans to place the sidewalk in an easement,rather than a tract. The applicant shall place a statement on the face of the final plat indicating the private street(s) will be owned and maintained by the properties that will be served by it/them. In addition, the applicant shall record Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) along with the final plat that will clarify how the private property owners are to maintain the private street(s). These CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to approval of the final plat. The City's public improvement design standards require private streets to have a pavement section equal to a public local street. The.applicant will need to provide this type of pavement section. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length,width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre- existing development or; ♦ For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways,major collectors or railroads. ♦ For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. The applicant proposes to continue SW 74th through the subject site to the property line as an east/west extension. Future development on adjacent parcels may continue the street through to SW 78th reducing the size of the existing block. The proposed private streets are precluded from continuing south to Highway 99W, an arterial, or north to SW Spruce Street because of limited access, and existing development constraints. Therefore, the proposed development is consistent with this standard. Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of- ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. The applicant has proposed a 5-foot pedestrian path through Tract A to connect the proposed private street with Highway 99W. However, the applicant's narrative does not address this connectivity standard and its requirement for public easements for public use of connecting pathways. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a revised plat identifying a public access easement over the proposed Tracts "A" and `B" extending from the proposed public street to Highway 99W, consistent with this standard. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width,unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. All of the proposed lots are less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of 3,020 square feet. Therefore, this standard does WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2000-0001( PAGE 29 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • not apply. Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies,which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. All proposed lots have a minimum of 27 feet of frontage, consistent with this standard. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant's plans indicate they will be constructing sidewalk and planter strip along the south side of the public street. They must also construct sidewalk and planter strip along the north side of the public street west of Tax Lot IS136DB01100,where the full street improvements are required,pursuant to TDC Table 18.810.1 The applicant's plans indicate they will be constructing sidewalk on one side of the private streets. The sidewalk must be a full five feet in width,not including the curb,pursuant to TDC Table 18.810.1 Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant's plans indicate they will be extending the ublic sewer from the existing sewer at the south end of their property. The plans shall be revised to provide a manhole at each terminus point of the sewer line. The applicant shall also provide a stub to the west at the manhole at the southwest corner of the site for future development to the west. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream drainage ways that impact this development. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff wiIl be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant has proposed on-site detention. Because the applicant is proposing to discharge the stormwater into WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 30 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • ODOT's stormwater system in Highway 99 they will need to obtain an ODOT Drainage Permit prior to issuance of any City of Tigard permits. An ODOT Miscellaneous Permit will also be required for all work in the highway ROW. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. Highway 99W is identified as a bicycle facility. The arterial is already improved with a striped bicycle lane along the subject site's frontage. Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. The arterial is already improved with a 5-foot striped bicycle lane along the subject site's frontage. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: ♦ The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; ♦ All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer,shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles,rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are no existing overhead utility lines along the project frontages. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (FVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant is required to obtain permits from TVWD for the water line extension prior to the issuance of the City of Tigard PFI permit. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. Because the applicant is proposing to discharge the stormwater into ODOT's stormwater system in Highway 99 WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 31 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • they will need to obtain an ODOT Drainage Permit prior to issuance of any City of Tigard permits. An ODOT Miscellaneous Permit will also be required for all work in the highway ROW. Prior to the City accepting this facility as a public facility, the developer shall maintain it for a minimum of three years after construction is completed to ensure that it is operationally sound that the landscaping components are properly maintained. The pond shall be placed in a tract and conveyed to the City on the final plat. The developer will be required to submit annual reports to the City which show what maintenance operations were conducted on the facility for that year. Once the three-year maintenance period is completed, the City will inspect the facility and make note of any roblems that have arisen and require them to be resolved before the City will take over maintenance of the facility. In addition, the City will not take over maintenance of the facility unless 80 percent of the landscaping is established and healthy. If at any time during the maintenance period, the landscaping falls below the 80 percent level, the developer shall immediately reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of all lots, and show that they will be graded to insure that surface drainage is directed to the street or a public storm drainage system approved by the Engineering Department. For situations where the back portions of lots drain away from a street and toward adjacent lots, appropriate private storm drainage lines shall be provided to sufficiently contain and convey runoff from each lot. The applicant will also be required to provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the fproposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report will need to be incorporated into the inal grading plan and a final construction supervision report must be filed with the Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permits. The design engineer shall also indicate, on the grading plan, which lots will have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that will have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections and/or permits will be necessary when the lots develop. An NPDES 1200-C permit will be required prior to issuance of the City of Tigard PFI permit. Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of$ 50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to final plat approval. The developer will also be required to provide signage at the entrance of each shared flag lot driveway or private street that lists the addresses that are served by the given driveway or street. This will assist emergency services personnel to more easily find a particular home. Survey Requirements The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates [NAD 83 (91)] on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic control network (GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: • GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 32 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • • By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins,water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). 18.390—(DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES/IMPACT STUDY): SECTION 18.390.040.B.e requires that the applicant shall include an impact study. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication of real property interest, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. The applicant has submitted an impact study addressing the required elements above. As shown in the applicant's Tentative Plat ("Tract A" Water Quality/Access/Park) and Narrative (Impact Statement, Parks System), the applicant specifically provides for dedicated open space and pedestrian connection to transit on Hwy 99W. ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Effective July 1, 2006, the TIF for a detached, single-family dwelling is $3,020. Upon completion of this development, the future builders of the residences will be required to pay TIF's totaling approximately $69,460 ($3,020 x 23 dwelling units). Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $217,062 ($69,460 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid and the full impact,is considered as unmitigated impact. The public and private streets within the subdivision are needed to allow the subdivision to develop and the need for these streets is created by the subdivision. Because the need for the internal streets is created by the development, the impact of the development is directly proportional to the cost of dedication and construction of the internal streets and is not considered as mitigation for the development impact. Mitigation Value Assessment: Off site improvements to SW 74th Avenue include 24 feet of paved surface between SW Spruce Street and the subject site, a distance of approximately 575 feet. The applicant will be required to dedicate approximately 224 square feet (16 feet x 14 feet) of public street right-of- way for Hwy 99W valued at$3,360 (224 s.f. x $15.00/s.f.). Full Impact ($81,540±0.32) $217,062 Less TIF Assessment (23 lots x$3,020) -$69,460 Public street right-of-way for Hwy 99W (approx. 224 s.f.x$15.00/s.f). -$3,360 Less mitigated values for 74th Street Improvements (approx. 5001.f. x$100/l.f.) -$50,000 Estimate of Unmitigated Impacts $94,242 FINDING: The applicant's proposed on-site right-of-way dedications and street improvements are required to address the standards of Chapter 18.810 and to allow the subdivision to function properly. The project requires minor off-site dedication of real property on Hwy 99W and includes improvements to SW 74th Avenue which is mitigation for the resulting transportation impacts. The value of these improvements is substantially less than the value of the full impact, thus justified. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Tigard Engineering Department provided comments and recommendations which have been incorporated into this report and recommended conditions of approval. WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 33 OF 35 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • The Tigard Police Department reviewed the proposal and had the following comments: Concerns are directed towards the "pedestrian path' that leads from the development to 99W. The plans noted only two "low level" lighting elements. That does not appear adequate to support efforts of crime prevention. Tigard Police would support further emphasis on CPTED elements. It is therefore suggested the developer revisit the lighting plan to include better enhancement of lighting along the approximate 500' path. The revised lighting plan should be adequate enough to maintain consistent levels of illumination from end to end. Lighting levels should be similar to what is typically available today in most public areas such as parking lots in busy commercial areas. It appears the pedestrian path does not border any light sensitive residential areas. To that end, illumination levels can be increased to support better visibility and safety to the users without any negative impact to neighboring areas. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation commented that they had reviewed the proposal and has no objection to it. The Tualatin Valley Water District Administrative Offices commented that they had reviewed the proposal and have no objection to it. Oregon Department of Transportation did not submit comment. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue reviewed the applicant's proposal based on the submitted PDF attachments and offered the following comments with regard to the final design of the proposal insofar as fire apparatus access and firefighting water supplies are concerned: 1) ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS— ONE-OR TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL: Where there are more than 30 one- or two-family dwelling units, not less than two separate approved means of access shall be provided. Where there are more than 30 dwelling units and all are protected by approved residential sprinkler systems, a single access will be allowed. (IFC D107) While your proposal meets this requirement, future development proposals will be required to provide additional fire apparatus access. 2) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 26 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. (IFC 503.2.1) The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. 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) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Roads 26 feet wide or less shall be posted on both sides as a fire lane. Roads more than 26 feet wide to 32 feet wide shall be posted on one side as a fire lane. Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE" and shall be installed with a clear space above grade level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have red letters on a white reflective background. (IFC D103.6) 5) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 60,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. (IFC D102.1) WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 34 OF 35 PLANNING COMMIISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • 6) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. (IFC 503.2.4&D103.3) 7) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. (IFC B105.1) 8) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly. (IFC 508.5.4) 9) 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 co • •ustible materials on the site. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) v` it/OF March 20,2007 PREPARED BY: Gary agenstecher DATE Ass ciate Planner (1.4, March 20 ,2007 APPROVED BY: Richard . i ewersdorff DATE Planning Manager WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT(SUB2006-00010) PAGE 35 OF 35 PLANNING COMDIISSION HEARING 4/2/2007 • • These numbers came from DL Designs changes to ROW with the F/ag00% in Net Area 103,gT1.12 . Gross area of site (10,510.00) New Public R.O.W. (12,161.00) New Private R.O.W. 81,300.12 Net Developable Area 26.66 Number of allowable lots 28.26 Number of Lots w/ 6% density bonus 2c1.06 Number of Lots w/ ci% density bonus mithout the F/ago% in Net Area 103,gT7.72 Gross area of site (10,510.00) New Public R.O.W. (12,16/.00) New Private R.O.W. (6:716.Oo) Flagpole /4,524.72 Net Developable Area 24.43 Number of allowable lots 25.ciO Number of Lots w/ 6% density bonus 26.63 Number of Lots w/ 1% density bonus .. \ ! D L eftooMrda ,, ..."..' * ' DESIGN GROUP INC. 1 _ Bas SW 9nrbur Blvd 9�� Iy 1-- - - PbnImG.OR%7iB Lf / . 14 aA{°'"{ s I t�4' � AY (507)725-1779 SITE PLAN 4?",., r".20' _ _ ■ I.*. ea.. I I ., I 1 ,- .......■. H -_- TRACT A' - __i__ _i L s6 WATER p/AUTY/ /' I __-_ ACCESS/PARK T f - A \— _H 0,l O _1 LOT 27 1 1 I I 1 e , ;O{p Y I LOT 24 I 1 1 1 W a s fi0 153 I Lor zz I Lor 2r I LOT 20 I LoT rs I Lor Ta 1 Lor n l riot rs i —,_r--—--J w , s , � g , ff 4 , 4 mACrc I I I I I 1 1 t 1 .20/Y I Cr QZ ( 5 I , O J xiar 1 ___ Yd p• --- r --- Q Q W U a 1 I I- In , i I I I 1 I M^ m 1„ IMCM I I I1.1 ion B i LoT s i LOT Is0 i Lor rr i LOT r2 i LOT i LOT rr i ZO2lS - I ^- I 1 r s I„I Los ..,rs I,>.s I,2.s �IJ' _ I I 1 I I 1 I ' .� I 1 1 I l e I I _ ,or u. I�/ � i I I 1 B�1--1 1 1 y,A �ti .,s I I I m srrlc r -m _ _ - TRACT B v I - T__- I I FR 1 1 I B1 — 11JrI \ 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 I I I j i 1 wv u.n n. i LOT 7 I LOT 6 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 3 LOT 2 LOT r TRACT 0 , I 1 1 I {n.s I.m,s I r",n s I r"G7,s 1 I"em s I r m,s I ,, I {'2°s 1 I 1 O I 1 1 ¢ 1 ' 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 - L — ll _L--1--1 L---- -----L -------L---- y\,\ wla7c. ` UMBER DAL007 Ow OWN/ <1 1 I I\ I F.. I•x 1 _ SW 74TH AI/EI a,,,F SS111 1 L--- I �- I 1 SITE PLAN 1 /2 • • COFIELD LAW OFFICE Dorothy S. Cofield, Attorney at Law TO: Tigard Planning Commission Members FR: Dorothy S. Cofield, Attorney at Law RE: White Oak Village (SUB 2006-00010) DT: March 30, 2007 MEMORANDUM This memorandum will respond to the staff report dated April 2, 2007 in regards to the density calculations on page 23 of the staff report. The main difference between the allowable density as calculated by the developer and the allowable density as described in the staff report lies in the staff recommendation to remove the "flagpole" portion of the tract configuration from being considered as part of the area to be used for the density calculations. See Attached Site Plan. The flagpole portion of the parcel totals about 6,784 square feet, and its removal from consideration results in a net loss of two units from the project. We believe that staff has misinterpreted the regulations for the following reasons. The Proposed Subdivision Will Not Include a Flag Lot The staff report states that Tax Lot 1700, as it is presently configured and developed, is defined as a flag lot under TDC 18.120.030.89.c. Staff reasoned that because Tax Lot 1700 is a flag lot, TDC 18.730.050.E.2 applies and the flag cannot be included in the net buildable area. Under that provision a flag lot is: "Flag Lot"—A lot behind a frontage lot, plus a strip of land out to the street for an access drive. A flag lot results from the subdivision of a residential lot or parcel which is more than twice as large as the minimum allowed in the underlying zone, but without sufficient frontage to allow two dwellings to front along a street. There are two distinct parts to a flag lot: the "flag" which comprises the actual building site located at the rear portion of the original lot, and the "pole" which provides access from a street to the flag lot. The flag pole can either be part of the rear lot or granted as an easement from the front lot." Tax Lot 1700 as it will be developed does not meet any part of this definition. First, the frontage for the proposed subdivision will be on newly extended SW 74th Ave. to the north, not SW Pacific Hwy. to the south. Secondly, the resulting flag lot has sufficient frontage to the north to allow all the dwellings to front along SW 74th (via the private loop street). Third, the pole does not provide the primary access to the building site which is via SW 74th Ave. The pole is an open space tract with a secondary, pedestrian path access to SW Pacific Hwy and is not used • • Tigard Planning Commission Memorandum Page 2 as the main access to each building site. Therefore, the lot area exclusions in TDC 18.730.050.E.2 do not apply. It seems clear from reading all of the section regarding the definitions of"flag lots" that the definitions are meant to give direction on when and whether someone may create a flag lot. Staff should not exclude the flagpole portion because upon approval and development, the flagpole portion will no longer serve as the access to the parcel. In a similar case interpreting a local government's flag lot regulation the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), affirmed the county's interpretation that whether a flag lot exists is shown by the future use of the property as shown on a proposed plat. Central Bethany Dev. Co. L.P. v. Washington County, 33 Or LUBA 463 (1997). In that case, the central dispute was whether a lot was a flag lot as defined in the county's code. The applicant replaced the "flagpole" portion of a residential lot with a"separate tract for access purposes" and the county found the lot was no longer a flag lot. LUBA found that the county was correct in finding the separate tract attached to the lot was no longer a flag lot because there was no "pole." In looking at the proposed subdivision plat for White Oak Village, the pedestrian path is proposed to be within Tract A. As shown, Tract A could be made into two separate tracts and there would no longer be the "pole" portion of TL 1700. See Attached Site Plan. Staffs conclusion that TL 1700 is a flag pole lot is "clearly wrong" because there will not be any pole. Id. at 474. (where there is no pole, there is no flag lot). Or, the developer could go through the exercise of a Property Line Adjustment/ Consolidation (PLA), and when approved, the parcel would no longer meet the definition of a flag lot. Access to the site would then be through the northeast corner of the site, and the flagpole portion would no longer be the access point. While the developer could clearly get rid of the flag pole problem by doing a property line adjustment, the fact that the flag pole does not exist on the site plan already achieves that result. Therefore, the planning commission should find the net density of the project includes the pedestrian pathway in Tract A and the allowable density with the 6% bonus is 28.26 dwellings. See Attachment. The Density Computation Ordinance Should Not Amply to a Public Pedestrian Easement The staff report concludes it is appropriate to exclude the "pole" from the net development area because "it can only be used for access and is not functionally proximate to the buildable area." The staff report does not specifically address whether land that can only be used for access must be excluded from the net development area pursuant to TDC 18.715.020 (Density Calculation). That regulation excludes the following land from counting toward a developer's allowed density as follows: 1. All sensitive land areas: a. Land within the 100 year floodplain; b. Land or slopes exceeding 25%; The Round •12725 SW Millikan Way • Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofield @hevanet.com • • Tigard Planning Commission Memorandum Page 3 c. Drainage ways; and d. Wetlands. 2. All land dedicated to the public for park purposes 3. All land dedicated for public rights-of-way. 4. All land proposed for private streets; and S. A lot of at least the size required by the applicable based zoning district, if an existing dwelling is to remain on the site. With staffs proposed condition of approval that the pedestrian path be a public easement, it is unclear whether the Planning Commission will exclude it from the developer's net density on the basis of it being a public right-of-way rather than a flag pole. The developer urges the planning commission to find it is not proper to exclude the pedestrian path easement on Tract A from the net development area for the following reasons. By making the pedestrian pathway a public easement, the developer will lose two lots if the public pathway is considered a public "right-of-way"I and excluded from the net development area. The loss of two lots, worth approximately $200,000, as well as constructing the pathway and related infrastructure and dedicating the land for the pathway results in a $300,000 exaction. Even considering the unmitigated impacts of$94,242, the public easement requirement is not roughly proportional.2 Nor is it related to the impacts of the proposed subdivision. Assuming a 27-lot subdivision creates the need for a connection to SW Pacific Hwy., it does not create an impediment to the public's access to SW Pacific Hwy. which will continue to have access through the Fred Meyer shopping center. Any impacts from the proposed 27-lot subdivision to create the need for a pedestrian connection to SW Pacific Hwy can be met by a private pedestrian pathway. A private pathway is clearly not a "public right-of- way" and would count toward the net development area, thereby increasing density to 28.26 lots (with the 6% density bonus). Requiring the public pedestrian pathway and also subtracting the public easement from the net development area results in a double impact to the developer: He has to dedicate the land for the path, construct the path and then lose two lots because the pedestrian pathway land area can no longer be included in the net density. We urge the planning commission to find a fair result when determining if the public pedestrian pathway is subtracted from the net development area. The developer is willing to provide a public access easement, but not at such a severe cost to him as losing two lots. TDC 18.120.12.122 defines right-of-way as a strip of land occupied by a pedestrian path which must be shown as separate and distinct from the adjoining lots and not included within the dimensions of such lots. 2 By using the staff's"Rough Proportionality"analysis,the applicant reserves the right to challenge it during these proceedings as to certain errors that were made. The Round •12725 SW Millikan Way • Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofield @hevanet.com I • � • D L • RECEVED I DESIGN GROUP INC. rf� 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. MAR 7 Suite 101 illA --- IdIAR �OQ/ Portland,(503)2205-167919 J:• • ..,.• '-:,110•.'4 dro 4..:t. .sc``.J:.a= �,et. -?r<.' 7 i.4i...y��>a;•,.r.- '':,2.t:+ .r Ptt:';A. ••v'. •4:e. .r_z;ii24.,4 .•-�`,:. ,:.r.:.ge•-iMi -rt• — ;: PLANNING/ENGINEERING i‘,..,...Efs,o 16160 01ar�1 4 ...40 EXPIRES 12-31-07 _ I V_ ....:r \ 7_,__.,,` '4.-�.w-S�S�'iTr�ti'l.1'Ii71['w'.'.— •y�..`. —— —— —— —— —— —— —— — —— —•A• —— —— — `. — —— —— —— ———— __ __ __ 77UCT A 'i�, �— — — — — —� — — — yb II °o tn" I LOT 18 g - / // + w.rs�rrS7CF�%u .� A ' �� ni 3 !,"� 24.�DO' g —1 ' \ ® I yV -- —} -- I A' o I laoo' I 15.00' ,..:,,..it-1,..7-r•• ••-- ;''�+' L T�-- - � 10. : —_li _1: -- -- � : i- -L-- � : - - -1-- LT _ _ iL I w 1300' I LOT 24 F 75. i :�`a.Js�j�" #I I I III I III I III I I �..I ...• ITI __ __ 1 (Lor 23 I LOT n III mr 21 I mr 20 III LOT 18 I LOT 18 III LOT 17 I LOT 101 I J —I s. w Z III I III I III ' 4. —I T7LICT c g > 0 J II I I LOT 25 I 1 L — - -Tr___ — -- J L - - --J L- - I I Q.I 300' —- I Y — 250" { 1 I Q a w L 70 �.. -- -- -• 1 1 1 I III � I � I � III 1 I c. I c. I I = r 1 I LOT 8 I LOT 9 II l II LOT 10 LOT 11 i i LOT 12 LOT 13 II I LOT 14 I LOT 1 I I i i I III I III I III g I I Ph TRACT E I 1\ \ \: iiLIIIIHLITIIiLiIIiiI Ir,•,.:r �c i....r�'r.ta { . '`' TRACT BI I I K3 P, �1 \ N o N — — — 1 s.00' I I I 1-1-1--- : `17 I I I g • 1 I I I REV. DATE BY 3.00' — 8• �- �S r_ _ J I it J lil : 1 Ii t 1 ' I I 1 ' I II I I I I I I ' ' I I 20' 10' 0 20' LOT 7 I I I LOT 8 ( LOT 3 I I I LOT 4 LOT 3 I I I LOT 2 I LOT 1 I I I I C I I III I III I 1 1 TRACT D I I I I SCAM 1. 10' I_ _1_ L-- I — 1 ' 1-- - I --JIB-- - 1 - - -J I , 1 I I I L_ __�__ t __ _ l_ __ _ __ I__________I___ _____�______ PROJECT NUMBER DAL007 U n Dee: O s O I II `�– _ o – – – – : I''4.. I I a Drawn By (\''1i.. I 1 ti I r_ Designed By: :* , � SW 74TH AVE g Checked • I \`. 6- ---------- ------ ------ 1 O rdµA•.} j I 1 1 C2 . 1 t: \--"'/, , ',,. :,,,,, 1 -":' .1; --":'1"---*-- 1 ''""". 7.----: , ,..,,:,./ „ N......-/ , ,,__..." RECEIVED ) 1.0. MAR 1 6 2007 CITY OF TIGARD DESIGN GROUP INC. CP/ PLANNING/ENGINEERING 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. 47.--• Suite 101 "0 Portland, OR 97219 '57,,N _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ _ _ _,,,_ ___ _ ........ .. ), (503) 225-1679 •rx• N... ' . . 'immi........imminO P R Off 4.•**/ G I ke /a ,-- <kJ 4V 191 60 4` 17.- OREGON v ,\ J' 15 EXPIRES 12-31-07 I 1.. 4.. N , JP Pi A , ir 1. ..."." Y ..-- .....- ,''' t A I\.) N..) -t :" ''. . 1 '''' .;:-.'','..- , 71.:'"'",.', ',. l N) C3 (C) .'-', ' 1, ' ' cf. i , .., - „.„.„,,, ......„ .......„ ........ „.„.„,... ......„ 1 CA TRACT A / ------- o o , N „ I!„,;-„'..:-1 I '': '' I 1 Q) (.3) o „ J LOT 26 2400 o . '-:*_ .'1-- , ,,,,::,,,.,',..,;.---,. :,,,z.-.,--::.,;-i- .,-.,,,:, , _- 4' . •,,., ..4.-„2 ,,-,,,,,z,-.-...-.:.„-;,-.,-. 4, . --- .,....--f-7er" .,1 . '1','", -;` :e": °- ,:: .';.'t- :,--,' •'''- ''''' (PA 1 — I sC: .. A _ ,_ ........, ......_ ■-.... o■---- 15.00' 15.00' 1 11' / , ..„,-----.--.- -I 1--- -1 1--- 1--- .. . ,,,,_,,. ,, .,.::-_-.'„:: Iv HI , . ... i 4 . „ _ , / , . ,- t., ..,,,,,,-;.--,_74 , , -;.-i, , t i ( t., ,,., _____ __I. ___L__ ___I___ ------t- d _ ,„ , - 1—*4 ,.,...- . ,,,` . y'':, t ,'..,—--, . ......", -.,— „,fi 'i ,:. ...,, . ' i ' .. . ..,.., . , .,, :,.., ,: . ' .— —' ......•, . . -,.. ... . ,.: '. -, tt, — t -. ' .. LOT 27 1 I 1 LOT 24 10. 01 , t..:' . . :,. ''. 1 I 1 — — — 10.00' , e. - 15.00' _.■ ...- ..... 15 0 . ' . 1 I .. .,.. '%!,-.=,::. I 1 — I 111 I - •. ,., ' .,... ''' 1 LOT 23 LOT 22 LOT 21 LOT 20 LOT 19 LOT 18 LOT 17 LOT 16 1 I .- ,.,: ... ___ . .. ,. t J = tr I ----, 1 .... , 4. t-, __. . , .._ _ TRACT C -.. ..:, o ,,t „, , -.,.--t o > 0 < 1 ,, , , L _ , -4,04; 46. 0 ....- ~::.' S-Al • .1 L_ __J L_ . _J L. __Jo 1.. ..",:i4r. I I LOT 25 _,. . — 3.00' _____._ T , ,,.,,,,. , ,' . I '- ■ — 1 V fl 1 cy 1 ....._ 250 ',."-- „.. ,7,--, , , 0 < Iii _ e , I k....._) 0 1.---- „„, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0.0., ■■•■■ ' ... .' ' - I 20.100' , — ----i--1.,,,::... .. __ ir - _ ....... _ ._.... _ . _ ....... — — _ _ ...-.. . . 4, [---- (..n ... 4 . „1 - ---- - _ ...., - ,... „ I E 7 r".- I- t -;,,:,, , _ 1 .,,I. 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I--:- - . I ,,C, I I _ I f,c ..t:. :': V.'''. . g r .i"..,' LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 11 LOT 12 LOT 13 LOT 14 LOT 15 ,,- I 11' -4,..-": 1 1 .... , ,,,,-, , ._ . -.-...., ' ,...,,,,....._..,::::'`.,,H I , . ,, I I l.:, , o ;:,:r., I AM '',:;. 1 1 I .. _, .. ..: ,2 1 0 1 . 771r , i-,„ 1 1 ---t-- 1 _____ _8 1 _: ,1 . , , : , TRACT E I \ --* ..,.. t \ I L._ ___ _I [---- — __I I iv - - Q, ' FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY _ \ "0777.7. ; „4 ! i \ ,,B,, Am , \ , ....----- w . . ,,..' ---. - -- ,,--..-----,- -• - -,- , . -, ,- - , , ,:, . ,.,,:.- -,---,..y , ., ,, .: ...,-„ .,. „.„,-. ., „,- ,,-- -;-- r, ::-.: r , !.'P', ,' ''' ''':0::1..;'P'P:%!;',..'',:,.,,:I'.".:: ,:,,,'4 :j.', '''.: Y'"P:.'' ' ': 'i "'''r ' ''.. .P PP, PP P‘ ;P P P, P .,.. .9 P.,:",,., ., , , y.P., ,, .;:.P ,: y y',.P,. , ,4 ,,, y, I :., NJ I I 1 TRACT B L,:,,,,,:.,„ \ ...... - Pi iv Pi R) cr, •,, o o o - - - - - - o , „ ,..:.- .-- ,,I.' 1-' -' '-' I I I ..., ,.. 4, ..4. , --.-- ki— 5 00' ,.... _1 . ,z'..et 'Y N A A A ...._ _ y N — _....c : 00 : „....„, ;.,,: I I I .,., , 01 , , . I REV. DATE BY -.- IN- -0--- 3.00 ,,B„ ........_ If • , ........■ ......■ ........■,... \ '''....1 , r"-- • .,. , \ 1 l' , ,„. , I I \ \\NN,,_ I I I f I 1 I I 20' 10' 0 20' ) I I I LOT 7 LOT 6 LOT 5 LOT 4 LOT 3 LOT 2 LOT 1 !111111111IgldIIIIIIIIIIII! 1 TRACT D SCALE: 1 " = 20' 1 . - I I I A i _ — L_____ I - l , 1 , if ...,„:;.; ..,,. A - - - - PROJECT \ ...... ...... _ _ _ _ ....... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ...... _ _ _ - -_ - -_ - -_ _ _ _ _ — i.-, - -_ NUMBER DAL007 ---z:.:. -..,., — —1 ,?, I Date: o o I :'-..'', -..., o (2) ..,. ...,, ----,...... - - .,..._ — -,.%,' - , cm o . _ — Drawn By: Designed By: -„ ,, ,4 f:',.";. ' .f., . . \ ":-.'"./.: C.) .,.„1, ,.._ Checked By 1 - ,.,--...f. -,. -- .;.', . _ ...... , _ _ , _ _ , _ ..... .7--..... I - - _ _ _ _ IL ........ 1 . I 1 C 2 ' 4 , i \-.." \\---/ ' -,..„,"" ',,,._ J ,.....„._ .., . • • WHITE OAK VILLAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN AND DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 27-LOT SUBDIVISION:SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS APPLICATION CONTENTS . Signed Application . Compliance Narrative . Pre-Application Notes . Neighborhood Meeting Documentation . Title Report . CWS Service Provider Letter & Documented Communication with ODOT . Impact Statement & Memo from Cofield Law Office . Preliminary Sight Distance Letter . Drainage Report . Plat Name Recordation . Reduced Plan Set ONE Arborist Report S White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision 0-alpha November 15. 2006 247-011 M � • • PRE-APR HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION •51111111. LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION City of Tigard Pemit Center 13125 SW Hall Blzd, Tigarg OR 97223 Phone 503.639.4171 Fax:503.598.1960 File# Other Case# Date By Receipt# Fee Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑Adjustment/Variance(I or II) ❑Minor Land Partition(II) ❑Zone Change(III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) (Planned Development(III) ❑Zone Change Annexation(IV) ❑Conditional Use(III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑Site Development Review(II) El Home Occupation(II) [Subdivision(II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY WILL OCCUR(Address WavalIblk) 1 kc4.5 sv■J -k1' a- ►\ tp2t sw PP\ i4 V,/•j TAX MAPS&TAX LOT NOS. I 513loCA- 01 1 00 I St3lot 01tDoc.. TOTAL SITE SIZE ZONING CLASSIFICATION /X-1 2— . 3t r ic�ZE tZ- 12. •:.CANT° ►—t crE. OPT te. \! cn.l=, LL-C . MAILING ADDRESS/QTY/STATE/ZIP 79- SW t—( /411. va. —6 vt-Va,.3, 0t-r oo5 PHONE NO. FAXNO. �U3 • z°t O 88109 b3 • to 2_to' 541.85 PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON PHONETIC). b3 . 2°I O 8S(v°I PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach rut if more than one) &rY MAILING ADDRESS/QTY/STATE/ZIP PHONE NO. FAXNO. *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) Z7 - L by L.PaNN \IT.LBPM NIT/( 1A12511V IS 1 trn1 • APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS"INFORMATION SHEET. is\curpin\masters\land use applications\land use permit app.doc • • 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. F I /(o De, Owner's Signature WkirfE Nick Vtu-Rc,rE) 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 . • • • • WHITE OAK VILLAGE SUB2006-00010/PDR2006-00003 ANNOTATED SUBMITTAL W/PUBLIC STREET ALIGNMENT REQUESTED BY TIGARD ENGINEERING FEBRUARY 22,2007 27-LOT SUBDIVISION:SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROPOSAL SUMMARY 2 GENERAL INFORMATION 2 REQUEST 3 VICINITY & SITE INFORMATION 3 SURROUNDING AREA 5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 6 II. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA 8 18.350 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 8 18.390 QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING 17 18.430 SUBDIVISIONS 18 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 20 18.705 ACCESS/EGRESS & CIRCULATION 21 • 18.715 DENSITY COMPUTATIONS 24 18.725 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE 25 18.745 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 25 18.765 OFF-STREET PARKING 33 18.780 SIGNS 35 18.790 TREE REMOVAL 36 18.795 VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS 37 18.810 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS 38 III. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION 46 LIST OF EXHIBITS A APPLICATION ' B NARRATIVE C PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES D NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MATERIALS E TITLE REPORT F SPL&ODOT COMMUNICATION G IMPACT STATEMENT H PRELIMINARY SITE DISTANCE I WATER QUALITY REPORT J PLAT NAME RESERVATION • K REDUCED SITE PLANS L ARBORIST REPORT White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal February 22, 2007 247-011 Cdeal,trr.Qipha • • I. PROPOSAL SUMMARY GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: White Oak Village, LLC. 7955 SW Hall Blvd. Beaverton, OR 97008 Contact: Len Dalton [1] 503.209.8869 [F] 503.626.8485 Representative: Alpha Community Development 9200 SW Nimbus Avenue Beaverton, OR 97008 [1] 503.452.8003 [F] 503.452.8043 Contact: Kirsten Van Loo kvl @alphacommunity.com Engineer: DL Design 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. Suite 101 Portland, OR 97219 Contact: Gary Darling, P.E. [T] 503.225.1679 [F] 503.246.2094 Owner: White Oak Village, LLC. Project Name: White Oak Village Proposed Actions: 27- Lot Subdivision PD Tax Map: 1 S 136CA 1700 & 1 S 136DB 1000 Site Size: Approximately 2.38 acres Location: 11625 & 11645 SW Pacific Hwy Zoning: R-12 Pre-Application Meeting: February 14, 2006 • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 2 February 22, 2007 247-011 - '+alpha .. : ... . . . . : . : . .. .. . . . . . . . .. •: .•., . .. .. •. . . . . . ..... .. . . . . - ... . . .•• • ••k .. .. .. : .... .1. . zZ74.4...... I . •• '... '. .... : ' •'4! ...!:.•:.! ..4' ... .,;. . ..*r • • '4'. r..•'' • -•••01111,1!::::14:: . . .,.... /..-••I-.1 *.... iiiiimiii 1...t.. ...i,....!• :t4•••;111'..::••••;n::•••,:.t. . . .... Ir7.'''.**i.:••••!...w.•.. ' . .. . •• •"'miTIF7.:+7. .........:P:14 . . ..•4. 1 I. ?.1... ''.44. •IP • 4: ./ :i'n .. .. .. L..... x.,..1:: \ . ., ,.. , .... ., .. — .•%1 ..:: :1:64.• ...: : .. : : .......: . . . .• : : • . • .. .... ... • ••• 0, , 4• •••'*•••••:.•:•;:. II;•.•• tr.*...4 .1. •i• - ••.4,....e .:. .. .' . . . . ' f I, : 1..„.:. . . '• . 4,,• 4'.4 .••••, .0 ,. ••• , .. . . . . ... • • .. . . .... .• . . .. .. • • . •. -..l'• ' .C.,4'..' ... "... ...:•••• ::-•• ••,?'••..•ii. •••,:. ./ • • .... . ... ..„. v.,,,.. ......... .• 1 .. I .. : (.. • L.... •••••., •• ,r4.4 . ..•:.•:.:....:,...& ..t-••• v.!' •-•,, ••••:::: \• . . ... . • :. . . .• ..... ... . - •••. ::••••••••. ..4......•••••.: .7,:::::::...:.. . . 4.1.,,,-.p . .. . '.:...: '.•••••• .. . .. ... . .. I . ......... .......•, . •... ... • •••. •: •• . i. .• , "•-4 i>,. . ':•'n..11,iiii: . .. ... *14.1•:+4":..,....•:..91.2?...... '. • i'..,4, . •*....4.* ..'''' • •••••••••••••• ..... ..:. ' •• •• •••• -: • k. • • • . ...• .. ••••••• • • ' ••• •••••:• .!•• . ••• •• • _ 1 .k .. •i t • • •C•1 • ,',.• 1 H• • , • • ••.. ., •• • VI •• • ••••: ..' ••• ••••M.,.....t.t......r.r.r.a.... ...,.............x.,,wa..t.tv .. . .. .. . ... .. ... . . . .. 4. *‘' ..4.?.t. 41,434:::14 . . .. . . , . ... . . . . •• ...., .. . :4.... . . . . • . • .•• ..4 . ••• •• •': ••• :• ..•.....•. '• •.••...•. .• . .•„: —4••::.,L..„, . ,.„"....: ,.. : . , ... . %• . • •• •.= ..•::::,.•'• •••'•••..\+..: . . ..• .•• ... ....—...,...-,... ..•,......• .. ..•......... .•,...• .. —. .. ..... .... ..... •. .' .•.. . • . .. •. ... . ,. . .... . . .. •••• .. % . . i.4. ;:i , 'xi .. .:•••. . • . . . . . .. .. . . . . . .... . . — ""••'• • •• ::• , : ... , . . ••• ...... .. • ...... , .. ... •:::••••• •• • ::::: . .... ...., — •••••:.' .• • :::;•::: -':::::• 0 * 0 • • Topography The site slopes slightly southwesterly from 255 feet to 240 feet; however, the end of the flagpole sits at 225 feet. Existing surface run-off flows to properties south of the site without piped storm sewer connections. Vegetation The site is vegetated with various species of trees undergrowth. There is a large White Oak tree located on the northeastern edge of Tax Lot 1000. There are numerous other trees of varying species and caliper typically grouped around the perimeter of the lots or near the existing residences. All these trees are found to be hazardous but the White Oak. Transportation The sites currently accesses 99W (a state highway managed by ODOT), designated a Major Arterial by the City of Tigard Transportation System Plan, via a 16 foot wide flag-pole driveway. The proposed site currently has approximately 6 feet of frontage along SW 74th Avenue. The applicant proposes to take access to 74th Avenue through the establishment of an access easement over the northwest corner of the abutting tax lot 2300. The flag-pole access will remain as a pedestrian connection to TriMet bus routes 12 (Barbur), 94 (Sherwood/Pacific Hwy), 95 (Tigard/I-5 Express) and 64 (Marquam Hill/Tigard) with stops located on 99W within a quarter mile of the project site. Surrounding Land Uses Surrounding the project site is a mix of land uses and zoning districts. Predominately south of the site are commercial uses that run along 99W. Surrounding the site to the north are residential uses ranging from low density to high density. Both single-family and multifamily residences are abutting the project site. White Oak Village Planned Development E. Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 4 February 2 . 2007 247 u1 1 Cu„alpha ... , ... • • • ....;..1.....i....e.i....i.••)j f....1 LI i Is.“-:: „.41,k..t."......, . . . • • • .. : . . . . .. . . • . . . . . • . . - . • . .:..••• ••: • :• .• ...: . .. . : • . • .• : . . .. 1.1:::::1..:4i.... 4: "!..:•,,:.:.•11 4.,•:I„:n Y.:Ai!I r.'ij t<r..........i rid i.::i H.:.:•.:••• ........... ... , . • • .............. • • • •-•-"'"''''''',..C,h.f.',ri.,:"..i V F.' P•fr...11.`•I Dt?..,,....:11,-4n(Ai f.:%i....i .1/.111.....i..rif....11...731...sincr t.is.f...1.!.4 ..• •• •• ••••••••••••••••••••••• ... .. N.-..0.F.....: . . . - . . : . ..... ... . . . •-..---- •• •.'... ......— •., :: '''... •: ....• ...,$.::::::::::...E....:LH ... . i .,.... ...c.-......:11:. ..."'—'.......—....:;r:.1:1i..A ...... ..1.. • •• • :, . .. • •:•:1•1 if:',..f1; I S:101.11 *:-.....----P......if-:-... 1•:*....1 •*: •:-.. i ....,:.;''.. :.;,..'•• ...... . • --"""""""""""'''''''''''• i ::'...H.i.—.1.... ....4'.. :: 'I,N:...'.....1. • • •••• .......... . 5 - . .•••• • w) .. • • • • .•••• • C • • 1 1........ : k _ . . .,.. . . • • Table B: Utilities • Utility I Service Provider Size Location Water Tualatin Valley Water 8" SW 74th Avenue Sanitary CWS 8" SW 74th Avenue Sewer 8" Within TL 1700 Storm Oregon DOT SW Pacific Hwy Drainage i Data source:City of Tigard Table C: Transportation Street ! Planned (Classification) R/W Surface Sidewalk I Bike Planter Strip 99W-SW Pacific Hwy 98' 66' 6' Y N (Arterial) SW 74th Avenue 40' 24' 5' N 5' (Local) 1 Data source:Tigard Transportation System Plan;January 2002 PROJECT DESCRIPTION White Oak Village, a proposed 27-lot PUD subdivision, will be situated on the 2.38 acre site specifically identified by Tax Lot 1700 of Tax Map 1S136CA and Tax Lot 1000 of Tax Map 1S136DB. The parcels are zoned R-12 by the City of Tigard; this designation allows for residential use with 3,050 square foot lots size for single- family dwelling units. The utilization of the Planned Development process will allow for smaller lot sizes while providing open spaces and protecting the White Oak tree located on one of the existing parcels. The average size of the proposed lots is approximately 1,926 square feet with two parks of 3,917 and 10,000 square feet, a landscape strip between Lot 7 and Lot 25 of 399 square feet and a pedestrian tract/open space to 99W of 11,665 square feet. Tax Lot 1700 has access to 99W via the flag-lot driveway and Tax Lot 1000 is at the stub end of SW 74th Avenue. An easement will be created across the northwest corner of Tax Lot 2300, Tax Map 1S136DB, in order to allow adequate access to the new development from SW 74th Avenue, a local street. As shown on the Site Plan, a 2/3rds east-west local public street will extend from SW 74th Avenue with 35.5 feet of ROW and 24 feet of pavement, meeting the "skinny street" standards. A 20 foot wide private street and 5 foot wide sidewalk will loop around the parcel allowing every lot to have access to the City's street system. This street will provide two-way access to Lots 26 and 27 with one-way access looping counterclockwise to the lots off of the proposed public street. The existing flag-pole will be improved as a pedestrian path to 99W. This five-foot concrete path, situated within the 16 foot pole, will contribute to the livability of • the development by adding 11,665 square feet of useable landscaped open White Oak Village Planned Development 8. Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 6 February 22, 2007 247 r)11 -C alpha • • space. As discussed below, and shown in the plan set, the street designs meet the City's design standards for public and private streets. An easement (and subsequent ROW dedication) across tax lot 2300 of tax map 1S136DB will allow access to the site from SW 74th Avenue. SW 74th Avenue will be improved with 24 feet of pavement width from the development to Spruce Street. As described in the memo from Lancaster Engineering, the sight distance is adequate at the intersection of Spruce Street and SW 74th Avenue for the proposed development site. An 8-inch domestic water line will be accessed from an existing line in SW 74th Avenue and extended throughout the site within the public and private ROWs. Sanitary sewer will be extended throughout the site via an 8-inch public line accessed at the south end of the property. A stormwater drainage system will be installed to address drainage on the site. As seen on the Preliminary Utility Plan, sheet C4.1, drainage is collected in 7 various inlets along the internal street. The stormwater is retained in piping under the street and conveyed to the bioswale located along the pedestrian path leading to 99W. Once the stormwater travels through the bioswale it enters a ditch inlet which connects to the Public Storm System in 99W. Along the pedestrian path is a water quality swale designed using CWS standards. • White Oak Viilaae Planned Develoarnent a Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 7 February 22. 2007 247-01 1 &-alpha • • II. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA • NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Neighborhood meeting was held Monday, May 25, 2006 at 6:00 pm at Tigard City Hall, Red Rock Creek Conference Room; 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Meeting minutes and associated materials are attached. 18.350 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 350.020 The Process A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process,as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development overlay zone; 2. The approval of the planned development concept plan;and 3. The approval of the detailed development plan. C. Decision-making process. A new planned development overlay zone and/or concept plan shall be processed by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.350.100. The detailed development plan shall be reviewed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by 18.390.040, to ensure that it is substantially in compliance with the approved concept development plan. In the case of an existing planned development overlay zone for any other type of application, the application shall be reviewed under the provisions required • in the chapters which apply to the particular land use application. D. Concurrent overlay zone and conceptual plan applications. The application for the overlay zone and for approval of the conceptual development plan may be heard concurrently if an application for each of the actions is submitted. E. Concurrent overlay zone and subdivision applications. If the application involves subdivision of land, the applicant may apply for preliminary plat approval and the applications shall be heard concurrently. Response: This application request will follow the identified process for the planned development overlay approval concurrently with both concept plan and detailed development plan, and preliminary plat approval for a 27-lot subdivision through the Type Ill procedure. 350.030 Administrative Provisions A. Zoning map designation. Where a planned development overlay zone has been approved,the zoning map shall be amended Response: There is no previously approved Planned Development overlay for this site; this criterion is not applicable. B. Time limit on filing of detailed development plan. Within 1-1/2 years after the date of Commission approval of the conceptual development plan, the owner shall prepare and file with the Director a detailed development plan. Action on the detailed development plan shall be ministerial and taken by the Director by means of a Type II • procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,using approval criteria below: White Oak Viilaae Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 8 February 22 2007 247-0 1 1 c alpha • • • Response: The detailed development plan is submitted as a part of this combined comprehensive review. 1. The Director shall approve the detailed development plan upon finding that the final plan conforms with the conceptual development plan approved, or approved with conditions by the Commission. The detailed plan shall be approved unless the Director finds: a. The change increases the residential densities, increases the lot coverage by buildings or reduces the amount of parking; b. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping; c. The change involves a change in use; d. The change commits land to development which is environmentally sensitive or subject to a potential hazard;and e. The change involves a major shift in the location of buildings, proposed streets, parking lot configuration, utility easements, landscaping or other site improvements. Response: The detailed development plan is submitted as a part of this combined comprehensive review, and replaces a concept plan. D. Phased development. 1. The Commission shall approve a time schedule for developing a site in phases, but in no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than seven years without reapplying for conceptual development plan review. • Response: This PD will is proposed to be constructed in one Phase; this criterion is not applicable. 350.040 Noncompliance: Bond Noncompliance. Noncompliance with an approved detailed development plan shall be a violation of this chapter. Response: Non-compliance is not applicable to this stage of the project approval process. A. Issuance of occupancy permits. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved detailed development plan including landscaping and recreation areas before any occupancy permits are issued. However, when the Director determines that immediate execution of any feature of an approved detailed development plan is impractical due to climatic conditions, unavailability of materials, or other temporary condition, the Director shall, as a precondition of the issuance of a required permit, require the posting of a performance bond or other surety to secure execution of the feature at a time certain not to exceed one year. Response: The applicant understands that the development must be built as approved in the proposed DDP prior to issuance of occupancy permits. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 9 February 22.2007 247-011 alpha • 350.060. Allowed Uses A. In residential zones. In all residential zones, an applicant with a planned development • approval may develop the site to contain a mixture of uses subject to the density provisions of the underlying zone and the density bonus provisions of 18.350.100 B2. The following uses are allowed with planned development approval: 1. All uses allowed outright in the underlying zoning district; 2. Single-family detached and attached residential units; 3. Duplex residential units; 4. Multi-family residential units; 5. Manufactured homes; Response: As described below, this PD takes advantage of the density provisions provided by Section 350.100B.2(a). The applicant has met and exceeded the bonus density requirements and as such is requesting the addition of one lot. As described below and as shown in Chapter 18.715, Density Computations, the applicant meets the requirements and respectfully seeks approval of the proposed 27-lot subdivision for single-family attached residential dwelling units. 350.070 Applicability of the Base Zone Development Standards A. Compliance to specific development standards. The provisions of the base zone are applicable as follows: 1. Lot dimensional standards: The minimum lot size, lot depth and lot width standards shall not apply except as related to the density computation under Chapter 18.715; 2. Site coverage: The site coverage provisions of the base zone shall apply; 3. Building height The building height provisions shall not apply;and • 4. Structure setback provisions: a. Front yard and rear yard setbacks for structures on the perimeter of the project shall be the same as that required by the base zone unless otherwise provided by Chapter 18.360; b. The side yard setback provisions shall not apply except that all detached structures shall meet the Uniform Building Code requirements for fire walls;and c. Front yard and rear yard setback requirements in the base zone setback shall not apply to structures on the interior of the project except that (1) A minimum front yard setback of 20 feet is required for any garage structure which opens facing a street. (2) A minimum front yard setback of eight feet is required for any garage opening for an attached single-family dwelling facing a private street as long as the required off-street parking spaces are provided. B. Other provisions of the base zone. All other provisions of the base zone shall apply except as modified by this chapter. Response: As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan, the proposed 27-Lot subdivision will comply with the 80% maximum lot coverage requirement of the R12 zoning district. Lots 1-7, 26 & 27, and 24 & 25 are all designed to meet the front and rear yard setbacks for structures on the perimeter of the R12 zoning district. As shown on the Architectural Drawings, the structures are represented on a 67 foot deep lot. Referring to Tentative Plat - C2.1, all perimeter lots are 69 to 70 feet deep. The front yards are 10 feet minimum, with 20 feet to the garage, and the back yard setbacks are 13 feet, minimum. The extra two or three foot depth, as depicted on the Tentative Plat, will be used in the back yards of these units to • provide the proper setbacks for perimeter lots. All dwellings will meet the Uniform Building Code requirements. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision- Annola-ed Submittal 10 February 22. 2007 247-01 1 -440-alpha • • • Attached Units in R12 Zoning Perimeter Housing type Housing Type B District Lots A, D, E Front Yard Setback 15 ft. 10 ft. 14 ff. Side Yard Setback 3 ff. 3.ff. Rear Yard Setback 15ff. 13ff. 11 ff.- 13ff. Distance Between Property Line 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. and Garage Entrance Maximum Site Coverage 80% 80% 80% 350.080 Exceptions to Underlying Development Standards A. Exceptions to parking requirements. The Commission may grant an exception to the off- street parking dimensional and minimum number of space requirements in the applicable zone based on findings that: 1. The minor exception is not greater than 10 percent of the required parking;and 2. The application is for a use designed for a specific purpose which is intended to be permanent in nature,e.g., a nursing home,and which has a low demand for off-street parking;or 3. There is an opportunity for sharing parking and there is written evidence that the property owners are willing to enter into a legal agreement;or 4. Public transportation is available to the site, reducing the standards and will not adversely affect adjoining uses;or 5. There is a community interest in the preservation of particular natural features of the site which make it in the public interest to grant an exception to parking standards. • Response: The applicant is not requesting exceptions to the parking requirements. Each dwelling will have-at a minimum - a one car garage and a parking place in front of the garage (two spaces/dwelling unit). Additional guest parking is provided per the site plan. The parking requirements are met. B. Exceptions to sign requirements. The Commission may grant an exception to the sign dimensional requirements in the applicable zone based on findings that: 1. The minor exception is not greater than 10 percent of the required applicable dimensional standard for signs; 2. The exception is necessary for adequate identification of the use on the property;and 3. The sign will be compatible with the overall site plan,the structural improvements and with the structures and uses on adjoining properties. Response: The applicant is not asking for exceptions to the sign requirements. C. Exceptions to landscaping requirements. The Commission may grant an exception to the landscape requirements of this title upon a finding that the overall landscape plan provides for 20%of the gross site area to be landscaped. Response: The applicant is providing approximately 25% of the gross site area as "shared" open space. All of the shared open spaces are landscaped as depicted on the Landscape plan. Additionally each lot will have a landscaped front, side and rear yard. The 20% landscaping requirement is exceeded with the proposed plan. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 11 February 22.2007 247-011 • • 350.100 Approval Criteria A. Relationship to site development review. The provisions of Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, are not applicable to Planned Development Reviews. The detailed development plan review is intended to address the same type of issues as the Site Development Review. Response: The application includes a detailed development plan set. This criterion is met. B. Specific planned development approval criteria. The Commission shall make findings that the following criteria are satisfied when approving or approving with conditions, the concept plan. The Commission shall make findings that the criteria are not satisfied when denying an application. 1. All the provisions of the land division provisions, Chapters 18.410, 18.420 and 18.430, shall be met; Response: This application has addressed Chapter 18.430 - Subdivisions. As described below, all the requirements can be met as proposed. 2. Except as noted, the provisions of the following chapters shall be utilized as guidelines. A planned development need not meet these requirements where a development plan provides alternative designs and methods, if acceptable to the Commission, a. Chapter 18.715, Density Computation and Limitations. Unless authorized below, density shall be governed by the density established in the underlying zoning district. The Commission may further authorize a density bonus not to • exceed 10% as an incentive to increase or enhance open space, architectural character and/or site variation incorporated into the development. These factors must make a substantial contribution to objectives of the planned development. The degree of distinctiveness and the desirability of variation achieved shall govern the amount of density increase which the Commission may approve according to the following: (1) A maximum of 3% is allowed for the provision of undeveloped common space, exclusive of areas contained in floodplain, slopes greater than 25 %, drainageways, or wetlands that would otherwise be precluded from development; (2) A maximum of 3% is allowed for landscaping; streetscape development; developed open spaces, plazas and pedestrian pathways and related amenities; recreation area development; and/or retention of existing vegetation; (3) A maximum of 3% is allowed for creation of visual focal points; use of existing physical amenities such as topography, view, and sun/wind orientation; (4) A maximum of 3% quality of architectural quality and style; harmonious use of materials; innovative building orientation or building grouping; and/or varied use of housing types. Response: The density proposed for this development meets the standards of the R12 zoning district by taking advantage of the density bonus provision. The site contains significant open space designed to serve the residents local recreational needs, protects a beautiful tree (the White Oak) as a focal point and provides a pleasant pedestrian connection to transit services on Highway • 99W. Compliance with three of the above density bonus provisions would afford White Oak Viliaae Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 12 February 22: 2007 247-011 c 0`,yalpha • • • a 9% increase above the "normal" allowable density of 25 units. This application requests a 6% increase in density to facilitate the design of a 27 unit project. b. Chapter 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standards; c. Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas; d. Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; e. Chapter 18.765,Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements; f. Chapter 18.705,Access, Egress and Circulation;and g. Chapter 18.780, Signs. Response: The project complies with all above standards with additional information addressing Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening as stated below in 18.350.100B.3.b. and 18.745.050.8.1. 3. In addition,the following criteria shall be met: a. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: (1) The streets, buildings and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible; Response: As shown on the Site Plan, there is a large White Oak Tree located on the northeast side of subject parcel 1700. This tree will be preserved in an 8,500 + square foot park. The proposed lot and street layout preserve this natural amenity while providing ample useable open space. • Since the site is currently vacant the existing drainage from SW 74th Avenue drains onto the site. A stormwater drainage system will be installed to address drainage on the site. As seen on the Preliminary Utility Plan, sheet C4.1, drainage is collected in 7 various inlets along the internal street. The stormwater is retained in piping under the street and. conveyed to the bioswale located along the pedestrian path leading to 99W. Once the stormwater travels through the bioswale it enters a ditch inlet which connects to the Public Storm System in 99W. Along the pedestrian path is a water quality swale designed using CWS standards. (2) Structures located on the site shall not be in areas subject to ground slumping and sliding; Response: No areas identified on the site are subject to ground slumping or sliding; therefore this criterion is not applicable. (3) There shall be adequate distance between on-site buildings and other on-site and off-site buildings on adjoining properties to provide for adequate light and air circulation and for fire protection; Response: As shown on the site plan, the structures are sited on the parcels to provide adequate distance between buildings and off-site buildings on adjoining properties to provide for adequate light and air circulation and for fire • protection. By complying with the required setback standards and meeting the Fire Code and Uniform Building Code standards this criterion is met. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 13 February 22. 2007 247-011 ZA'alpha • • (4) The structures shall be oriented with consideration for the sun and wind • directions,where possible;and Response: The existing shape and location of the property precludes significant solar design solutions. Each unit will have pleasant exposure to both morning and evening sun. High wind consideration is not critical in this location; however, the surrounding buildings will help protect this site from some winter winds. (5) Trees preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790,Tree Removal. Response: As described in addressing Chapter 18.790 below, and in looking at the Tree Survey, the tree removal criteria have been met. All trees on the site have been classified as hazardous (hazard trees do not require mitigation) except for one, the White Oak. As mentioned, the White Oak, located on existing parcel 1700, will be a keystone element of this development. The applicant is currently researching the options of placing the tree on a historical preservation list. The landscape plan shows significant plantings of street trees, landscape trees, screen materials and shrubs. b. Buffering,screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Response: As is described below in addressing the criteria of Chapter 18.745 - Landscaping and Screening, the proposed buffering' will consider the • surrounding uses and how they might impact a residential development. As described while addressing 18.754.050.8.1, the buffering meets the intent of the buffer matrix. The applicant proposes adequate alternative buffers to better meet the objectives of the matrix. It is the intent of the applicant to create a pleasant community on parcels that abut uses not generally considered desirable neighbors. c. Privacy and noise: Non-residential structures which abut existing residential dwellings shall be located on the site or be designed in a manner, to the maximum degree possible, to protect the private areas on the adjoining properties from view and noise; Response: As the Landscape Plan depicts, the proposed layout places the lots as far from the non-residential uses as feasible while maximizing density. While still saving the highly desirable White Oak tree, only one of the twenty-seven lots will abut the vacant property to the west. This lot will utilize the existing wood fence for screening; additional landscape plantings and living groundcover will screen and buffer this project. The interior lots will be buffered by the proposed private street as well as the wall and shrubbery buffer along the western edge of the property. (Please refer to the Landscape Plan). • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 14 February 22. 200? 247-011 -V-alpha • • d. Private outdoor area -- multi-family use: • (1) In addition to the requirements of subparagraph (3), each ground-level residential dwelling unit shall have an outdoor private area (patio, terrace, porch)of not less than 48 square feet; (2) Wherever possible, private outdoor open spaces should be oriented toward the sun;and (3) Private outdoor spaces shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the use of the space. Response: As shown on the architectural drawings a 12x8 (96 square feet) concrete patio is provided for each individual unit in the private back yard of the units, satisfying this requirement. e. Shared outdoor recreation areas-- multi-family use: (1) In addition to subparagraphs (2) and (3) of this section each multiple- dwelling development shall incorporate shared usable outdoor recreation areas within the development plan as follows: (a) Studio units up to and including two bedroom units, 200 square feet per unit;and (b) Three or more bedroom units,300 square feet per unit. Response: The minimum required outdoor open space (8,100 square feet) is provided with the two parks included in this PD, as well as the pedestrian path to 99W affording access to public transit. These functional outdoor areas will be owned collectively by the homeowners association and are for all residents to use and enjoy. • (2) Shared outdoor recreation space shall be readily observable from adjacent units for reasons of crime prevention and safety; Response: As depicted on the Site Plan, the parks are all within view of adjacent units; therefore satisfying the intent of this criterion. (3) The required recreation space may be provided as follows: (a) It may all outdoor space;or (b) It may be part outdoor space and part indoor space; for example, an outdoor tennis court and indoor recreation room;or (c) It may be all public or common space;or (d) It may be part common space and part private; for example, it could be an outdoor tennis court, indoor recreation room, and balconies on each unit;or (e) Where balconies are added to units, the balconies shall not be less than 48 square feet. Response: These parks will provide areas for families to experience the outdoors for picnics and ball games of all sorts. No structured facilities are provided. f. Access and circulation: (1) The number of allowed access points for a development shall be provided in Chapter 18.705; Response: One vehicular access point is proposed in accordance with the criteria addressed below in Chapter 18.705. An additional pedestrian walkway is • provided to access Hwy 99W from the site. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 15 February 22.2007 247-01 1 'rtalpha • (2) All circulation patterns within a development must be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles;and Response: As shown on plan sheet C2.1 - the Site Plan, the proposed public and private streets are designed to accommodate emergency vehicles. (3) Provisions shall be made for pedestrian and bicycle ways if such facilities are shown on an adopted plan. Response: Although there is no bike/ped facility shown on any adopted plan for this site area, a pedestrian path is proposed within the existing flag-pole of Tax Lot 1700. Sidewalks are included with the public and private on-site street design. g. Landscaping and open space: (1) Residential Development: In addition to the requirements of subparagraphs (4) and (5) of section (a) of this subsection, a minimum of 20 percent of the site shall be landscaped; Response: As shown on the Site Plan when calculating the total landscaped and open space area, more than 25% of the site is landscaped, satisfying this criterion. h. Public transit: (1) Provisions for public transit may be required where the site abuts a public • transit route. The required facilities shall be based on: (a) The location of other transit facilities in the area; and (b) The size and type of the proposed development. (2) The required facilities shall be limited to such facilities as: (a) A waiting shelter, (b) A turn-out area for loading and unloading;and (c) Hard surface paths connecting the development to the waiting area. Response: The project will provide a five-foot paved pedestrian accessway in a tract to 99W accessing two major TriMet bus stops. i. Signs: (1) In addition to the provisions of Chapter 18.780,Signs: (a) Location of all signs proposed for the development site;and (b) The signs shall not obscure vehicle driver's sight distance; Response: One entry monument sign is proposed, in an easement on the parcel adjacent to the project (see landscape plan). j. Parking: (1) All parking and loading areas shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.765; Response: Parking requirements are addressed below in Chapter 18.765. • White Oak Villaae Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 16 February 22, 2007 247-01 1 f04-alpha • • (2) Up to 50% of required off-street parking spaces for single-family attached dwellings may be provided on one or more common parking lots within the planned development as long as each single-family lot contains one off-sheet parking space. Response: All the attached units will have 2 (minimum) off-street parking spaces; additional guest spaces are provided. k. Drainage: All drainage provisions shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.775, and the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; Response: The drainage requirements are addressed in Chapter 18.810 and on the Preliminary Utility Plan. 350.110 Shared Open Space A. Requirements for shared open space. Where the open space is designated on the plan as common open space the following applies: Response: There are common/shared open spaces in this PD design; therefore the following standards apply. 1. The open space area shall be shown on the final plan and recorded with the Director; and Response: The open space area is shown on the Site Plan and will be shown on the final plan to be recorded with the Director. 2. The open space shall be conveyed in accordance with one of the following methods: Response: The open space tracts will be owned and maintained collectively through a homeowners association. 18.390 QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING 390.050 Type Ill Procedure Response: This application will be processes through the Type IIIB land use procedure. A. Preapplication conference. Response: A pre-application conference was held in conformance with this standard. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 17 February 22.2007 247-011 —alpha • • B. Application requirements. • Response: Included in the application submittal package is all the information requested on the application form, along with a narrative document addressing . the appropriate criteria in sufficient detail for review and action, the required fees and a list of all surrounding property owners. The Subdivision/PD is consistent with the underlying zoning requirements and all relevant City ordinances and standards. An Impact Study has been prepared by Gary Darling, a registered professional engineer, as part of this submittal. A copy of the study is included. 18.430 SUBDIVISIONS 430.020 General Provisions D. Lot averaging, Lot size may be averaged to allow lots less than the minimum lot size allowed in the underlying zoning district as long as the average lot area for all lots is not less than allowed by the underlying zoning district. No lot created under this provision shall be less than 80%of the minimum lot size allowed in the underlying zoning district. Response: This subdivision will be processed as a Planned Development. According to 18.350.070.A.1, the lot dimensional standards, including minimum lot size shall not apply to Planned Developments except as related to density computations. This criterion is met. • E. Temporary sales office.Temporary sales offices in conjunction with any subdivision may be granted as set forth in Chapter 18.785,Temporary Uses. Response: This project proposes use of one of the dwelling units as a model home and temporary sales office. All of the applicable requirements under "Temporary Uses" will be met. H. Need for adequate utilities. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage. Response: As described further in addressing Chapter 18.810, and in the. Impact Study, all public utilities and facilities are located and will be constructed to minimize flood damage. I. Need for adequate drainage. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood damage;and Response: As described further in addressing Chapter 18.810, drainage is adequate to reduce the prospect of flood damage. • White Oak Vifiage Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 18 February 22, 2007 247-011 "t alpha 430.040 Subdivision 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; Response: The applicant is proposing to subdivide Tax Lots 1700 and 1000 into 27 residential lots. A proposed Preliminary Tentative Plat in compliance with the R- 12 zoning district, as permitted through the Planned Developments - Chapter 18.350 of the Tigard Community Development Code, has been submitted with this application and plan set. The Preliminary Tentative Plat is also in conformance with other applicable ordinances as reflected by this narrative and the preliminary plans. This document serves as the narrative for the project and contains explanations for all proposed improvements and applicable City of Tigard standards, guidelines and criteria. 2. The proposed plat name is not duplicative or otherwise satisfies the provisions of ORS Chapter 92; Response: The Washington County Survey Department has reviewed and accepted the proposed White Oak Village plat name, and its approval is included in this application packet. • 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; and Response: The proposed local public and private street system is designed such that it extends off of SW 74th Avenue to create a circulation pattern for the project. The east-west public street is proposed to stub to the properties to the west for future expansion. No other projects are currently under review or in the final platting stages that might require "circulation coordination" or access to the proposed street system. Please refer to the Preliminary Tentative Plat. 4. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. Response: This narrative addresses all common improvements proposed by this 27-lot subdivision/PD. B. Conditions of approval. The Approval Authority may attach such conditions as are necessary to carry out the comprehensive plan and other applicable ordinances and regulations and may require reserve strips be granted to the City for the purpose of controlling access to adjoining undeveloped properties. Response: The applicant understands that conditions of approval may be attached to this proposed development as necessary to carry out the • comprehensive plan, ordinances and regulations. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 19 February 22.2007 247-011 i`'alpha • • 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. Response: Since this subdivision is processed concurrently as a Planned Development it will be reviewed as a Type IIIB (Planning Commission) procedure. As stated above in 390.050B, the applicable application requirements are met in this package. 430.060 Adjustments Authorized Response: No adjustments are requested. 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 510.030 Uses Response: The applicable standards of the residential zoning district are addressed above in Chapter 18.350 Planned Developments. The parcels will be used for single-family attached (and detached) residential homes, a permitted • use in the Residential 12 District. 510.040 Minimum and Maximum Densities Response: The total 2.38 acre site can be divided into 21 lots minimum and 26 lots maximum. Through the PD density bonus provisions process, the applicant is proposing 27 lots. This criterion was met above in section 18.350; also please refer to Density Computations addressed below. 510.050 Development Standards Response: As detailed in addressing Chapter 18.350 - Planned Developments, the dimensional standards of the R12 District are met within the requirements of the PD qualifications. • White Oak Villaae Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 20 February 22, 2007 247-011 (at�alpha e • • 18.705 ACCESS/EGRESS & CIRCULATION 705.030 General Provisions A. Continuing obligation of property owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in this title are continuing requirements for the use of any structure or parcel of real property in the City. Response: The applicant understands that it is the continuing obligation of the property owner to maintain access and egress to the individual lots. B. Access plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. Response: An Access Plan is provided, plan sheet C5.1, in accordance with this provision. C. 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. Response: As shown on the Tentative Plat, there is an easement for access and construction of public ROW improvements for the subdivision on tax map 1S136DB, lot 2300. This easement will be legally documented and copies of the agreement will be on permanent file with the City. D. Public street access.All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.0301 shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. Response: As shown on the Access Plan, plan sheet C5.1, the development will have access to a public street, SW 74th Avenue, via the public and private street system proposed within the development. E. Curb cuts.Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N. Response: As shown on plan sheet C2.2, Typical Street Section, and described further in addressing Section 18.810.030 N & 0, all curb cuts meet the required specifications. F. Required walkway location. On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following • standards: White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 21 February 22, 2007 247-01 1 =*alpha • 1. 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; Response: This PD subdivision is for attached single-family homes (two family homes) therefore this standard does not apply to this project. 2. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways Response: This PD subdivision is for attached single-family homes (two family homes) therefore this standard does not apply to this project. 3. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. Response: The pedestrian path provided within this project is not a "required walkway." It will be paved with concrete. As shown on the plans, there will be low level lighting provided along the pathway to 99W. G. Inadequate or hazardous access. 1. Applications for building permits shall be referred to the Commission for review when, in the opinion of the Director,the access proposed: • a. Would cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions;or b. Would provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles;or c. Would in any other way cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a clear and present danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare. Response: The design of this project does not include proposed access that might be hazardous or inadequate. 2. Direct individual access to arterial or collector streets from single-family dwellings and duplex lots shall be discouraged.Direct access... Response: No direct individual access to arterial or collector streets is proposed with this development; therefore this criterion is not applicable. 3. In no case shall the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward movement or other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. Single-family and duplex dwellings are exempt from this requirement. Response: The proposed duet dwellings are exempt from this requirement. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 22 February 22. 2037 247-011 ~alpha • • 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.) Response: Please refer to the Access Plan sheet included in the plan set. Also, a Preliminary Sight Distance Report, prepared by Lancaster Engineering, is included in the application packet which verifies that sight distance along SW 74th Avenue to Spruce Street is adequate. 2. Driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area Response: The driveways associated with this development will access the internal street system within the project and eventually access SW 74th Ave., a designated local street. This criterion is not applicable to this development. 3. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet.The minimum spacing ... Response: This proposed development is not along a collector street; this criterion is not applicable to this project. 4. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. • Response: This project provides an east-west public street at the current terminus of SW 74th Avenue, a 600 foot street. The looped private street accesses the local street with 138 feet of spacing. Since these are private streets, this criterion is not applicable. 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; Response: Each lot will hold one dwelling unit; the single family attached dwelling units will have individual driveways that will lead to their individual garages in accordance to Table 18.705.2. This standard is met. 2. Vehicular access to multi-family structures shall be brought to within 50 feet of the ground floor entrance ... Response: Single-family attached units are proposed; this criterion does not apply to this project. 3. Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code; • Response: Each access drive is proposed to meet and maintain Uniform Fire Code in accordance with this requirement. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 23 February 22. 2007 2A7-011 'alpha • • 4. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved • provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus by one of the following: a. A circular, paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured from center point to outside edge of 35 feet; b. A hammerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet;. c. The maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%. Response: The private road is a one-way street looping through the proposed development, with radii meeting or exceeding the minimum necessary to accommodate fire and life-safety vehicles. Apparatus will have the ability to go around the block to either turn around or exit the site. 5. Vehicle turnouts,(providing a minimum total driveway width of 24 feet for a distance of at least 30 feet), may be required so as to reduce the need for excessive vehicular backing motions in situations where two vehicles traveling in opposite directions meet on driveways in excess of 200 feet in length; Response: There is no need for a vehicle turnout because the roadway will loop around the development in a single direction. Therefore no vehicles will be forced to encounter oncoming traffic while backing. K. One-way vehicular access points.Where a proposed parking facility indicates only one- way traffic flow on the site,it shall be accommodated Response: There is no parking facility on the proposed site; this criterion is not • applicable. 18.715 DENSITY COMPUTATIONS 715.020 Density Calculation Response: This project is a Planned Development. The minimum lot sizes do not apply to the site except for calculating the allowable density on the site. The minimum lot size within the R12 zoning district is 3,050 square feet. The project takes advantage of the PUD density bonus option to allow 27 units as proposed. MAXIMUM DENSITY-Site Size: 103,977 sq. ft. Minus ROW: 28,585 (actual) 75,392 / 3,050 = (24.7) 25 dwelling units (max) MINIMUM DENSITY 24.7 x .8= (19.7) 20 dwelling units The project has 27 lots situated in such a way that there are several open spaces totaling 25% of the site. Lots sizes range from 1,836 square feet to 2,748 square White Oak Village Planned Deve"+.00ment a Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 24 February 22,2007 247-0' 1 `-alpha • feet, with an average lot size of 1,926 square feet. Please refer above to Section • 350.100B2(a) for density bonus provision standards. 18.725 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE 18.725.030 Performance Standards Response: The proposed development is for attached single-family residences, and therefore not expected to generate significant levels of noise, emission, vibration, odor, glare or other nuisance. 18.745 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 745.030 General Provisions A. Obligation to maintain. Unless otherwise provided by the lease agreement, the owner, tenant and his agent, if any, shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping and screening which shall be maintained in good condition so as to present a healthy, neat and orderly appearance, shall be replaced or repaired as necessary,and shall be kept free from refuse and debris. Response: A homeowners association will be formed. The property owners, through the HOA, will be obligated to maintain the open space landscaping • and all buffers and screening in good condition so as to present a healthy, neat and orderly appearance, and shall replace plants or repair installations as necessary. B. Pruning required.All plant growth in landscaped areas of developments shall be controlled by pruning,trimming or otherwise so that: 1. It will not interfere with the maintenance or repair of any public utility; 2. It will not restrict pedestrian or vehicular access;and 3. It will not constitute a traffic hazard because of reduced visibility. Response: As part of the maintenance agreement for the landscaping and screening will be the maintenance of the shrubs and pruning. C. Installation requirements.The installation of all landscaping shall be as follows: 1. All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures; 2. The plant materials shall be of high grade, and shall meet the size and grading standards of the American Standards for Nurberg Stock (ANSI Z60, 1-1986, and any future revisions);and 3. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of this title. Response: All landscaping will be planted using conventional methods. As noted on the Landscape Plan, plant options are to be high grade and are chosen meet the size and grading standards of the American Standards for Nursery Stock. D. Certificate of Occupancy. Certificates of occupancy shall not be issued unless the landscaping requirements have been met or other arrangements have been made and approved by the City such as the posting of a bond. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 25 February 2007 247-011 ..,.February�_. j� alpha • • Response: No Certificate's of Occupancy will be issued to any of the dwellings • until the landscaping requirements have been met. E. Protection of existing vegetation. Existing vegetation on.a site shall be protected as much as possible: 1. The developer shall provide methods for the protection of existing vegetation to remain during the construction process;and 2. The plants to be saved shall be noted on the landscape plans (e.g., areas not to be disturbed can be fenced, as in snow fencing which can be placed around individual trees). Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan and as further described in the Arborist Report conducted by Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants, Inc., the White Oak will be protected during the construction process. All other trees and vegetation will be removed; all the trees, as noted, besides the White Oak are hazard trees. F. Care of landscaping along public rights-of-way. Appropriate methods for the care and maintenance of street trees and landscaping materials shall be provided by the owner of the property abutting the rights-of-way unless otherwise required for emergency conditions and the safety of the general public. Response: There is no formal landscaping along SW 74th Avenue. The street trees proposed along the proposed public and private street system will be planted after the construction of the road. G. Conditions of approval of existing vegetation. The review procedures and standards for • required landscaping and screening shall be specified in the conditions of approval during development review and in no instance shall be less than that required for conventional development. Response: As mentioned, there is no existing preservable vegetation, other than the large White Oak tree. The proposed screening, as shown on the Landscape plan, meets the applicable requirements when the site is adjacent to uses of differing intensities and types. The specific landscaping and screening requirements are addressed below in Section 745.050- Buffering and Screening. H. Height restrictions abutting public rights-of-way. No trees, shrubs or plantings more than 18 inches in height shall be planted in the public right-of-way abutting roadways having no established curb and gutter. Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan, no trees greater than 18 inches in height are proposed to be planted in the public ROW abutting SW 74th Avenue. 745.040 Street Trees A. 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. Response: As described below, this proposed development meets the Street Tree standards of 18.745.040.C. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 26 i ebruary 22. 2007 947-01 i 'alpha • • B. Street tree planting list. Certain trees can severely damage utilities,streets and sidewalks or • can cause personal injury. Approval of any planting list shall be subject to review by the Director. Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan, the street trees proposed are standard accepted street trees. The applicant understands that the Director has final review and approval of the proposed street trees. C. Size and spacing of street trees. 1. Landscaping in the front and exterior side yards shall include trees with a minimum caliper of two inches at four feet in height as specified in the requirements stated in Section 18.745.040.C.2 below; Response: The proposed street trees will be placed within the front yards of the interior lots along the private ROW; they are placed within the 5 foot planting strip along the proposed public ROW, as shown on the Landscape Plan. The specifics of these street trees are addressed below. 2. The specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan, the proposed street trees meet the standards of this section. D. Pruning requirements. Trees, as they grow, shall be pruned to provide at least eight feet of clearance above sidewalks and 13 feet above local street, 15 feet above collector street, and 18 feet above arterial street roadway surfaces. • Response: Upon maturation, it is acknowledged that the street trees shall be pruned in such a manner as to provide for 8 feet of clear space between the sidewalk and the tree canopy. E. Cut and fill around existing trees. Existing trees may be used as street trees if Response: None of the existing trees on the site are proposed for use as street trees, this criterion is not applicable to this project. F. Replacement of street trees. Existing street trees removed by Response: There are no existing street trees to be replaced associated with this proposal. Therefore this standard does not apply to this project. G. Granting of adjustments.Adjustments to the street tree requirements Response: This proposal meets the above criteria, no adjustment is proposed. Therefore this standard does not apply to this project. H. Location of trees near signalized intersections.The Director may allow trees Response: There is no signalized intersection proposed within or adjacent to the project site; therefore, this criterion is not applicable to this project. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 27 February 22.2007 247-01 ; Q alpha • • 745.050 Buffering and Screening • A. General provisions. 1. It is the intent that these requirements shall provide for privacy and protection and reduce or eliminate the adverse impacts of visual or noise pollution at a development site, without unduly interfering with the view from neighboring properties or jeopardizing the safety of pedestrians and vehicles; Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan, the applicant has provided significant buffering, screening, and landscaping to reduce the impacts of the adjacent properties and uses. As addressed below, the proposed Landscape Plan addresses the criteria of this section. 2. Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter(Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right-of-way, buffering, but not screening,shall be required as specified in the matrix; Response: In accordance with this criterion, the proposed Landscape Plan is designed to address the buffer matrices of this code section. 3. In lieu of these standards, a detailed buffer area landscaping and screening plan may be submitted for the Director's approval as an alternative to the buffer area landscaping and screening standards, provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as required by this code. B. Buffering and screening requirements. • 1. A buffer consists of an area within a required setback adjacent to a property line and having a depth equal to the amount specified in the buffering and screening matrix and containing a length equal to the length of the property line of the abutting use or uses; Response: The following buffers and screening are proposed in accordance with the buffer matrices of Tables 18.745.1 & 2. Western Buffer As shown, there is ROW located along the western edge of the site, terminating at Lot 26. As stated in 18.745.050.2, buffering, but not screening, is required in accordance with the matrices. The proposed buffer is a 4 foot high masonry fence fronted with landscape plantings including trees, shrubs and groundcover. Lot 26 will be buffered by a 6 foot high solid wood fence fronted with trees. Southern Buffer-Tax Lot 1700 This portion of the site abuts a commercial parking lot. A C3-Buffer is provided along the back yard, which includes a 6 foot high masonry wall, more than 6 feet of living ground cover and landscape plantings including trees and shrubs in accordance with the matrix. • White Oak Visage Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 28 February 22, 2007 247-01 1 ; apha • • • Southern Buffer-Tax Lot 1000 Lot 7 will have a detached dwelling unit. No buffer is required between this use and the single family detached homes to the south. The applicant is providing the continuation of the 6 foot masonry wall to create a cohesive development. Eastern Buffer- Lot 25 The side yard of Lot 25 abuts detached single-family residence, on land zoned R- 12 (same as site). A 6 foot masonry wall will buffer and screen the abutting use, meeting the intent of the ordinance, and providing both sound and visual security to the new units. Eastern Buffer- Lots 1 thru 7 The eastern edge of the site abuts commercial zoning and uses. Accordingly, a C3-Buffer is provided. The proposed buffer is a 6 foot high solid wood fence fronted with landscape plantings including trees shrubs and living groundcover. Eastern Buffer- Park Tract C The park will buffer the existing single-family detached residential dwelling units from this proposed duet development. The applicant proposes to maintain or replace the existing wood fence. Northern Buffer-Tax Lot 1000 This portion of the northern edge of the site abuts a single-family detached • residential dwelling. There is public ROW separating the adjoining uses. Northern Buffer-Tax Lot 1700 This portion of the northern edge abuts 5+ attached multi-family residential units. Since there is not enough space to meet the 10 feet of living ground cover suggested by the Type B-Buffer, the applicant is proposing to maintain the existing 6 foot solid wood fence. *Please refer to the Landscape Plan to see the proposed buffers. 2. A buffer area may only be occupied by utilities, screening, sidewalks and bikeways, and landscaping. No buildings, accessways or parking areas shall be allowed in a buffer area except where an accessway has been approved by the City; Response: No accessway is proposed in any buffer area, as shown on the Site Plan and Landscape Plan. 3. A fence, hedge or wall, or any combination of such elements, which are located in any yard is subject to the conditions and requirements of Sections 18.745.050.8.8 and 18.745.050.D; Response: As provided below, the fences and walls located within the yards of the lots are in conformance with Sections 18.745.050.8.8 and 18.745.050.D. • White Oak`tillage Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 29 February 22. 2007 247-011 .bt alpha • • 4. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of combinations for • landscaping and screening as specified in Table 18.745.1. In addition, improvements shall meet the following specifications: Response: All minimum improvements within the buffer are depicted on the Landscape Plan and described fully in addressing 18.745.050.B.1. Please refer to the response above as well as the Landscape Plan. (1) At least one row of trees shall be planted.They shall.... Response: All minimum improvements within the buffer are depicted on the Landscape Plan and described fully in addressing 18.745.050.8.1. Please refer to the response above as well as the Landscape Plan. a. In addition, at least 10 five-gallon shrubs or 20 one-gallon shrubs shall be planted for each 1,000 square feet of required buffer area; b. The remaining area shall be planted in lawn or other living ground cover. Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan and described above in addressing 18.745.050.B.1, these requirements are met. 5. Where screening is required the following standards shall apply in addition to those required for buffering: a. A hedge of narrow or broad leaf evergreen shrubs shall be planted which will form a four-foot continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two years of planting;or b. An earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials shall be provided which will form a continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two • years. The unplanted portion of the berm shall be planted in lawn or other living ground cover;or c. A fence or wall of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. Response: None of the screening required/provided for this site requires a hedge or berm. The fences and walls proposed will be of the height suggested in the matrices and will be constructed or maintained to provide continuous sight obstruction. 6. Buffering and screening provisions shall be superseded by the vision clearance requirements as set forth in Chapter 18.795; Response: The proposed buffering and screening does not interfere with the vision and clearance requirements as shown on the Landscape Plan. 7. When the use to be screened is downhill from the adjoining zone or use,the prescribed heights of required fences,walls,or landscape screening shall be measured Response: In no instance is the use to be screened downhill from the adjoining zone or use; this criterion is not applicable. • White Oak Viilage Planned Development & Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 30 February 22. 2007 947-011 alpha • • 8. Fences and walls • a. Fences and walls shall be constructed of any materials commonly used in the construction of fences and walls such as wood, stone, rock or brick, or otherwise acceptable by the Director; b. Such fence or wall construction shall be in compliance with other City regulations; c. Walls shall be a minimum of six inches thick;and d. Chain link fences with slats shall qualify for screening. However, chain link fences without slats shall require the planting of a continuous evergreen hedge to be considered screening. Response: The proposed fences and walls, as described above, will be constructed of commonly used materials and in compliance with construction regulations. The fences will be made of either wood or chain link and the walls are proposed as masonry meeting the minimum of six inch thickness. 9. Hedges a. An evergreen hedge or other dense evergreen landscaping may satisfy a requirement... Response: No hedges are proposed, please refer to the Landscape Plan; this criterion is not applicable. C. Setbacks for fences or walls. 1. No fence or wall shall be constructed which exceeds the standards in Section 18.745.050.C.2 except when the approval authority Response: No fence is proposed at a height greater than 6 feet, please refer to • the Landscape Plan. 2. Fences or walls: a. May not exceed three feet in height in a required front yard along local streets or eight feet in all other locations and, in all other cases, shall meet vision clearance area requirements in Chapter 18.795; b. Are permitted up to six feet in height in front yards adjacent to any designated arterial or collector street. For any fence over three feet in height in the required front yard area,permission shall be subject to administrative review of the location of the fence or wall. Response: No fences or walls are proposed in the front yard of any of the lots nor do they exceed eight feet in any location in accordance with this standard. 3. All fences or walls shall meet vision clearance area requirements in Chapter 18.795; Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan, none of the proposed fences or walls inhibit the vision clearance area. 4. All fences or walls greater than six feet in height shall be subject to building permit approval. Response: No fence or wall is proposed greater than six feet in height; this criterion is not applicable. • White Oak Vi!iaae Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 31 February 22. 2007 247-01 1 alpha • • D. Height restrictions. • 1. The prescribed heights of required fences,walls or landscaping Response: None of the proposed screens are more than six feet in height and they are measured from the level of finished grade. E. Screening: special provisions. L Screening and landscaping of parking and loading areas: Response: There are no parking or loading areas to be screened on this site. 2. Screening of service facilities. Except for one-family and two-family dwellings, Response: This proposal is for single-family dwellings; this criterion does not apply to this project. 3. Screening of swimming pools.All swimming pools shall be enclosed ... Response: No swimming pool is proposed with this subdivision; this criterion is not applicable to this project. 4. Screening of refuse containers. Except for one- and two-family dwellings, .... Response: This application proposes single-family dwellings; this criterion is not applicable. F. Buffer Matrix. • 1. The Buffer Matrices contained in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2 shall be used in calculating widths of buffering/screening and required improvements to be installed between proposed uses and abutting uses or zoning districts; Response: The Buffer Matrices of Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2 were utilized in calculating widths of buffering and screening and improvements between the abutting uses and zoning districts of this project site. Please refer to the Landscape Plan as well as the explanation in response to 18.745.050.B.1 above. 745.060 Re-vegetation A. When re-vegetation is required. Where natural vegetation has been removed through grading in areas not affected by the landscaping requirements and that are not to be occupied by structures, such areas are to be replanted as set forth in this section to prevent erosion after construction activities are completed. B. Preparation for re-vegetation. Topsoil removed from the surface in preparation for grading and construction is to be stored on or near the sites and protected from erosion while grading operations are underway;and 1. Such storage may not be located where it would cause suffocation of root systems of trees intended to be preserved;and 2. After completion of such grading, the topsoil is to be restored to exposed cut and fill embankments or building pads to provide a suitable base for seeding and planting. Response: The entire site will be graded, developed and landscaped in compliance with the development plans and the proposed Landscape Plan. The side and rear yards of the lots will be planted incompliance with the Landscape Plan for screening and buffering compliance. Additional planting of • side, rear, and front yards will be accomplished after construction of the dwelling White Oak Vi;iaae Planned Development & Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 32 alpha February 22 2007 247-011 ,_„oC, .,.,, • • units, and will be similar to traditional residential landscaping observed • throughout the City. Topsoil will be removed from the property and temporarily stored as shown on the final grading plans for redistribution over the yard areas of the project. C. Methods of re-vegetation. 1. Acceptable methods of re-vegetation include hydro-mulching or the planting of rye grass,barley,or other seed with equivalent germination rates,and: a. Where lawn or turf grass is to be established, lawn grass seed or other appropriate landscape cover is to be sown at not less than four pounds to each 1,000 square feet of land area; b. Other re-vegetation methods offering equivalent protection may be approved by the approval authority; c. Plant materials are to be watered at intervals sufficient to ensure survival and growth;and d. The use of native plant materials is encouraged to reduce irrigation and maintenance demands. Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan, re-vegetation will be provided using grass mixes appropriate for the location within the site. They will be planted such that they will be able to grow and become re-established. 18.765 OFF-STREET PARKING • 765.020 Applicability of Provisions A. New construction. At the time of the erection of a new structure within any zoning district, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070. Response: As described below, when construction begins, off-street vehicle parking will be provided. 765.030 General Provisions A. 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 Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. B. Location of vehicle parking.The location of off-street parking will be as follows: 1. Off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwelling(s); Response: In accordance with this provision, each unit will have off-street parking spaces provided within the same lot as the dwelling. G. Disabled-accessible parking. All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. Response: No ADA parking spaces will be identified within this development. The parking areas shown on the Site Plan are for on street parking for visitors to • the neighborhood residents. These are not meant to be public parking facilities. White Oak Village Planned Development S.Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 33 February 22. 2007 247-011 —LW-alpha COY. rT • • 765.040 General Design Standards • A. Maintenance of parking areas. All parking lots shall be kept clean and in good repair at all times. Breaks in paved surfaces shall be repaired promptly and broken or splintered wheel stops shall be replaced so that their function will not be impaired. Response: The visitor parking will be managed by the Homeowners Association which will acquire responsibility over the parking areas upon its inception. B. Access drives.With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: 1. Access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; 2. The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705,Access,Egress and Circulation; 3. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; 4. Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; 5. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface;and 6. Excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. Response: Driveways will be provided to the individual dwellings from the internal private ROW loop. As described above in addressing Chapter 18.705, this subdivision meets the Access, Egress and Circulation requirements. There are • several visitor parking areas configured around the open spaces and parks within this single-family residential development. C. Loading/unloading driveways. A driveway designed for continuous forward flow of passenger vehicles for the purpose of loading and unloading passengers .... Response: No loading or unloading driveways are proposed with this subdivision; this criterion is not applicable. J. Wheel stops. Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan, wheel stops are proposed in the parking stalls adjacent to the open spaces. K. Drainage. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be drained in accordance with specifications approved by the City Engineer to ensure that ponds do not occur except for single-family and duplex residences, off-street parking and loading facilities shall be drained to avoid flow of water across public sidewalks. Response: As shown on the Preliminary Utility Plan and the Preliminary Grading Plan, drainage of the parking is configured such that they drain accordingly. As above, the individual off-street parking for each unit does not need to meet these specifications. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 34 February 22. 2007 247-01 1 Zitt'alpha • • L. Lighting. A lights providing to illuminate any public or private parking area or vehicle sales • area shall be arranged to direct the light away from any adjacent residential district. Response: There are street lights throughout the site, they are arranged to direct the light away from the adjacent residential units, with cut-off shields as required by the City. M. Signs. Signs which are placed on parking lots shall be designed and installed in accordance with Chapter 18.780,Signs. Response: No signs will be placed within the parking stalls. 18.780 SIGNS 780.030 Permit Approval Process C. Site plan.The applicant shall submit a proposed sign site plan.The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. Response: The Signing and Lighting Plan, plan sheet 8.1, depicts the location and type of traffic signage that will be used with this subdivision, please refer to it within the plan set. • 18.780.130 Zoning District Regulations B. In the R-12, R-25 and R-40 zones. No sign shall be permitted in the R-12, R-25 or R-40 zone except for the following: 1. Wall sign(s) may not exceed a combined total area of one square foot per dwelling unit and may not project from the wall face; Response: No wall signs are proposed, this criterion is not applicable. 2. Every housing complex shall be allowed one permanent freestanding sign at each entry point to the housing complex from the public right-of-way, with the site properly landscaped and not exceeding 32 square feet in area per sign face. 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; Response: This is a subdivision proposal; signs are addressed below. 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 in area per sign face. 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; Response: As shown on the Site Plan and Landscape Plan, a permanent monument sign 32 sq. ft. max., is located at the entrance to the project. 4. For non-residential uses, one illuminated or non-illuminated freestanding sign not exceeding six feet in height... • Response: This is a residential subdivision; this criterion is not applicable. White Oak Vilicge Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 35 February 22 2007 247-01 1 -,64- alpha • • 5. Directional signs on private property when such signs are solely designed to identify • driveway entrances and exits for motorists on adjoining public streets will be permitted. One sign with an area of four square feet per face shall be permitted per driveway. Such signs shall be consistent with Chapter 18.795,Visual Clearance Areas; Response: As shown on plan sheet C8.1 - Signing and Lighting Plan, directional signs are proposed throughout the site to indicate to motorist where not to enter and when a street is a one-way. 6. The signs specified in Section 18.780.060A shall be allowed, subject to any restrictions imposed by this title; Response: No signs are proposed per Section 18.780.060A; this criterion is not applicable. 7. Temporary Signs in accordance with Sections 18.780.090 and 18.780.100; Response: No temporary signs are proposed; this criterion is not applicable. 8. Lawn signs in accordance with Sections 18.780.060 A.1,A.6, and B.2; Response: No lawn signs are proposed; this criterion is not applicable. 9. Special condition signs in accordance with Section 18.780.090;and Response: No special condition signs are proposed; this criterion is not applicable. 10. Additional permitted sign including awning sign(s)and painted wall sign(s). • Response: No additional permitted signs are proposed; this criterion is not applicable. 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. Response: A Tree Report prepared by Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants, Inc. is included in this submittal package. As shown and described, there are a total of 43 trees located within the project site. Twelve of those trees are measured at more than 12 inches; all of those trees are hazardous but one. The hazardous trees have severe trunk and limb splitting, dead trunks and dead limbs that are un-repairable. In accordance with the zoning code, these trees are to be removed and mitigation for these removed trees is not required. As shown on the Landscape Plan, the White Oak is proposed to be protected as instructed • within the Halstead Tree Report. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 36 February 22. 2007 247-01 1 *alpha S • • This one significant tree is an Oregon White Oak that sits along the border of the northeastern portion of tax lot 1700. This White Oak is over 60,feet in height, is 46 caliper inches at breast height, with 70 feet of limb spread. This tree is found to be a great asset of the property and is proposed to remain. The applicant is currently researching the options of placing the tree on a historical preservation list. Many neighbors have commented about its beauty and their wish to see it remain. It will be maintained in a park and contribute to the character of the new White Oak Village neighborhood. 18.795 VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS 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. Response: Visual clearance is met as proposed on the Site Plan. The Homeowners Association will maintain the clearance as required. B. Obstructions prohibited. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, • wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area,provided all branches below eight feet are removed. Response: As shown on the Landscape Plan, no obstructions are proposed within the visual clearance area. C.Additional topographical constraints.Where the crest of a hill or.... Response: There are no hills or vertical curve conditions on this site; this criterion is not applicable to this project. 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 non-arterial 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. See Figure 18.795.1 Response: The visual clearance requirements for street intersections and • driveway/street intersections will be met White Oak Viliaae Planned Development &Subaivision- Annotated Submittal 37 February 22. 2007 247-01 1 -661-alpha • • 18.810 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS • 810.030 Streets A. Improvements. 1. No development shall occur unless the development has frontage or approved access to a public street. Response: As shown on the Site Plan, an east-west public street is proposed to serve the development by accessing SW 74th Avenue via the proposed easement as seen on the Site Plan. All individual residences will access the proposed private street system via private drives. 2. No development shall occur unless streets within the development meet the standards of this chapter. Response: As proposed the streets meet the standards of this Chapter. The developer is providing a public local east-west street through the private development to stub into the property to the west. This design meets the connectivity standard of Chapter 18.705. The applicant is proposing a looped private street for this subdivision. The looped road provides adequate interim turn around in lieu of a cul-de-sac. Therefore, a looped private road system, as proposed, is adequate to provide the same • convenience and ability for vehicle turn around as requested in the completeness memo provided by the City on December 13, 2006. Eventually the public street will continue to the west and connect to a 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. Response: SW 74th Avenue is proposed to have a width of 24 feet of pavement from the entrance of this development to SW Spruce Street in accordance with the Pre-Application notes. 4. Any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall meet the standards of this chapter; Response: The public and private street systems proposed within the development meet the standards of this chapter as described below. a. If the City could and would otherwise require the applicant to provide street improvements,the City Engineer... Response: Street improvements are feasible at this time; the above criteria are not applicable. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 38 February 22, 2007 7,17-011 _ alpha • • • 6. The standards of this chapter include the standard specifications adopted by the City Engineer pursuant to Section 18.810.020.B. Response: The applicant understands that the City Engineer may place additional specifications on the street systems proposed. 7. The approval authority may approve adjustments to the standards of this chapter if compliance with the standards... Response: No adjustments are requested; this criterion is not applicable. E. Minimum rights-of-way and street widths. Unless otherwise indicated on an approved street plan, or as needed to continue an existing improved street, street right-of-way and roadway widths shall not be less than the minimum width described below.Where a range ... Response: There are no private street standards set forth in the table. The applicant proposes a two-way private street accessing Lots 26 & 27 from the proposed public local street. A 20 foot wide private street one-way loop is proposed around the interior lots, to provide one way travel in a counterclockwise direction. The public street is proposed for 2/3rds construction. The proposed ROW width meets the development criteria. At the time of street extension, the removal of parking spaces and street improvements will be warranted. As provided, there are parking spaces along the parks. These spaces will provide much needed parking within the development. When the • public street is developed to its full width, parallel parking can potentially be accommodated along the northern side of the street. The streets are designed to meet all fire access requirements and radii. Street sections are detailed on plan sheet C2.2, the Access Plan is detailed on plan sheet C5.1 and the signage is detailed on plan sheet C8.1. G.Street spacing and access management. Refer to 18.705.030.H. Response: As discussed above when addressing 18.705.030.H, this proposal meets the street spacing and access management criteria. J. Existing rights-of-way. Whenever existing rights-of-way adjacent to or within a tract are of less than standard width, additional rights-of-way shall be provided at the time of subdivision or development. Response: SW 74th Avenue will be improved with 24 feet of pavement from the entrance of this development to SW Spruce Street in accordance with this standard. K. Partial street improvements. Partial street improvements resulting in a pavement width of less than 20 feet;while generally not acceptable, may be approved where essential to reasonable development when in conformity with the other requirements of these regulations, and when it will be practical to require the improvement of the other half when the adjoining property developed. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 39 February 22.2007 247-01 1 `alpha • • Response: A 24 foot pavement width is proposed for SW 74th Avenue. This criterion is not applicable. O. Curbs, curb cuts, ramps, and driveway approaches. Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair, bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080;and: 1. Concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required;except 2. Where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City Engineer approval;and 3. Asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shall be built to City configuration standards. Response: Concrete curbs are proposed as seen on the Site Plan and on plan sheet C2.2 - Typical Street Section. As shown, they are to be constructed in accordance with the standards below and Section 15.04.080. Q. Access to arterials and collectors.Where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing or proposed arterial or collector street, Response: The proposed development does not abut an existing or proposed arterial or collector street; this criterion is not applicable. 810.060 Lots A. Size and shape. Lot size, width, shape and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the development and for the type of use contemplated,and: • 1. No lot shall contain part of an existing or proposed public right-of-way within its dimensions; 2. The depth of all lots shall not exceed 2-1/2 times the average width, unless the parcel is less than 1-1/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district; 3. Depth and width of properties zoned for commercial and industrial purposes shall be adequate to provide for the off-street parking and service facilities required by the type of use proposed. Response: No public ROW is within a proposed lot in accordance with this standard. The lots meet the proscribed width to depth standard. B. Lot frontage. Each lot shall abut upon a public or private street, other than an alley,for a width of at least 25 feet unless the lot is created through a minor land partition in which case Subsection 18.162.050 (C) applies, or unless the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,in which case the lot frontage shall be at least 15 feet. Response: As shown on the Site Plan, Lots 1 through 26 have more than 25.feet width abutting the internal private street. Lot 27 can meet this standard with an adjusted design for the private street abutting the lot. C. Through lots. Through lots shall be avoided except where they are essential to provide separation of residential development from major traffic arterials or to overcome specific disadvantages of topography and orientation,and: Response: A through-lot is not proposed with this 27-lot subdivision; this criterion • in not applicable. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal - 40 February 22, 2007 247-01 1 --6&-alpha • • D. Lot side lines. The side lines of lots, as far as practicable, shall be at right angles to the street upon which the lots front. Response: As shown on the Site Plan, in most instances side lines of the lots are at right angles. This does not occur for Lot 7 where the lot accesses the internal street. Also, Lot 24 does not maintain a right angle because of the curve of the street; the intent of this criterion is met throughout the proposed development. E. Large lots. In dividing tracts into large lots or parcels which at some future time are likely to be redivided, the Commission may require that the lots be of such size and shape, and be so divided into building sites,and contain such site restrictions .... Response: The intent of this subdivision is for ultimate residential development, not the re-division of the lots in the future; this criterion is not applicable to this project. 810.070 Sidewalks A. Sidewalks. All industrial streets and private streets shall have sidewalks meeting City standards along at least one side of the street. All other streets shall have sidewalks meeting City standards along both sides of the street. A development may be approved if an adjoining street has sidewalks on the side adjoining the development, even if no sidewalk exists on the other side of the street Response: As shown on the Site Plan, the private street has a sidewalk proposed • along one side of the internal street at all times. There is a sidewalk around the circumference of the proposed internal lots. The public street will provide a sidewalk along the south side. Additionally there is a sidewalk along the street to Lots 26 and 27. The sidewalk configuration proposed meets the stated standard. B. Requirement of developers 1. As part of any development proposal, or change in use resulting in an additional 1,000 vehicle trips or more per day, an applicant shall be required to identify direct, safe (1.25 x the straight line distance) pedestrian routes within 1/2 mile of their site to all transit facilities and Neighborhood Activity Centers (schools, parks, libraries, etc.). In addition, the developer may be required to participate in the removal of any gaps in the pedestrian system off-site it justified by the development. 2. If there is an existing sidewalk, on the same side of the street as the development, within 300 feet of a development site in either direction, the sidewalk shall be extended from the site to meet the existing sidewalk, subject to rough proportionality (even if the sidewalk does not serve a neighborhood activity center). Response: This development will not produce an additional 1,000 vehicle trips per day and there is no existing sidewalk abutting the development site. The developer does, however propose to create a pedestrian path from the site to 99W to provide easy access to a main bus route. C. Planter strip requirements. A planter strip separation of at least five feet between the curb and the sidewalk shall be required in the design of streets, except where the following conditions exist there is inadequate right-of-way; the curbside sidewalks already exist on predominant • portions of the street it would conflict with the utilities, there are significant natural features (large trees, water features, etc) that would be destroyed if the sidewalk were located as White Oak Viilaae Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal _ 41 February 22. 2007 247-011 L6'alp • • required, or where there are existing structures in close proximity to the street (15 feet or • less)Additional consideration for exempting the planter strip requirement may be given on a case by case basis if a property abuts more than one street frontage. Response: The applicant is proposing curb-tight sidewalks on the private street due to the constraints of the site. In order to meet the density requirement of the parcels and maintain the applicable dimensional requirements of the R12 zoning district that apply to Planned Developments, a Planter Strip on the private street would restrict the building envelope proposed and require smaller housing footprint than feasible. The street trees will be placed within the front lots along the sidewalk as shown on the Landscape Plan. The provision of useable open spaces and significant perimeter buffer plantings balances the "potential" planter strip benefit found in a typical subdivision. D. Sidewalks in central business district. In the central business district,sidewalks shall be 10 feet in width,and: Response: This site is not within the CBD; this criterion is not applicable. 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. Response: As shown on the Preliminary Utility Plan, new sanitary sewer will be connected to a sanitary manhole located at the south of the property along the private internal street. An 8 inch line will run in a horseshoe shape underground to provide each dwelling access to sanitary sewer; this criterion is met. B. Sewer plan approval. The City Engineer shall approve all sanitary sewer plans and proposed systems prior to issuance of development permits involving sewer service. Response: The proposed sanitary sewer system is included on the Preliminary Utility Plan Sheet. It is submitted for preliminary approval with this application package. C. Over-sizing. Proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. Response: A sanitary sewer manhole is placed at the northern tip of Tract B within the private street. If development were to occur to the west of the site, the opportunity to connect to this sewer system is available. D. Permits denied. Development permits may be restricted by the Commission or Hearings Officer where a deficiency exists in the existing sewer system or portion thereof which cannot be rectified within the development and which if not rectified will result in a threat to public health • or safety, surcharging of existing mains, or violations of state or federal standards pertaining to operation of the sewage treatment system. White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 42 February 22: 2007 247-01 1 ' alpha • • • Response: It has been confirmed that adequate public sewer system capacity exists for this development. 810.100 Storm Drainage A. General provisions.The Director and City Engineer shall issue a development permit only where adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff have been made,and: 1. The storm water drainage system shall be separate and independent of any sanitary sewerage system; 2. Where possible, inlets shall be provided so surface water is not carried across any intersection or allowed to flood any street;and 3. Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown on every development proposal plan. Response: As shown on the Preliminary Utility Plan, the proposed stormwater drainage system is separate and independent from the sanitary sewer system. Stormwater drainage currently flows southeast across the property. Proposed drainage collects stormwater in a 12 inch storm pipe and conveys it south and west under the street system to the 48 inch detention pipe under the western portion of the street. There are 7 storm drains that connect directly to the storm pipe at locations so that surface water is not carried across any intersection or allowed to flood any of the street. There are two additional storm drains that connect to 10 inch perforated distribution pipe that is located within the detention chamber. The detention pipe has a controlled outlet that carries the stormwater halfway through Tract B to an outfall location that empties into the bioswale along the pedestrian walkway. The stormwater meanders through the • bioswale. Once the stormwater makes it though the bioswale it enters a ditch inlet which connects to the Public Strom System in 99W. 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. Response: Water quality access is located at the north of Tract B in the two on- street parking places. 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,and: 1. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management(as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). Response: The proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage facilities meet the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management. The sanitary sewer and stormwater drainage plan are as proposed on the Preliminary Utility Plan and described above. • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 43 February 22. 2007 2A7-011 • • 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). Response: New stormwater drainage is proposed with this development because there is no existing infrastructure; this criterion is not applicable to this project. 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,and: 1. The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; 2. The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; 3. All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer,shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and 4. Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Response: As shown on the Preliminary Utility Plan, the proposed utilities are • underground. The utilities are proposed to be constructed prior to street surfacing and are proposed to stub long enough to avoid disturbing street improvements. B. Information on development plans. The applicant for a development shall show on the development plan or in the explanatory information, easements for all underground utility facilities,and: 1. Plans showing the location of all underground facilities as described herein shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval;and 2. Care shall be taken in all cases to ensure that above ground equipment does not obstruct vision clearance areas for vehicular traffic. Response: Underground utility easements are shown on the Utility Plan Sheet. No utilities are proposed in the vision clearance areas for vehicular traffic. They are included in this submittal package for review and approval. C. Exception to under-grounding requirement. 1. The developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of undergrounding in conjunction with the development.The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which undergrounding would result in the placement of additional poles,rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. • White Oak Viiiage Planned Development &Subdivision- Annotated Submittal 44 February 2.2. 2007 247-01 1 :04-alpha • • • Response: The applicant proposes to place utilities underground during the development stage; there is no need for a fee in-lieu. 2. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. Response: See above. 3. Properties within the CBD zoning district shall be exempt from the requirements for undergrounding of utility lines and from the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. Response: This property is not within the CBD zoning district; this standard does not apply to this project. 4. The exceptions in Subsections 1 through 3 of this section shall apply only to existing utility lines. All new utility lines shall be placed underground. Response: All new utility lines are proposed underground as shown on the Utility Plan; this criterion is met. D. Fee in-lieu of undergrounding. Response: All new utility lines are proposed underground as shown on the Utility • Plan, no fee in-lieu of undergrounding is proposed; these standards are not applicable. 810.130 Cash or Bond Required A. Guarantee. All improvements installed by the developer shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City Council. Response: Bonds will be posted at the conclusion of the construction document approval process. B. Cash deposit or bond. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. Response: Bonds as required by the City will be posted at the conclusion of the construction document approval process. C. Compliance requirements. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.430.090. Response: See above. • White Oak Village Planned Development & Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 45 February 22. 2007 - 247-011 -P77-alpha • • III. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION • The proposed White Oak Village subdivision and planned development complies with all applicable elements of the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. The proper design provisions have been taken to ensure compatibility with the established neighborhood character within the context of existing City of Tigard R-12 zoning. The design and number of lots proposed meet the density requirements of the site; and adequate public facilities and services exist, or are proposed, to serve the development. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed to City and other applicable standards. The proposed PD subdivision will create housing in a manner consistent with, and complementary to, the surrounding residential developments while complying with City of Tigard development standards. The applicant therefore respectfully requests that this application for subdivision with adjustments be approved. • • White Oak Village Planned Development &Subdivision-Annotated Submittal 46 February 22, 2007 247-01 1 1S44-411P h a •. 0 _ CITY OF TIGARD. A` DU or nqc oa�aon el PRE-APPLICATION_ CONFERENCE NOTES- -: : c ,-cv Sli,piii A Bewr community• - = - _ - _ (Pre-Application:Meeting.;Notes are Valid for Six .(6).Months); -.: - - PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: �4.//05 • STAFF AT PRE-APP.: _ P/A1, - RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: i �� /...),4z_7-1-411 AGENT: Phone: 6-04 2(7,4 - bc'c 6. 9 Phone: ( ) PROPERTY LOCATION: • ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: //6 ,Z S/88 GYS 5'4/J/9111P-i7 k 1, / 1 c30 S. ! 77 14-t, TAX MAPS)/LOT #(S): / S /3& Gi'l T 1 /70e' r / S/ a 72. /f✓lio > .3(1e) NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: 5'ti- O r tff s/e---v (5-c/3) P r m, vl n r 6--c. --PSu 7� (POR) PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ti 6-N.>//371,1)/k/of i� 7L ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: R—�/. S 12. 23' ) _ /2-0 1L %B /7 • ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.570 l /78. 3S b 6'12) MINIMUM LO -SjZE:;13 sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: --- ft. Max. building height: — ft. Setback& Front 26 1..4 ft. Side 5' ft. Rear /S'ft. Corner co ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: en °/ Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: 'o %. GARAGES: z-43 ft. QQ-/2-" i� gi NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout] THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED PARTIES, AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. • * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section • • • V NARRATIVE [Refer to Code Chapter 18.390) " 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 IF consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. [,/IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) 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. XACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18 705 and 18.765) "1-i If'ITS 5!'Lt-(1 �' �X 5 Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: Minimum pavement width: OWALKWAY REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.705) rthin all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING REA, COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION (Refer to Code Chapter 18315)-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: � 'Y4 �" g-.42- 23 ➢ Land within the 100-year floodplain; l `'.1 bb 1-css ➢ Slopes exceeding 25%; /9,33 e et- . ➢ Drainageways; and = v 113,KKlo s , ,' ➢ Wetlands for the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts. c,,,i.rs Public right-of-way dedication: ?-61 643 ➢ 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. 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 sq.ft.120%)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 • = 3.050(minimum lot area) = 3.050(minimum lot area) 11.4 Units Per Acre 12.1 Units Per Acre *The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit.NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. *Minimum Project Density is 80%o1 the maximum allowed density.TO DETERMINE THIS STANDARD,MULTIPLY THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS BY.8. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 Residential Apptcaton/Planning Division Section • • ❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS [Refer to Code Section 18.7301 > 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.1 ❑ 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. 121111IFFERING AND SCREENING [Refer to Code Chapter 18745) 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 (,.._ along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. Buffer Level along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQ IRED LONG: G — &(--10 �t= M -4- LC-- fu a ra ��Lr,: / 1- 5%4'' 5 LANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapte 18.745,18.765 and 18.7 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. FIVRECYCLING [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 App6cationlPlanning Division section • dPARIDNG [Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 s 18.705) ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. ri D Single-family . Requires: One (1) off-street parking space per dwelling unit; and One (1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. • ➢ Multiple-fa ily _ Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 71 41fAcM,C iecut _1. spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms; and jr 20. _ 3 v -r.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: D. Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet, 6 inches. D Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet, 6 inches. D 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 183651 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. •pr SENSITIVE.LANDS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7751 - 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 18115.070.0) 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[CWS) BUFFER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 31 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide en_ ough 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 Page 4 of 9 Residential App6w6onJPlanning Division Section • • TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION a ORDEIR 96-44 16' .SENSITIVE.AREA DEFINITION.,. SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTH (OF VEGETATED TO SENSITIVE AREA - CORRIDOR.PER:S.IDE2 • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 15 feet 4 10 to <50 acres 25 feet 4 >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 4 10 to <50 acres 50 feet 4 >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 ravine3 •Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds,whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. . 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. 2rSIGNS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) 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.CJ 0 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 Page 5 of 9 Residential AppGcationJPlanning Division Section • . • THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE 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. MITIGATION [Refer to Code Section 18.190.060.E1 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. 1LEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND • EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting 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 Residents!Applca&on/Pla ring Division Section S . 1,4 le FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREETS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.030.1) A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: > Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The- e • 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 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1%times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. )7f BLOCKS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0901 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(Ott-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) 18.340(Director's Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) - 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) 18.350(Planned Development) + 18.705(Access!Egress/Circulation) _i(18.780(Signs) - 18.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) 18.785(Temporary use Permits) . - 18.370(varianceslAdjustments) L 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(tree Removal) - 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) 18.720(Design Compatrbiity standards) 1- 18.795(Vsual Clearance Areas) - 18.385(Macellaneous Permits) (/18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) /18.798(Wifeless Communication Facilities) Making Procedures/Impact Study) 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) e! 18.810(Street&Ul tity Improvement Standards) - 18.41.0(Lot fie Adjustments) 18.740(Historic overlay) - 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) 18.430(subdivisions) 8.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) I/18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufacured/Mobrl Home Regulations) - 18.520(Commercial zoning Districts) 18.755(NGxed sad Waste/Recydngg Storage) - 18.530(Industrial zoning Disks) 18.760(tionconfonning situations) . • CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 Residential Appfication/Planning Division Section i • ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: : • tr.✓dve=i3 j vr2 r e -Iii C / . 3.5-0 PROCEDURE • 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. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2' x 11". One 8 " x 11" map of a proposed project shall also be submitted for attachment to the staff '/2 report or administrative decision. Applications with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. • 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 Apprica5on/Planning Division Section • The administrative decisio• public-hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public • . hearing. A 10-day public appeal period fo lows all I nd use decisions. An ap peal. on this. matter would be heard by the Tigard t :--n_y ..f = A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is Atonable from The Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. . • This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM- the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION [County Surveyors 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 Surveyor's 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). PLEASE NOTE: ' The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City 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). O PREPARED BY: CITY OF TIGARD PING DIV�St6N - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX 503-684-7297 EMAIL lsafrs rust name)@citigard.or.us TITLE 18((ITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNET ADDRESS:www.ci.tigard.or.us • H:lpatty\masters\Pre-App Notes Residential.doc Updated: 15-Dec-04 (Engineering section:preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 Residential App(casonlPlanning Division section V"' . �<:f, -v- a. :-r. •• ''-�. �.ct . ;a�. s a�_,r7' .x.51 "'^15 `y°t °" -�' .5'' .7. '``E 6$4 � .r , ,� P E- PPI ` 101 CONFERENCE OTES 44 •S s' X-°kl� f s �? r 4' w, 1 F3_t r ?• y , T �so Eiiy n t�a ga on I� .,=`? 's _ .xne. ;,zt.. `~�.-�i-- -..ems. `ik_.�..,w-� .�;n "max '- -s'te ?i• � - ...� ,��knt!�u�3�.y. 'UBLIC FACILITIES Tax Mapts): 15136CA Tax Lolls): 01100 Use Type: SUB 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-74th Avenue to 51 feet to provide a cul-de-sac bulb for termination of public street ❑ SW to feet ❑ SW to feet n SW to feet Street improvements: ® Full street improvements will be necessary along SW 74th Avenue cul-de-sac, to include: VI 40 feet of pavement (radius) IA concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities 5-foot concrete sidewalk with 5 foot planter strip M street trees sized and spaced per TDC FI "street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Fl Other: CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Holes Page 1 MS ngineering Department Section • • ® Full street improvements will be necessary along SW Interior private streets, to include: • EI 24 feet of pavement from curb to curb •■ ®concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities 5-foot concrete sidewalk on at least one side ® street trees sized and spaced per TDC ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: ® Partial street improvements will be necessary along SW 74th Avenue, to include: ® 24 feet of pavement width from development to Spruce Street. ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control.devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: • ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb . ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities • ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. :1TY OF T16ARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 ngineering Department Section ' ❑ 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: ❑ 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 Prior to , 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 at south property line. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developers responsibility to extend the public sewer to serve the development. • 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) 612-70101 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. • 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 :ITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 Of 6 ngineering Department Section drainage plan for the site, anday 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. The applicant must also contact ODOT regarding connection to the • public storm sewer in Highway 99. 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) Applicant must contact ODOT for connection to the public storm sewer. 2) Provide preliminary sight distance certification for 74th Avenue/Spruce Street, 18.705.030.H.1. 3) Provide preliminary approval from TVFR regarding secondary access and required improvements. FRAFFIC 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 category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building 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. ',ITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 ngineering Department Section 'Pay the TIF • • -SITS . 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 PFI 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. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-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. CITY OFTICARD Pre-Aunlication Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Deuartme tSection V • • Other Permits. There are other special perrnits, 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: Z• (4 o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF DATE Phone: [5031639-4171 Fax 1503)624-0752 docvment3 Revised: September 2,2003 • CITY OFTIPARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section • • 1S136CD-01501 1 S136DB-02400 A Q DEVELOPMENT LLC CFIAMF ON RONALD D 3Y CASCADE PROPERTY SERVICES INC ROBER 4380 SW MACADAM AVE STE 210 16449 CT TLAND,OR 97239 E OSWEGO,OR 4 18136D8-01700 1S136CA-90421 ABBOTT BRUCE&REBECCA CLEVELAND STEPHEN J 10850 SW 74TH AVE 10900 SW 76TH PL#42 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 , 1S136CA-90141 1S136CA-90591 ALLEN TERESA J COLEMAN TEDRIC V&KARYN S. 10900 SW 76TH PL#14 16367 S IVEL RD TIGARD, OR 97223 BEAVERCREEK,OR 97004 1S136CA-90581 1S136DB-00700 ARBOW JEANNE TRUST CORBIN GROVER D TRUSTEE 10900 SW 76TH PL#58 BY TBC TAX UNIT#016600 TIGARD,OR 97223 PO BOX 35370 LOUISVILLE, KY 40232 1S136CA-90501 1S136AC-03801 BENOLKEN CAROLYN A CROWDER DONALD L TRUSTEE 10900 SW 76TH PL#50 82513 CROWDER RD . TIGARD, OR 97223 SEASIDE,OR 97138 •6CA-90361 1S136DB-02300 BOYER SUNNY M DALTON COMPANY LLC THE 10900 SW 76TH PL#36 11030 SW 74TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136CA-90471 1S136CA-01700 CAMERA GEORGE NICHOLAS DALTON COMPANY LLC THE • 10900 SW 76TH PL#47 11645 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DB-01400 1S136DB-01000 CARLASCIO GIL"E DALTON COMPANY LLC THE 10915 SW 74TH AVE 10160 SW NIMBUS AVE#F1A TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136CA-90341 1S136AC-03900 CATHEY CORRIN K DEAL LORI MATHIS&J TODD 10900 SW 76TH PL#34 10815 SW 74TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 36DC-00501 1 S136CA-90371 MPION RONALD V AND DINAN JUDITH L F�OBERTA E 10900 SW 76TH PL#37 16449 LEXINGTON CT TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 • . 1S136DB-01600 - 1S136AC-03400 DORRELL DONAL N - _ERR MEYER STO5ES INC 10885 SW 74TH ST ATTN:CL-D 0_ /23C TIGARD,OR 97223 PO BO 121 Pp) LAND,OR 97242 • • 1 S 136DB-01500 1 S 136 DB-00201 DORRELL DONAL V G DELMA FRED MEYER STORES INC PO BOX 230482 ATTR"CLD 04002a3e- TIGARD,OR 97281 PO 80 .42 PORTLAND,OR 97242 1S136CD-01601 1S136CA-90241 DOUGHTY J PAUL ESTATE OF FROHNMAYER SUSAN V • BY C THOMAS DAVIS PER REP 10900 SW 76TH PL#24 12220 SW FIRST ST TIGARD,OR 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 1S136CD-01600 15136CA-90481 DO -TY J PAUL ESTAT o FUJIOKA AIMEE& BY C THO - D: 'ER REP FUJIOKA FAMILY TRUST 12220 S ST = FUJIOKA MASARU/SHARON CLAIRE TR B RTON,OR 9700 13713 NW 46TH AVE VANCOUVER,WA 98686 1S136CA-90561 1S136DB-00800 EMMETT RICHARD F&SANDRA J GALVAN SALVADOR R&MERCEDES 10900 SW 76TH PL#56 10930 SW MIRA CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136CA-90311 1S136DB-00900 • ENGLEHART MICHAEL GENSMAN MITCHELL EDWARD 8423 SW POINTER WAY#B 18470 PARRETT MTN RD PORTLAND,OR 97225 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 • 1S136CA-06000 1S136DB-00500 FERGUSON ADAM P&ALANA M GGE TIGAR LLC 7640 SW SPRUCE ST#B 11619 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DB-00501 1S136BD-03700 FRANCESCHI JEROME R/GENEVIEVE R GOLDBERG JACOB INTER VIVOS TRUST AGREEMENT DATE MA 7535 SW SPRUCE ST FRANCESCHI KENNETH A/BARBARA A TIGARD,OR 97223 602 THIRD ST STE#9 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 1S136DB-00200 1S136CA-90651 FRANCESCHI JEROME R/GENEVIEVE T GORDON JOHN A FRANCESCHI KENNETH A/BARBARA A TRS 10900 SW 76TH PL#65 37 SAN MATEO CT TIGARD,OR 97223 SAN RAFAEL,CA 94903 1S136AC-03402 1S136CA-90322 • FRED MEYER STORES INC GRAHAM RHONDA L ATTN:CLD 04002/23C 10900 SW 76TH PL#32 PO BOX 42121 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97242 • 1S136CA-90151 • 1S136CA-90161 GREEN SUSAN& HOFFERT NANCY L GREEN SHARON 10900 SW 76TH PL#16 10900 SW 76TH PL TIGARD,OR 97223 • atRD,OR 97223 13136CA-07100 1S136CA-90231 GUERRERO JOHN BAPTISTA III& HOLTE SECELIA E EVELYN E 10900 SW 76TH PL#23 2516 G ST _ TIGARD,OR 97223 HUBBARD,OR 97032 1S136CA-90521 1S136CD-01401 HALL BARBARA T JOHNSON JULIE A LIFE ESTATE AND 10900 SW 76TH PL#52 RICHARDSON BERNY TIGARD,OR 97223 19430 NE HASSALO PORTLAND,OR 97230 13136CA-01601 1S136AC-03800 HALL DONALD W&GRACE L& JONES KEVIN L&JANICE A HALL JOHN G ET AL 7302 SW SPRUCE ST BY FIRST AMERICAN REAL ESTATE TA TIGARD,OR 97223 8435 N STEMMONS FREEWAY DALLAS,TX 75247 1S136CA-01600 1S136CA-90131 HALL DONALD W&GRACE L AND JUNG JAMES H HALL JOHN G&PARKER CAROL J 10900 SW 76TH PL#13 c/o AMAN WALTER S&AMAN WALTE TIGARD,OR 97223 PO BOX 2990 ''\LATIN,OR 97062 •CA-90511 1S136DB-02502 HANES LISA M KESSLER JULES 10900 SW 76TH PL#51 BY KAREN LILLEBO TIGARD,OR 97223 6312 SW CAPITOL HWY#443 PORTLAND,OR 97239 1S136CA-90441 1S136DB-02500 HATTING KATHRYN L - LER JULES 5711 SW MULTNOMAH BLVD#216 BY KARE" :0 PORTLAND, OR 97219 6312 S PITOL ' •` ,•43 P%'TLAND,OR 97239 1S136CA-01500 1S136CA-90022 HAWTHORNE VILLA LTD PARTNERSHIP KIMBALL PAULA A. BY TVHP 10900 SW 76TH PL#2 6160 SW MAIN ST TIGARD,OR 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 1S136CA-90642 1S136CA-90351 HILGART JAMES M KOTLYARENKO MILYA&BORIS 10900 SW 76TH PL#64 10900 SW 76TH PL#35 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 ,c136CA-90621 1S136CA-90461 4PSUSAN L LAING EMILY H 00 SW 76TH PL#62 10900 SW 76TH PL#46 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 1 S 136 DB-00600 1 S136 D B-01800 LARSON RAYMOND K& MICKLEY WILLIAM C&MARY R EILEEN FRANCES 10880 SW 74TH BY-TBC#016600 TIGARD,OR 97223 - PO BOX 35370 • LOUISVILLE,KY 40232 •1S136CA-01400 1S136CA-90541 LEE BEN&LAURA LIVING TRUST MIHO NANCY GREENWAY& 7745 SW PFAFFLE ST MIHO PAIGE YUIKO TIGARD,OR 97223 10900 SW 76TH PL#54 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136AC-02101 1 S 136CA-90091 LEPIANE ALEX J&RUTH E . MILLER JODI A 7415 SW SPRUCE ST 10900 SW 76TH PL#9 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 181361M-02100 1S136CA-01800 LEWIS BENJAMIN NOLAN MILNE REAL PROPERTIES INC 10970 SW 74TH AVE 1312 SW 16TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97201 • 1S136CA-90291 1S136CA-90172 MACY TIMOTHY&NANCY . MISKA TRUST 35351 NE WILSONVILLE RD BY MISKA EDWARDS P& NEWBERG,OR 97132 PHYLLIS A TRS 745 THIRD ST LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 1 S 136DB-01900 1 S136CA-90272 • MAGLEY PAMELA L MITCHELL PATRICK W 10910 SW 74TH AVE 10900 SW 76TH PL#27 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR.97223 1S136CA-90201 1S136CA-90071 MAHAR JACOB T& MOTLAGH ZENAIDA F FICK MELAINA A 10900 SW 76TH PL#7 10900 SW 76TH PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 . 1S136CA-90011 1S136CA-90451 MATTSON ROBERTA - MURPHY CHARITY 10900 SW 76TH PL#1 10900 SW 76TH PL#45 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136C D-00101 1 S136CA-90491 MCGRATH STANLEY R ET AL NAIMO GARY L BY WILLIAM FLOBERG 10900 SW 76TH PL UNIT 49 834 SW ST CLAIR TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97205 1 S136CD-00102 1S136DB-02000 TO RATH STANLEY R ET : NELSON ROBERT L SHIRLEY BY WILL • FLO: . - 12316 NW CORNELL RD 834 SW S • ° PORTLAND,OR 97229 LAND,OR 9720 • • • • . • 1S136CA-90061 1S1368D-03600 NICKLEN JEAN C PULSINELLI CHRISTINE M L10900 SW 76TH PL#6 7515 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 . • . 1S136CD-01400 1S136CA-90632 NMJ PROPERTIES LLC QUARTON PRISCILLA S 9838 SW DAPPLEGREY LOOP • 10900 SW 76TH PL#63 BEAVERTON,OR 97008 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136CA-07000 1S136CA-00100 • OLSEN LORIE ANN REES ROBERT A. 1447 LAKE FRONT RD 7510 SW SPRUCE ST LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 1S136DB-00190 - 1S136CA-90111 OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION REESOR LOUISA R/W PROPERTY MGMT UNIT 10900 SW 76TH PL#11 • FILE#06948-//1245 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 355 CAPITAL ST NE RM 411 , SALEM,OR 97301 1S136CA-90222 1S136CA-90101 . ORI JEFFREY F ROBERTSON KELLIE M 10900 SW 76TH PL#22 10900 SW 76TH PL#10 • TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 5CA-90401 1S136CA-06900 PAPPAS MICHAEL W& ROUSE CHARLES& DAVENPORT CANDY J GENDE DIANE M .10900 SW 76TH PL#40 11916 SW ELEMAR CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 1S136DB-01200 1S136CA-90611 • PATELZICK JOHN.J JR RUFOLO CHRISTINE E • 10975 SW 74TH AVE 10900 SW 76TH PL#61 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136BD-04000 1 S136DB-02200 PERRI JOANNE M REVOC LT SATHER RONALD A BY JOANNE M PERRI TR 11000 SW 74111 AVE . 4801 SW CALDEW ST#B TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97219 . 1S136CA-90411 1S136CA-90212 PETERSON THOMAS B& SCHAEFFER CAROL CORNILS CANDICE L 10900 SW 76TH PL#21 . 10900 SW 76TH PL#41. TIGARD,OR 97223 • • TIGARD,OR 97223 '-136CA-90301 � 1S136BD-03900 MMER CORY J SCHMIDT DAVID W AND 1 900 SW 76TH PL#30 ANNETTE M TIGARD,OR 97223 7575 SW SPRUCE TIGARD,OR 97223 • • 1S136CA-90191 1S136CA-90551 SCHMUKI FRANK&MARTIE FAMILY T SUAREZ DAVID BY FRANCIS C/MARTHA J SCHMUKI TRS 10900 SW 76TH PL#55 10900 SW 76TH PL#19 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136C D-01500 1S136CA-90262 SCHULZ DAVID TR SYKNOV ALEKSEY& NATALIA KERR GLORIA TR 10900 SW 76TH AVE#26- BY MARTHA SCHULZ TIGARD,OR 97223 14326 WEST COLT LN SUN CITY WEST,AZ 85375 1S136CA-90051 1S136CA-90182 SHORB ANN M TEVET SHONAH 10900 SW 76TH PL#5 10900 SW 76TH PL#18 PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DB-01100 1S136CA-90601 SIMONSON KATHRYN A THOMPSON KRISTY L 11005 SW 74TH 10900 SW 76TH PL#60 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DB-02601 1S136CA-90000 SLAGTER RICHARD A&TAMERA L TIGA-g 'ID '• DO COMMUNITY 5760 SW NICOL RD UN e' ERS PORTLAND,OR 97225 , 0 1S136CA-90332 1S136DB-02503 • SPANGLER JEROME TOM MOYER THEATRES 10900 SW 76TH PL#33 805 SW BROADWAY#2020 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97205 1S136BD-03800 1S136DC-00500 SPRING BRADLEY B TOM MOYER THEATRES LINDA L 805 SW BROADWAY#2020 7555 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND,OR 97205 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S136CA-90431 1S136DB-02603 SPRUCE TERRACE ASSOCIATES LLC TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN 5320 SW MACADAM TRANSPORTATION DIST OF OR PORTLAND,OR 97201 4012 SE 17TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97202 1S136DB-02600 1S136CA-90032 STEWART PHYLLIS T/STEWART TRUST TSAI.DAVID L BY MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS OF 10900 SW 76TH PL#3 OREGON INC#5331 TIGARD,OR 97223 AMF O'HARE AIRPORT PO BOX 66351 CHICAGO, IL 60666 1S136DB-02602 1S136CA-90081 STEWART PHYLLIS TRUST VANDIJK CAROLYN L ( • BY US BANK TRUSTEE 10900 SW 76TH PL#8 REAL ESATE ASSET ADMIN TIGARD,OR 97223 PO BOX 3168 PORTLAND, OR 97208 • •. 1S136CA-90381 1S136DB-01300 VANDOREN MELODIE L ZSOKA KENNETH& "10900 SW 76TH PL#38 NICHOLS TIFFANYE PORTLAND,OR 97223 10945 SW 74TH AVE • TIGARD,OR 97223 • 1S136CA-90281 WALKER EMILY& MILLICAN MELISSA R 10900 SW 76TH PL#28 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S136CA-90391 WASHELESKI KRISTINE J 10900 SW 76TH PL#39 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136CA-90571 WATKINS CAROLE M 10900 SW 76TH PL#57 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DB-02501 WESTSIDE HOLDING CO LLC BY MELLANIE HENIFF 11632 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD,OR 97223 •6CA-05900 WHITE MICHAEL L&NANETTE M 7670 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136CA-90531 WIEDEMAN SARA K& WOLFE CHRISTOPHER T 10900 SW 76TH PL#53 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S136CA-90121 WISCHMEYER SARAH M 10900 SW 76TH PL#12 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136CA-90041 YOUNGREN PATRICIA M 10900 SW 76TH PL#4 TIGARD,OR 97223 03s6CA-90251 AJ&IRENEC 10900 SW 76TH PL#25 TIGARD,OR 97223 • • Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 • Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Diane Baldwin 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 3706 Kinsale Lane SE Tigard, OR 97223 Olympia, WA 98501 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue _ Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 • Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M • Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\Iabels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 21-Oct-05 •�/' AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEE _ OTICE i 1O}• IX I V ID € -, *- A N T'r ~. e'':^ E. t ,& .. a=.::IaI,S - GA r I a:6;'a P-A R, t„,#-_--?',10A=1 -r : s .'.. r , �1EGH4 '1300-.M2 DRC� �. z• a�L`-,r f A A D ESA E, E- ��'•O 8 . ''. , :. , �Wi _:N k "�' P, I ds�41E ©B `.in Xt _--r :]` �Y �j $- ' .:4 : `. x 447 � ' � - I f s o •� r i r, �,, ' wy 7y ; -11Ig``*' F � y '�-'PT4 I'ceg - . 7 ' i' u i a d_ an , la' . ri-,,#!`e N,64.. aMr +p i :, i: 4a+ .o r„ ' i :`t G `f.M1 ar y E'" � M. ISjti, Yeti° ' e:Q -y: i -- r y ta. a 4�•E " ti'•+ A,- ,k ^ '.. f y� . , ,. , Aa ' , f J " v,< Vi-`'�.4.,` ti - -1 -� I • ` "' . •. a fl "i „- ' . `r r... :'. *r, -- ' "+� I a ) r-�, 11.41..,x7. e 0,,,: .t" :, • tia. I .., - � r i r I. a , i � i1 I z ,,, r3: r:-,,`E . K f: =r„.... ra up {1..a,. *p��= ' � 7• _tya e. YK -4,-.A.- v *' a SiAj-,xL .era. Ud. �x� -HI,:1^T4 ):`4N!fw _�.. ,,�.3"F'r,t ?4-A '}tIi�N 410,/011* -& ' d .; ..8 :.i. lD•` 1. ,L'AE:F' _.`.,® 1 ;9.t ..,, If:-tir.` . .QFL„.g-U t TI.Q1,., MAILING: I, - " OC.i\1P, 1(.1.i�n , being duly sworn, depose and say that on the day of t1\ , 20 DEO , !caused to have mailed Jo each of the persons on the attached list, a otice of a meeting to discuss a piroposed development at(or near) POeitie. Hicti 1.1 LL. 4 111 Age., it r i . 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 plainly address to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at Tict ; OR , with postage prepaid thereon. /� S nature (I "e presence of a Notary Public) POSTING: . t, �A,■Ac (I L eoLfa ref_ , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed resi ci-e-v,-L t( (c 1 J cLe.✓-cIcp wIe l affecting the land located at (sae the approximate location(s) IF no address(s)and/or lot(s)currently registered)JJ,ZSa.�-tk'1/E4S 5 C Pac/�-iii.. -644 q jj030 50 74!' A/ Hord •and did on the 9 t-it day of A444 ,20 06 personally post noii'ce indicating that the site may be proposed for a re ',4( "r_R✓ loippueK'L application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at (/J 'Z 5 ) raci�*c ff co.j• 61.,,c i. /103a 50 747-1 4✓-,' f l ja.-cl J/ (state location you posted notice on property) - . . -.-c.ctf e p,_,.....,___ Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FORA STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF Ore9 CAA ) - County of -{ /tOMO.4 ) ss. . Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the 9 day of Ao -.- , Ob '�".5, OFFICIAL SEAL 1 a, )t •® C MRY1 UBLIC REGON } 0 M SSION NO.382234 MY COMMISSION EXr I ES JUNE 27 2008? �� • NO •RY PUBLI F OREGON '.y Commission Expires: 271 2005 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): b ogin\patty\rnasters\afiidavit of mai ing-postir,a neiohbnrhnnri,n tine rine. 0 O . . .. • --- ---,---,t,,,,---,_.,,,,,,,r.:--4- --, ,T,,7,,,,w7,-,,,,, ..,y,'„,---,77e-,,,,,.:,,,,,..--zr,,,,, ---,,,,,,!,...,,,.$:.4.,--1,:f.,,..--,;=,,,,:,,,t-.-4".-5-,:_'-'.-. 4,4,,... .....,4,,..r.,-'if.,,z-5,17-7',.---1-r----',:---;,- • ,.,..-_...t ,.-,:-,.---,..,....-..--::,—,.'--....-::,-v-i,-.----J,-•:.--t.,,-t-..=--:-_-,.-,--v,.v7,,,--3,fL.;:c„-- , ..,.. -- -.4,,ibor2.,,::gt.t.,:.,atztry-let,--.-.-v..;.'-A--,.; ,—,,,,-;,,f,,,,.;',,,,,,f Z....c,..1..g,,,,, • .....'- Noar tcE -- -- ' - .. *, , ,...„,„...„..:..., ..• •,. ..,,„,. .„ ..........................,„„„„„......... .T.„..„.„:„..-„,,,..;,,,,...,..,• .,4r1 I Developer to hold NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ps.t-tt'At'z'i*,- -- - ' ....,e,--.,--14,--,,,-.7;,.....7 • , ' - - - concerning proposed . . - --- development of this property immea . . -- ',.: -c" '4'...'..•. , _ •R:,f';:f?"'"'-'="iY;;`•7 WAlleC1111V -D 41117':'t 19 0 --, 4;4. ,,.. .;'?."'.;' Y:'',•:,•••;•:',".Z , MAY VA.2X.; 'kaXr7ef.k;`•-anc"°.. ,v*ZPI "s '''' •. • - ''',. , 'I 4 ,` .'''•:'''Z' -'. --_, '- ....kl'•,/#4,74.11•ITY,...,0""tikt`ITe.,..gA_, -.' • '' - :le L..; __= 'Z-_,- -"'-‘-''14'''t‘".."•1 • i PROPOSEMPRO ECT:.-, ,,--,,*:-.1 ,---"..,.`- - - , '-1 ,•, k.<-1.41-- -r' 7: ..ftlAtc-..•-•`.:,,..'"' 7..0 %- _ •- .-'- z..1:i T5* .-, •-,'V':-J., .4. e ',Pt.,;.;10,-,,,,,f,:e., ",47,:;• .; .4:- • '' ' 4 (:, "', ..•;„ Z0 21,---- -....41,.?0; 4 ;A:A.' For Moro Inform-Mir CZ47tL„,,,...r,. b,m - , ..„,,,..,,.....,....,,,,, . • , -7: ".t . ,• Meeting Notice Posted at S. Edge of Property, adjacent to SW Pacific Hwy. • ----. .....-:-.4,---A .,...4.-.1.:43;,.....v.,....... `7.pw`A 1•'•*‘-`1. 1-'%•7,.:. ' fi ' -•-„- , .;•,:,...4%.ry .^-** ey%'''' ,v-t'h '*.4..-;t44:1 4 ' . t` -1, ',,,enl-i",'"""1•'-z--.4.:4,..1.•,.., f.c.:.,..-;.. ',.' • "-^'..;-,. ,-VA' .._,X,-- -,,,..,*-t.4•-. i-tA,?-?0,4;*".a",;t:,*-rg'''' .--,. f'-i7.'---,',4*--.:. f , A..-_-_-rt - ., , ,- ., --_-. - . . ,;..4,,,,,-,,,,_,..,,,,, ,......al.„ ..„.-. , --,,,e..... 4....,t..•!:71 h.j.,. .6. -.., ...,,, ,..1 7. 17..7..";- $.!.?.r '-. ...ttia.- 77.1.R44.6'.7.6f..."•'''' ."••••••.•• ....--- - ....- *IVO ..- i'd•'...,' ;6,...,4.4,, ;•:1!".1,11,1, '-', tr 7. t7...t" - •"f .•-' t...-.- •• "-' '--- ''-•-•-• .. . : ....•;.:•It. -,6•4:iiie4/ZVO: • ..- ,. --„, kr 4; i•-•• '• 0 •-' A .-. ';.• • c 4 - "..;+4•,,„,. • p• , :. . • A... . .*•11 • 2... t ' .• --".•.. -...=','7: --4* . 'f6, Developer to hold .. . ....• ,0:c. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING . ‘,..zif '2`-,,.... 4 '.,o7„ ••.4."4,,b, .‘.,.. . • .1 • • cencerriing proposed - ,. -- ....,.‘ ..-4.1 • ....,..„1...L.„..„-. . ---- ..,--A- !Av.?, .,..,..v.s... ..i....„ 't*,.;,:., -.., ''• :;" ---*-;t...°%1' development of this property. >47c,.. ..... ..4w.r.:„.„..-:. ...,......,- --. ..-..... - .. -.....,,,, ............A.,, .:. z -• -;\,“— ,...... ._ -- •-,. -- --.1.1,,t.1,5,,---. ..41-v-iro,...- -1-.4.4,..--r-, ..-:: -- .. ,,,...-..,....,-,r,-, -,, 'e'),....,,,,,,,,,,..•-..-4,„... -,,,,,,,,Zpr 0,-Arf"", ^..,'.,----•1'..„-- "......771-W-4. -. -" h ......."7".c. -•;••••'-‘-. ' *6;''''e'A.,‘..*7F''';‘>--,..-:,31-'-7,3„Lq-' ,,,..... ....i...,,,,-z..-....-. ;•-,. .,.,,,..f....: .. ---e:rt„,...-",!-- ......-.. ..-- . •,..t ., : ..". 7- -..."'-' ' --2,4;,--:e''...4..._-", -,f---''-'---'-'"---76.'4,-,riEt,4;t:i%-• -- - . -:' ..01c"*"-' • ;.-:•;.": 1,..,--.1--t ifArigitillk-„%.22-ftt'.^"w.-4-$f-'er .l'4--. r..;.-;-,,i...r - .-- ..7-...-. -4..1„p..- I: VITgCC !.'ai,„7-o--., ....-$:.-- ,. ..-- f ...., ,,,...„... 6-,.--...7-,..11.‘.Y. V-A,,`...L7r...-;-....-4::.S4,.---',-4ti,7-...4;"."1,.,-4:14,Art.......--,-----;,. _.-J.c.„-••2•• • _e••- •-•.>'''' ••" ;,-.•.‘d-g• s•‘,...4 • ••• .%•ro..1 .17,.. ..- •g,`,.. ,,l'.-,(1,''',.,*,tr•ROP.OSED:PRO—JEOlt:--,-.-r----'1--:-.. :-.--1-,..,'--,_r•-.,;:. , ' .;'-1.-. '''V. 1:-. ..6 "-_----.''''''""-, 4,,,,,,--...-. - .01 7`'4,7.-4'7-`1,7,-;„.r. -....,"446.--...7.--.77.• -1..--"I'.... ---••,":"&"-*".;:'''.,'::1.:):-..--,'''''.10,4,4, ›..1.47-4'..,,,,'''i51;4'.:X:Z:'-.,a ';'.:d1-44,:ts • '.'••••-•;:,--ix--(-7,74:vz--71,4,:....v-Det,.t.-e -tAgf---= .;-,.,:: ., w• , _ „a,i, Aie-,,L,,,;,,,,-.._ ,. .. , do; ...-3:...a__;,„,-. ,.- „ „ $.-1.,.. , ,..,..,.....„ 4,-,--• .,,- • . - -. ----.07. ._P , ,f ,„, ,,,,. ..---..-fAc;.-•'...:,----us;4-.1.--dp-1,r-40_,-,...-=--p:::-,-,-:- --,:-.',--4:-.1-:-.ft,,l-oz,,,-4,:se _zr,... s...,. sh: t,,,,ok, ----,-,--•_.,--.,,_.ge' v.sr.z.. "- --. "4ti e. 4 A For More information Contact -'1.'t-`,,:*--z:.- • ' --#),-,-=--t-- -,11- ...., "t.t4...%.• i. . my4k4:1.1. .v.r.,17,Arox-4-101),,, _ . ,a-,.. ,,„.. 1..„i7:?: -:•:.--t.....7'. ....P4,-- trer Vats, n.."MEI, ..,,.....-_,st ■,.... -.3.-,t,t.,f• - , 4.r..,1* r '' e--- ,•-. , i - 1. ' --....,::-. - a _- ,•••••.,...,,,,...1.‘-....c......rA,...x.. '"j''"Vslt .,* ‘' VI -'-.C''41''' 4-4•StW:t.47.W.V,,r'' " - V.,,Th,F,... '`•• '-'''''''<„,7' .-. .''''';`";.: s'A 'Ad 41rtr-..‹ 7„. -7 _ - , . - ----1-A,K*Peo,:- -.- _• ,,- ---45,...,-..,%,-, --. -,. ....4-.44/1. llt„, ... i, •••••4-4•10.t,7,..`„rik-.. ....f.i....zo,,..41,, '4-4"'-:'.:* )_.4.,ii ..:4:-.- ''.1"- ' . '.E- sir''..r .. -•-• _ -, ''' _..L.:-...*1.1.--.. ......... .....- Vele.,. ,......L...."...3-m .1. ''•AP A-LA- • Meeting Notice Posted at NE Edge of Property at S. End of SW 74th Avenue NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING May 9, 2006 RE: White Oak Planned Development Dear Interested Party: • DL Design Group Inc. represents the owner of three adjoining properties at 11625 and 11645 SW Pacific Highway, and 11030 SW 74th Avenue in Tigard, OR. These parcels are located west of the Fred Meyer retail store on the north side of Pacific Highway and south of SW 74th Ave. The developer is considering proposing a 27-lot planned development consisting of single-family detached homes at this location with private streets connecting to SW 74th Avenue on the north for access: Improvements will include utility services, site landscaping and a park area (see attached Tentative Plat). Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: • Day/ Date: Thursday, May 25, 2006 Location: Tigard City Hall, Red Rock Creek Conference Room Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 Telephone: (503) 639-4171 (City Hall) Time: 6:00 — 7:00 p.m. Please note this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the city. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at (503) 225-1679 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LA Ran Leonard DL Design Group Inc. Attachments: Project Vicinity Map and Meeting Location Map • Concept Plan (Tentative Plat) DL 9045 SW Barbur Boulevard, Suite 101 • Portland, Oregon 97219 • Phone: 503.225.1679 • Fax: 503.246.2094 DESIGN GROUP INC. • • • • • --4: 4 xt .r� r-w s J'e :¢ p r+ - - ti, . ,, ( 4.1.4,..,.....-.;. ,.,-......:......::. . ... i t .at �as a + wI' �y,7 7.4 r Y r A SE : > r �:. ^ :5ti :::::::::::::::::::1..:::::-.:-:::::.:.:.:7\6::::: ::: :: ::::::::::•::::-.-':-'1::':.::::: . ':''.:.... .....'.‘:,'-','„:',.,-.::::.'..:::.....''.....'..::::'.:::::..•••::..•:••.'::-...‘-'..1,':.::..:..'.1-:::::::'_.:.:•-•...:<.:::'::....:..:•:'...''',':::::'':....:::...'....:::.::.1::::.:','•..',.•-1:.'::::..'.::::•••7:.:'''•;; .::..........:... ..:...:..:.:: .. ...: "z :::: • dlCf Building Cis�1s1L�PUtice� s??-,v�F„r�.�;u�; �� s Ili l.t/tF;e. 4t �, s CCtiO.t t•..- 'ta6F3 f. z4 ... ...:: 1-, t.,.. . . . ...... . ..... . Neighborhood Meeting Location Map Meeting Location: City Hall Red Rock Creek Conf. Room • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 • Date: Thursday, May 25, 2006 Time: 6:00-7:00 p.m. • • - . • ( / ---~^ �� D 8 ` �* �� '-------_-- -__'__'--'-----'_—'--' ' - • c�� ________________ _____'___ _____________________��___ ~_=� ��=~_° 90I5 SW Sarbur 95417 ,��~" " • e\ ------_____-_-_ _■~ ^ 1503)225-16/9 . / ` / TEN TA v C2.2 ,^. 2o' . /~— .— , G �� ____ • --_'- ' .__- --_'_--'___'__-'__-'__''_--'__--__'---_-_--'__—'-_—'--_--'_--'—__ --_ __--.~_~.--_-__--_-_'_--- ^"~ ��^ ��`.-~.�` ^�'� ' '' LOT 26 �� ---�- , ; tor 22 7 ,_. , ,„ ri� ,, I -1- ,,,„;.;,;:47. 8. ; < .x LOT 24 Nz 2 LOT 19• - - it It it r D� F o< �� LOT I � � � �m + /--''- ' . -- —�- | | � •| |. . 131 it, ' ' . | / '!I 1 | | ' ' ' . , ' / `| • | ~~ ~~ . - „| �| ' ' --- H . ' �u° � ' | | | 1 Tl_r1311_,. /� . ` | / | � � | tor 7 LOT or 51' LOT 4 ' Lor J LOT uor / . . 1 ( ( - '' � It� .13 �, 3. � PARK � | / � _ | /--/ ' �� |' � . i E:' :( / /- �_- ` ------'---�---------'----�-- �_ =~� � . r-----' ~�~° � * __-'-__-__-'__�'_ ---_-_- . . 2 TEN TA p��r � -��x cz1 .'' m' / r~~� �°� �� _____�_________ ___ v�^��.�� / . � ----'---'-F--- • .� . � � • . . c�� h' j' NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ATTENDANCE ROSTER PROJECT: C041 , P k 60/4,kipr 'caI—be„Le>'op„iett MEETING DATE: it-'6C 2-5/ ace* PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY! NAME MAILING ADDRESS & CITY, STATE ZIP CODE ' PHONE # E-MAIL ADDRESS DL�esegK ‘rthu r� aR. L e-o tareL 91140t4-1 (A)S Qar�p Pt3/ ue./ol (SO 3) a•,�_ g42r- panic" j- aR---- 972/9 Z2.5-/6,73 A ( >ct6I., CkW vr, !Arc tug-)=-i9�Y vlZ .7)Z/ 1 so3 6 Y L1�C Zts( 4,7 10,t G,oU g I.i tus I'►/�- 503 (' 4 H.16-/ - 97,9e2`%l7 .5-4;0• r//w :i,1 1?✓ • , 4-L/7 Civb / ia,,,. o • r� lfL' c' -573 L/4,f"2/r/L�./7 r �? , ' di A c"Q.-�..r, . id O s " ' r L�.- -T .' CI -) 0-a3 S1 G ` cia: b C.. -1c�i,c_( a I 0c115 S )v ` 14Lt- ,c) C ,. % • Ka-Y-4 r e, V I'm oil�cp.7 /l co e'9- _Ledo •7'/ .c. t.-: 1IAn(16-Y 1=-2.0• )30x' cpg6 e�" -D�On `3-2 e/re e rr-ej 1 /a rr s" 4�'7� s i l7P2- 3 . e5. )-47 .-/7.511� 107 1-(9 c,1(.i Z Ze a la 5149 -Z040, 16,1•f-ij `((G,l 1c-r7 ;.•1 0-4..,-ice .�.d 747 1 rl, SC.,/ . - , t6r) e.e-C-e /b1 1?1.1-irt()--94: - ;/ ( ( 0 e) - 2.0"1--- • - • NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ATTENDANCE ROSTER ` f ( P( / l' 1 MEETING DATE: / is J ?5-i 2te'� PROJECT: C{,,)1► �,. �a c.- R r9IL{?d�f.��.E". o �rr�.�-�• PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY! NAME MAILING ADDRESS & CITY, STATE_. ZIP CODE PHONE # E-MAIL ADDRESS • s �{'c'c ,� ocd,1,*6 'f... /„ cr.., 7y% T ;,-\e-1 COk ei' ..,r'y`f K w \ kowrn 1 1 aas. 661 . '7751 ,4 1 ��a 3 • • • • NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AGENDA May 25, 2006, 6:00 — 7:00 p.m. White Oak Planned Development North of SW Pacific Hwy., South of SW 74th Ave. Tigard City Hall, Red Rock Creek Conference Room 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I. Sign-In, Welcome and Opening Remarks II. Neighbor Introductions III. Introduction of CPO Volunteer; Comments IV. Neighborhood Participation, City Statement V. Presentation Overview and Meeting Objectives VI. Distribution of Handouts VII. Discussion of Project and PUD Development Concept Engineering Design - Land Use, Access, Utilities VIII. Alternative Development Options and Consequences IX. Summary and Conclusions X. Open Forum - Question and Answer Period XI. Closing Comments • • STATEMENT OF PURPOSE THE FOLLOWING NOTICE SHALL BE READ TO ATTENDEES AT THE BEGINNING OF A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. This meeting is regarding White Oak Planned Development located at 11625 and 11645 SW Pacific Highway, and 11030 SW 74th Avenue in Tigard, Oregon and is being held as required by the City of Tigard development review process. The purpose of this meeting is to inform neighbors of the project as currently planned. This meeting is not a decision forum and is not to approve or disapprove the project in whole or in part. It is to share information regarding the project and to solicit constructive input from neighbors and affected property owners. Application for the project being discussed here has not yet been submitted to the City. Therefore, the project will be a various stages of planning and some details may not be available at this time. Property owners of record within 500 feet should have received • neighborhood meeting information and a list of frequently asked questions along with the notice of this meeting. This meeting is not attended by city staff in order to encourage dialogue between the developer and affected neighbors. Your comments and questions will be taken down and submitted with the application for consideration by the city planning staff. Property owners within 500 feet will be notified by the City after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment on the final proposals. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code.. For questions regarding the development review process, please contact the City of Tigard Planning Department. For project details you will need to contact the developer or developer's engineer. • 5 • • PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name: White Oak Proposed Action: Subdivide property for construction of 27 single-family attached rowhouses within a planned development Tax Map and Lot: Map 1S 1 36CA, TL 1700; Map 1S 1 36DB, TL 1000 and 2300 Site Area: TL 1700, 1.32 acres; TL 1000, 1.06 acres Site Location: North side of SW Pacific Highway, west of Intersection with SW 72"d Avenue and south of SW 74th Avenue, City of Tigard, Washington County Site Address: 11625 and 11645 SW Pacific Highway, Tigard OR 97223 Land Use District: R-12; Planned Unit Overlay Zone Neighborhood: . CPO 4M Metzger • Community Plan: Low/ Medium Density Residential Approval Criteria: City of Tigard, Title 18: Community Development Code Zoning Density: Subject to underlying zone districts;TL 1000 and 1700 zoned R-12. TL 2300 zoned R-4.5 not proposed to be subdivided. Allowed Density: Based on combined acreage of 2.38 acres (excluding TL 2300) Applicant: The Dalton Company Steven D. Dalton 10160 SW Nimbus Avenue, Suite F-1A Portland, OR 97223 Tel. 503-968-2054 Fax 503-968-2064 E-mail: info @thedaltonco.com Applicant's Gary Darling, P.E., Engineer Representative: Ran Leonard, Planner DL Design Group Inc. 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. Suite 101 Portland, OR 97219-4036 • Tel. 503-430-7383 Fax 503-430-7377 E-mail: gid @dleng.net • • • . „ Neighborhood Meeting Minutes • White Oak Planned Development Property Location: 11625 and 11645 SW Pacific Hwy.; also 11030 SW 74th Avenue(access only), Tigard, OR. Tax maps lot 1 S224DA00800 Proposal: Develop 27 rowhouses on approximately 2.38 acre site in R-12 district Date and Time: Thursday,May 25, 2006 from 6:00-7:00 p.m. Location: Tigard City Hall, Rock Creek Conference Rm., 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 Presenters: Gary Darling, P.E. and Ran Leonard, DL Design Group Inc.; also Len Dalton, Developer. Introduction: • Meeting schedule and agenda • Review of City of Tigard's Neighborhood Meeting Information—Purpose of neighborhood meeting, and What Happens After the Meeting • Review of"Questions to Ask of Typical Neighborhood Concerns"—typical questions on process, streets, zoning, drainage and water quality, and other issues. o Read the required Statement of Purpose(required to be read to attendees at the beginning of a neighborhood meeting). U City of Tigard processing and evaluation of site developments; distribute informational handouts • and Landscape/ Site Plan • Brief comments regarding proposed development General Overview: • • Engineering layout and lot configuration,roadways and access, drainage and detention Questions (in Italics) and Answers: O Will you maintain[pedestrian] access along the east side of the property?This is not a legitimate access and it enters onto private property that we do not have control over. We will provide pedestrian access to SW Pacific Highway at the westerly edge of the property. - o Concern expressed over Fred Meyer drainage; took years to correct drainage. Site drainage was reportedly partially corrected by their recent remodeling, although this may not have solved all drainage concerns. The City of Tigard has regulations concerning slow release of flows using detention on the property. We're not sure what the City will require yet at the end of SW 74th• • What about extra parking? There isn't much parking shown, and parking on SW 74th is already tight. The preliminary site layout shows parking set-aside areas,we've provided driveways and garages for homes. We're still evaluating overall parking needs. o Will SW 74th be paved? We will be paving our streets to 24-foot width. Any street improvements on SW 74th will be up to the City or possibly formulation of a neighborhood LID. • 1 don't want 74`h improved with curb and gutters (Cost issue) This is a City decision. U Are speed bumps a possibility? This makes a valid point; we will consider and talk to the City about it. • O What's the timeline for widening SW 74`h? Will you be bringing trucks in? We will use Pacific Avenue initially for truck traffic, which provides a better access point. Eventually some trucks will enter from SW 74th Avenue. 5/26/06 1 • •. • Will all streets be 24 ft. width? Yes; and sidewalk will also be provided along the inside portion of the roadway. • Will the proposed housing be private owner homes? Yes. • What will homes look like, and what price range will homes be?Homes are anticipated to be 140- 1550 sq. ft., 3-bedroom, and consist of attached units (attached in pairs) on garage side. Units are anticipated to be in the$250,000 range. A HOA will be established by owners to protect the value and characteristics of homes. • Will park areas be open for everyone?The parks will be a common space open to the neighborhood. • What's the probability of the plat changing? We like it the way it is; after 3-4 alternatives we developed the current arrangement. The City's review process could make minor changes but it pretty much complies with their requirements as-is. • What about the property to the east, shown on another map?This property will be for access only, and an access easement will be obtained. It will not be in the development plan. • Can owners buy the homes and rent them out? This is a possibility;however,the HOA can limit the proportion of homes being rented. • What about local drainage issues? We will try to pick-up flows and handle them where possible. • Will my backyard swing be removed from the tree?The large oak tree appears healthy, and it will be up to the arborist to make a judgment and perhaps tend to any tree problems. We would like to propose that this tree be placed on the"heritage tree' list. • What is the extent of the park near the large oak tree?The base of the tree is on the property being developed, although the tree extends outward and across adjoining property. Will dust be kept down during construction? Yes, fugitive dust control measures will be used. • How long will the development take to be built? It depends partially on the City's processing time, but it would be approximately a year away. • Is the development phased? Will you build as the lots sell? We don't build 20 units at a time due to investment costs,but we intend to build sections(groups) of homes. • O What will the impact be on the value of the neighborhood? In most respects this represents a beneficial improvement. The roadway(SW 74t )will no longer be a dead-end street. There will be additional traffic but it will add value to the neighborhood. O Concerned expressed about 60 plus.cars going up and down the street. There will be trade-offs between value improvements and traffic,but overall it will improve the neighborhood. • What about noise? We anticipate adding a brick or stone wall for noise buffering where the development adjoins the commercial area. • Will trees be removed along the side where RAZ Transportation is located?We will probably build another wall along the west side of the project, which will help with noise levels. O (Concluding remarks and adjournment, 7:00 p.m.) • 5/26/06 2 ______ • • e___ . Comments / Inquiries on White Oak, SW Pacific Hwy. in Tigard Date Name Address/Phone Question/Comments Response , 5/10/06 Todd Deal 503-318-7713 Res. Left message 6:00 p.m., wants to discuss mtg. Follow-up call (below) 5/11/06 " 503-230-8320 x 17 Wk. Concerned about meeting date before holiday Meets City requirements; mid-week II It 503-231(8?)-7713 cell Upset about possible crime, traffic, rentals, etc. Attempting to compy with city req's. Also suggested City will require meeting change Called City; "something to consider" " " Street not equipped to handle additional traffic per Dick Bewersdorff, but not req'd. 5/18/06 " " 503-230-8320 x 17 Wk. Will nearby properties be bought up for access? No add'I. properties involved 5/18/06 Lori Leonard Olson 503-635-2271 On Spruce St.; would like copy of meeting minutes Returned call; will send meeting info. • . • • • • ( O On Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon nn 1001 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 400 • Portland, OR 97204 (503)223-8338 • FAX (503) 227-8425 • SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE FOR THE PROPOSED PLAT OF White Oak ORDER NO.: 01-50000006-28 FEE: $200.00 • DATED: November 15, 2006 Fidelity National Title Insurance Company GUARANTEES Any County or City within which the subdivision or proposed subdivision is located: • That the estate or interest in the land which is covered by this Guarantee is: A Fee According to the public records which impart constructive notice of matters affecting title to the premises described on Exhibit "One", we find that as of November 6, 2006, at 5:00 p.m. the last deed of record runs to: White Oak Village, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company, as to Parcels I, 11 and III We also find the following apparent encumbrances,which include 'Blanket Encumbrances'as defined by ORS 92.305(1),and also easements, restrictive covenants and rights of way. NOTE: taxes as follows: Property taxes, and any assessments collected with taxes,for the fiscal year 2006-2007. Amount: $1,062.54 Unpaid Balance: $1,062.54 plus interest, if any Account No.: R285024 Map No.: 1S136DB-01000 • Levy Code: 023.81 Affects: Parcel • • • Order No. 01-50000006-28 Property taxes,and any assessments collected with taxes,for the fiscal year 2006-2007. Amount: $2,445.39 Unpaid Balance: $2,445.39 plus interest, if any Account No.: R282508 Map No.: 1S136CA-01700 Levy Code: 023.81 Affects: Parcels II and III 1. City liens in favor of the City of Tigard, if any. 2. Rights of the public and governmental agencies in and to any portion of said land lying within the boundaries of streets, roads and highways. 3. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as granted in a document. Granted to: Metzger Sanitary District Purpose: Sewer • Recorded: April 30, 1965, Book 550, Page 610 Affects: the Southerly 20 feet of the Westerly 15 feet of Parcel I herein. Reference is made to said document for full particulars. 4. [Intentionally deleted] • Subdivision Guarantee(GUARG7) Page 2 • Order No. 01-50000006-28 5. Before issuing its policy of title insurance, this Company will require for review, the following documents from the Limited Liability Company named below. Limited Liability Company:White Oak Village, LLC (a) A copy of its operating agreement and any and all amendments, supplements and/or modifications thereto,certified by the appropriate manager or member. (b) Confirmation that its Articles of Organization and any restated Articles of Organization have been filed with the Secretary of State. (c) If the Limited Liability Company is member-managed a full and complete current list of members certified by the appropriate manager or member. (d) If the Limited Liability Company was formed in a foreign jurisdiction, evidence satisfactory to the Company, that it was validly formed, is in good standing and authorized to do business in the state of origin. (e) If the Limited Liability Company was formed in a foreign jurisdiction, • evidence satisfactory to the Company, that it has complied with Oregon "doing business" laws, if applicable. After review of the requested documents, the Company reserves the right to add additional items or make additional requirements prior to the issuance of any policy of title insurance. 6. Leases and/or tenancies, if any. 7. No search has been made for financing statements filed in the office of the Secretary of State, or in any county other than the county in which the herein described land is located. No liability is assumed for any financing statement filed in the office of the County Clerk (Recorder) covering timber, crops, fixtures or contracts affecting said land if said land is not described by metes and bounds, recorded lot and block or under the rectangular survey system. 8. Personal property taxes, if any. CC: • Dalton Company, Attn: Steve Dalton Foster Surveying, Inc., Attn: David Foster • Subdivision Guarantee(GUARG7I Page 3 • • Order No. 01-50000006-28 We have also searched our General Index for judgments and state and federal liens against the grantees named above and find: NONE This is not a report issued preliminary to the issuance of a title insurance policy. Our search is limited and its use is intended as an informational report only, to be used in conjunction with the development of real property. Liability is limited to an aggregate sum not to exceed $1,000.00. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company By: Kerry Steinmetz, Senior Project Coordinator NOTE - ORS 92.305(1)reads as follows: • "Blanket encumbrance" means a trust deed or mortgage or any other lien or encumbrance, mechanics'lien or otherwise, securing or evidencing the payment of money and affecting more than one interest in subdivided or series partitioned land, or an agreement affecting more than one such lot, parcel or interest by which the subdivider, series partitioner or developer holds such subdivision or series partition under an option, contract to sell or trust agreement. • Subdivision Guarantee(GUARG71 Page 4 • • • Order No. 01-50000006-28 EXHIBIT "ONE" The premises are in WASHINGTON County and are described as follows: PARCEL I: The Northerly 288 feet of the following described tract, to wit: Beginning at a stone at the Northeast corner of the Geo. Richardson Donation Land Claim No. 55 in Section 36, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon; thence North 89°00'West 816.7 feet along the North line of said Donation Land Claim to a strap iron; thence South 0°29'West 450.5 feet M/L to a 1 inch pipe at the true point of beginning of the tract herein described;thence continuing South 0°29'West 713.4 feet to a 3/4 inch pipe in the Northerly right-of-way line of the West side Pacific Highway; thence North 54°02' East along said right-of-way line 199.92 feet to a 3/4 inch iron pipe; thence. North 0°29'East 593.54 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pipe; thence North 89°00'West 160 feet to the true point of beginning. • PARCEL II: A tract of land in Section 36, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as: Beginning at an iron pipe at the Southeast corner of that certain 1.0 acres tract of land in Section 36, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington arid State of Oregon, conveyed to William F. and Jessie E. Weller by deed recorded on Page 261 of Deed Book 184 and which beginning point is said to be South 89°00'East 1887.60 feet and South 0°11'West 290 feet and South 89°00'East 601 .80 feet and South 0°11'West 431.30 feet from the Northwest corner of the George Richardson Donation Land Claim No.55;thence from said beginning point South 0°11' West 82.00 feet to an iron rod set for the Northwest corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to John C. and Daisy E. Morris by Deed recorded on Page 469 of Book 281, said Deed Records; thence parallel to the South line of the above mentioned Weller tract, North 89°00'West 85.0 feet to an iron rod on the East line of a certain 16.00 foot wide roadway conveyed to William F. Weller by deed recorded on Page 261 of Book 184,said Deed Records; thence along the East line of said road North 0°11'East 82.00 feet to the South line of the Weller 1.0 acre tract noted above; thence South 89°00' East 85.0 feet to the true point of beginning. PARCEL III: A tract of land in Section 36, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as: • Beginning at an iron in place at the Northeast corner of the E.L. Keas Tract described in Deed, recorded February 15, 1923,in Book 125, Page 110,Deed Records, being also the Southeast corner of that certain 4 acre tract of land conveyed by Deed to Oscar and Grace Sidler as described on Page Subdivision Guarantee(GUARG7I Page 5 • S • Order No. 01-50000006-28 45 of Book 90, Washington County, Oregon Deed Records, from which point of beginning the Northwest corner of the said George Richardson Claim is said to bear North 89° West 601.80 feet, North 0°11' East 290 feet and North 89° West 1887.60 feet; thence from said point of beginning North 89°00'West along the South line of the said Sidler tract 101.0 feet to an iron in place at the Northeast corner of that certain 71 .5 acre tract of land conveyed by Deed to Edward and Lottie Warnock as recorded at Page 557 of Book 124, Deed Records for said County and State; thence South 0°11'West along the East line of said Warnock tract 431.30 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 89°00'East parallel with the South line of the said Sidler tract 101 .00 feet to an iron pipe on the East line of the said Keas tract; thence North 0°11'East along the East line of the said Keas tract 431.30 feet to the place of beginning. Also a strip of land running along the land owned by Warnock on the West of the Keas property and extending 16 feet on the Keas Property in an Easterly direction, it being a 16 foot roadway from the above described property to the S.W. Pacific Highway. Excepting that portion conveyed to the State of Oregon by and through its State highway Commission by Deed recorded September 18, 1939, Book 183, Page 543, Washington County Deed Records. • • Subdivision Guarantee(GUARG7) Page 6 CleanWate Service • Our commitment is clear.Services August 1, 2006 • Len Dalton 12260 SW 1241h-Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Melinda Smith Development Services Review 13131 SE 125th.Avenue . Clackamas, Oregon 97015 Re: 1S136DB-01000,.02300, and 1S136CA01700 Service Provider Letter, CWS File No.-06-001852 Clean Water Services has reviewed your ,Proposal for the above referenced. • activity on your site. Staff has conducted a pre-screen review and requested completion of a "Sensitive Areas Certification Form. Following review of submitted materials it appears that Sensitive Areas do not exist on-site or within • 20.0' from your project. In light:of this result, this document will serve as your • Service Provider letter as required by Resolution and Order 04-9,Section_3_02.1. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed ryUnder applicable local, state, and federal law: This concurrence letter does NOT eliminate the need to protect Sensitive Areas if they are subs'querltly identified on your site.' If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 503-681-3613. Sincerely, Julie Wirth Environmental Plan Review • = E_\Developmcnt Svcs\SP 00-71SPR Letters\1 S 136DB-01000,2300,IS 136CA01700 No SA SPL 08-01-06(06-001852).doc 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway• Hillsboro,Oregon 97123 Phone:(503)681-3600• Fax:(503)681-3603 •www.CleanWaterServices.org Message • S Page 1 of 2 • Sine Adams From: Gary Darting [gid @dleng.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 11:45 AM To: Sine Adams Subject: Fw:White Oak Village-Tigard, Oregon Sine, Here is Steve's confirmation that he has all of our material. Gary Gary Darling,P.E. Principal 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. Ste 101 Portland, OR 97219 ph: 503.225.1679 fax: 503.246.2094 www.dldesigoupinc.com ---Original Message From: SCHALK Steven B To: Gary Darling Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 11:40 AM Subject: RE:White Oak Village -Tigard, Oregon Gary, • I did locate the package and will begin processing. Steven Schalk District 2A Access Management and Engineering Coordinator 6000 SW Raab Road Portland, OR 97221 Office 503-229-5267 Steven.B.Schalk @odot.state.or.us Original Message From: Gary Darling [mailto:gid @dleng.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 11:08 AM To: SCHALK Steven B Subject: White Oak Village -Tigard, Oregon Steve, Can you let me know when you find the drainage report, plans, and fee that I sent to Sam. I just want to be sure that you received everything you will need. Thanks Gary Gary Darling, P.E. Principal 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. Ste 101 • Portland, OR 97219 ph: 503.225.1679 fax: 503.246.2094 www.dldesigngroupinc.com 11/8/2006 11/0b/200b 02:45 503-246-214 DL DLSIGN GROUP 110 PAGE 02/02 .4%[ • • DESIGN GROUP INC. • • TRANSMITTAL 9045 SW Barbur Boulevard,#101 Portland, Oregon 97219-4036 (503)225-1679 F$x:(503)246-2094 To ODOT-DISTRICT 2A Date: November 7,2006 Attn: Sam Hunaidi Project WHITE OAK ESTATES 6000 SW Raab Road Reference: _ Portland, OR 97221 DLENG# DAL007 From Gary Darling Case/File# Transmitting: Via: - For Your ®Attached ❑ U. S. Mail © Review&Comment ❑ Separate.Cover ® Rose City Messenger Service I3 As Requested _Number of Pages including Cover J Delivered by: ❑ Information/File Co•les Descri'tion ;f 2 Half Size Sets of Plans • ••its e Re 2 Draina. 1 $750 Plan&Cabo. Review Fee • • COMMENTS: • • I , � t Signed: C. ) L 1' ��..Lt ft) L • • • • IMPACT STATEMENT for White Oak Village PUD Subdivision Purpose The purpose of this Impact Study is to review existing public facilities and address any proposed modifications that will help mitigate the proportionate project impacts that will likely occur as a result of development. Some of the necessary facilities to serve this site are currently in place in SW 74th Avenue and Highway 99. Additional needed services will be provided by new construction within the site. The transportation, storm water, sanitary, water and private utility systems are or will be available and adequate in the immediate vicinity of the site. Transportation System • A new private local street will serve as the subdivision's access. When completed, this street will provide direct access from the White Oak Village subdivision to SW 74th Avenue and thence to SW Spruce Street, a Neighborhood Route, to the north and link to the existing transportation network. The new private street will be constructed as illustrated on the plans with 20" and 24" of pavement, 6" curbs, and 5' sidewalks one at least one side of the street in variable overall private right-of-way tract. Parking will not be permitted on either side of this street. The street is looped to provide fire/life safety vehicle access. Limited improvements on SW 74th Avenue will also be constructed to City of Tigard standards north to SW Spruce Street. Drainage Systems Storm drainage will be collected via a piped system in the private streets. Stormwater will be detained in a Contech system for detention. The design and size of the pipe shall be coordinated to accommodate the detention needs of this subdivision. Storm water quality will be provided with a filtration swale conveying the drainage to Highway 99. A connection with the public system will be constructed in compliance with ODOT standards • • • • Sanitary Sewer System Sanitary sewer service will be provided to all lots via a newly installed line, which runs through the private street. Lateral connections shall be made to each residential lot. Water Systems Domestic water service will be provided to all lots via individual service connections to a newly installed water line in the new public street, which is proposed to connect with an existing line in SW 74th Avenue. Noise Impacts No negative noise impacts are anticipated as a result of this subdivision. Noise levels generated would be typical of a small single-family neighborhood. Parks System This project does provide dedicated open space and pedestrian connections to transit on Highway 99. • • • ID COFIELD LAW OFFICE Dorothy S. Cofield, Attorney at Law TO: Kirsten Van Loo, Alpha Community Development FR: Dorothy S. Cofield, Attorney at Law RE: White Oak Village DT: November 15, 2006 MEMORANDUM Introduction: This memorandum will address the required access to the White Oak Village Planned Unit Development which is a 27 lot subdivision for attached dwelling units in the City of Tigard. As I understand the facts, the City's pre-application conference review on February 14, 2006, determined that the development must have a cul-de-sac bulb at the termination of 74t11 Street,reasoning that the termination of public 74'h Street into the private development was a"dead end" street. A dead end street necessitates a cul-de-sac or hammerhead in order to provide a way to turn around. At that time, the PUD was • planned for three tax lots (TL 2300, 1000 and 1700). The owner of the property, White Oak Village LLC,had its engineer draw a preliminary design for that cul-de-sac and it took up nearly all of TL 2300. The original plan for White Oak Village showed a park at the termination of 74`h, but due to the cul-de-sac requirement, the park could not be included in the PUD design. After the pre-application conference meeting and the information received from the planning staff, the applicant decided not to include TL 2300 in the PUD design. A new design was arrived at which is a looped,private street that negates the need for any cul-de-sac turnaround. You have asked me whether the City can impose the cul-de-sac requirement notwithstanding the fact that there is now a loop which will provide ingress and egress to the proposed lots in White Oak Village and the tax lot on which the cul-de- sac bulb would have to be constructed is not part of the land use application. (TL 2300). Applicable Code Provisions: Title 18 of the Development Code for the City of Tigard (TDC) contains the standards for land divisions. TDC 18.120.030.L sets at the standards for a cul-de-sac as follows: "Cul-de-sacs. A cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long[sic] shall not provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units and shall only be • Page 1 The Round •12725 SW Millikan Way • Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofieldPhevanet.com • • • used when environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and through circulation." The intersection at the entrance to the development does not require a turn around bulb complying with TDC 18.810.030(L) because it does not create a cul-de-sac. Under TDC 18.120.030.49 "[c]ul-de-sac [means] circular turnaround at the end of a dead-end street." (Emphasis added.) The TDC does not define"dead-end streets," so reference to a dictionary is appropriate. TDC 18.120.010. The dictionary defines "dead end" as follows: dead end*** 1: an end (as of a street,pipe, or power line)that has no exit or continuation 2: a course of action or policy that leads to nothing further; blind alley, cul-de-sac dead-end * * * : terminate: to come to a dead end: terminate Webster's Third New International Dictionary (Unabridged 1993) Here, the street does not terminate at the beginning of the development. The street continues into the development in a circulation pattern, so the street has a continuation. Streets can be both public and private, TCD 18.120.030.131 so • continuation of the public street into a private street does not create a dead end. Therefore, no cul-de-sac is created by the development, and no cul-de-sac bulb is necessary under TDC 18.810.030 L. When determining what a particular code provision requires, LUBA and the Courts first look at the plain meaning of the provision to discern the intent for the regulation. PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 859 P2d 1143 TDC 810.030(A)(1)requires that"No development shall occur unless the development has frontage or approved access to a public street." Frontage is defined in TDC 18-210-7 as"That portion of a development site which abuts a public or private street." Access is defined in TDC 18.120-1 as"The place, means or way by which pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles enter or leave property. A private access is an access not in public ownership and is controlled by means of deed,dedication or easement." In the case of White Oak Village,the applicant proposes to provide the access by an easement on TL 2300. In the event the City's interpretation of TDC 810.030(A)(1)is that an"approved access"must be a public easement when it abuts a public street,the applicant is willing to agree to a condition that the proposed access easement will be dedicated to the public as right-of-way as long as the ability to further divide TL 2300 is not damaged. • Page 2 The Round •12725 SW Millikan Way • Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofieldPhevanet.com • • • (1993)("words of common usage typically should be given their plain, natural and ordinary meaning."Id. at 611. Under the Tigard Code, a cul-de-sac is limited to 200 feet, the reason being that long streets with no terminus could impede safe ingress and egress. A cul-de-sac is a"last resort" access because it is only used when"environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and circulation." Finally, the city's cul- de-sac regulation does not allow more than 20 homes to be served because a cul-de-sac is not the best way to provide safe circulation. In the present situation,there is circulation into and out of the development through a looped street. With the planned looped street, vehicles can safely turn around by using, the loop so there is no need for a cul-de-sac bulb. The cul-de-sac would be 648 feet long, which is 3 times longer than allowed under the Code, far exceeding the 200' limitation. Finally, the cul-de-sac provision does not allow a cul-de-sac to serve more than 20 dwelling units. With White Oak Village, there will be 27 lots with duet homes, plus there are 15 existing homes being served on SW 74t. With White Oak Village's 27 new lots, the cul-de-sac would be serving 42 homes,more than doubling the allowed number under the Code. All of the requirements in the City's cul-de-sac provision lead to one conclusion: White Oak Village with a looped street is not appropriate for a cul-de-sac. In a similar case, the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA)held that the City could not allow a cul-de-sac longer than allowed under its code without providing legal • justification for the variance. Frewing v. City of Tigard, 47 Or LUBA 331 (2004) (Frewing I). In that case, the applicant's dead end street required a cul-de-sac which exceeded the allowable length and number of lots. The city engineer approved the longer length as an informal adjustment but did not provide adequate findings on why it was necessary.2 What is interesting in Frewing I is that if the City had not approved an adjustment, a loop system like the one proposed for White Oak Village would have been the solution for the fact the cul-de-sac was too long and did not meet the code standards. Id at 16. In this case, the applicant is proposing exactly what the City would have been required to do in Frewing had it not granted an adjustment. A variance is a permit authorizing use of a particular piece of property in a way that is otherwise prohibited by the local land use ordinance. 3 ROBERT M. ANDERSON, AMERICAN LAW OF ZONING §20.02. A variance is an extraordinary 2 The Public Improvement Design Standards(PIDS)allow the city engineer to provide an informal variance to design standards called a"modification to specifications." The request must be in writing and follow the procedures of Paragraph 2.4 of the PIDS Section 3. Frewing I at 4. • Page 3 The Round •12725 SW Millikan Way • Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofield @hevanet.com • • • remedy which should not be sought unless absolutely necessary. Erickson v. City of Portland, 9 Or App 256, 261, 496 P2d 726 (1972). In the present case, imposing the cul-de-sac where it does not meet the code standards for length and number of lots necessitates a variance when the applicant has a solution to avoid the variance. Since such an adjustment should only be used when absolutely necessary and it is not necessary in the present case, the requirement of a cul-de-sac and associated variance is inconsistent with general land use principles. There are other legal reasons a cul-de-sac should not be imposed in the present situation. In order to have a cul-de-sac with the radius terminus required by the city planning staff, the"bulb" would be developed on TL 2300, which is in different ownership and not part of this development application. Although a city may condition an application on getting legal access from another property owner not a part of the subject application, such conditions invariably lead to litigation and are generally not good public policy. Highland Condominium Assoc. v. City of Eugene, 37 Or LUBA 13, 1999 WL 33254941 (Or Luba). In some cases, it is illegal to plan improvements for land not part of the land use application. See e.g Lowery v. City ofKeizer, 48 Or LUBA 568, 2005 WL 555239 (Or Luba). Finally, the imposition of the cul-de-sac requirement when it is not related to the impacts of development may be constitutionally suspect. See e.g.Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374, 114 S. Ct. 2309 (1994). In the Dolan case, as the City is well • aware, the City imposed a dedication of private land for the public's use of a bikepath when the development application for expansion of a plumbing store would not increase the need for a bikepath. In the present situation, the cul-de-sac requirement appears to be for the general public to extend 74th street as a public street, rather than have the applicant develop the entrance as a private street. There is no impact from White Oak Village that necessitates a cul-de-sac because the development is providing the necessary turn around by using a loop. Requiring a cul-de-sac would be an unconstitutional exaction that would run afoul of the Dolan principles. The damages would be not only for the outright dedication of land but also the severance damages to the remainder of TL 2300 which is currently zoned R 4.5 and allows for a 7500 square foot minimum lot size. Without the cul-de-sac, the lot could be divided into two single family lots,but with a cul-de-sac the balance of the property would be too small to meet the minimum lot size for two additional lots. Conclusion: For these reasons, the proposed looped street best meets the Tigard Development Code, sound land use principles and constitutional law. The City should not and cannot impose the cul-de-sac requirement on White Oak Village without granting • Page 4 The Round •12725 SW Millikan Way • Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofield @hevanet.com • S a variance. A variance is an extraordinary remedy that should only be granted when there is no other solution. Here there is an easy solution that meets the TDC and the Oregon and U.S. Constitutions. For these reasons, the City should approve the White Oak Village street design using the looped street. • • Page 5 The Round •12725 SW Milliken Way • Suite 300 • Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: 503.675.4320 • Fax: 503.906.7937 • Email: cofieldPhevanet.com • • 1*& MEMORANDUM • ANCASTER engineering To: Gary Darling Ran Leonard Cc: Len Dalton Steve Dalton From: Catriona Sumrain Date: June 16, 2006 Subject: White Oak Village Sight Distance letter Gary: • Ran asked that I send you two originals and two copies of the sight distance letter for White Oak Village. A pdf copy has also been e-mailed to you. If you have any questions or need anything else, please contact me at (503) 248-0313 or by e-mail at catriona@lancasterengineering.com. Len, Steve: A copy of the sight distance letter for White Oak Village is enclosed for your records. CS • ID Union Station,Suite 206•800 NW 6th Avenue•Portland,OR 97209•Phone 503.248.0313•Fax 503.248.9251 • • is& • LANCASTER engineering PROFF June 16, 2006 #(ti GtNE <O 54983PE • Steve Dalton OREGON 10160 SW Nimbus Avenue, Suite F-1 A O4 Y10 iflp Tigard, OR 97223 A EL T•P I EXP7S1b71: RE: White Oak Village - Sight Distance /6/ Dear Steve: It is our understanding that the City of Tigard has requested a sight distance certificate for the intersection of Spruce Street and 74th Avenue for the White Oaks Village project. We • have measured the sight distance at the intersection and the results are reported in this letter. The site will access the street system via 74th Avenue. Sight distance measurements were taken at the northbound approach to the intersection of Spruce Street and 74th Avenue since this is the direction site traffic would travel when accessing the site. In accordance with guidelines in A POLICY ON GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF HIGH- WAYS AND STREETS (Green Book), published in 2004 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), sight distance was measured at a point 15 feet from the edge of the travel lane from a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet to an oncoming driver's eye height of 3.5 feet. The speed on Spruce Street is 25 mph, requiring a minimum sight distance of 280 feet in either direction. Sight distance was measured to be 361 feet to the east and 393 feet to the west. Sight distance is adequate at the intersection of Spruce Street and 74th Avenue for site traffic. Yours truly, Catriona Sumrain • Transportation Analyst Union Station, Suite 206•800 NW 6th Avenue•Portland,OR 97209•Phone 503.248.0313•Fax 503.248.9251 • • • Drainage Report WHITE OAK VILLAGE Washington County, Oregon Prepared for: White Oak Village,LLC. 7955 SW Hall Blvd. Beaverton, OR 97008 Prepared By: Khoi Le DL Design Group Inc. 9045 SW Barbur Blvd., Suite 101 Portland,Oregon 97219 PRO/E N4. A•44. 19160 OREGON - 9 \ 'V Y 1 15, cgRY I. 10. EXPIRES 12-31-07 September 15"'2006 Project No:DAL007 • • • • I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3 H. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 III. PROPOSED DRAINAGE 3 IV. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS 3 1. Impervious and Pervious Surface Areas 3 Table 1: Pervious and Impervious Area 4 2. Curve Numbers 4 Table 2: Curve Number 4 3. Time of Concentration 4 Table 3: Time of Concentration for Different Storm Event 4 4. Peak Discharges and Volume 4 Table 4: Peak Flow Rate and Volume Generated from 25 Year Storm Event 5 V. WATER QUALITY 5 Table 5: Water Quality Flow 5 Table 6: Water Quality Swale 5 VI. WATER QUANITY 6 Table 7: Detention Volume 6 Table 8: Control Manhole Orifice Sizes and Elevations 6 Figure 1: Vicinity Map 8 Figure 2: Pre Developed Basin Map 9 Figure 3: Post Developed Basin Map 10 Figure 4: Washington County Soil Map 12 Figure 5: Washington County Soil Map 12 Table 9: Curve Numbers 16 Table 10: N Coefficient 17 • Table 11: Pre Developed Flow Calculations 19 Table 12: Post-Developed Flow Calculations 20 Table 13: Pre Developed Conditions—2 Year Storm Event 21 Table 14: Pre Developed Conditions—S Year Storm Event 22 Table 15: Pre Developed Conditions—10 Year Storm Event 23 Table 16: Pre Developed Conditions—25 Year Storm Event 24 Table 17: Post-Developed Conditions—2 Year Storm Event 25 Table 18: Post-Developed Conditions—S Year Storm Event 26 Table 19: Post Developed Conditions—10 Year Storm Event 27 Table 20: Post-Developed Conditions—25 Year Storm Event 28 Table 21: Water Quality Swale Flow Calculation 29 Table 22: Water Quality Swale Flow Depth and Velocity Calculations 30 Table 23: Level Pool Table 31 Table 24: Discharge Structure Information 31 Table 25: Stage Storage Table 32 • 2 • • • I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development is a 27 lot subdivision project located in Washington County. The development will be consisted of constructing 27 new homes, two parks, a water quality swale and a new street that gives these homes access to SW 74th Avenue. The development will consist of two existing tax lots 1000, and 1700. The physical addresses of the two lots are SW 11645 and 11265 SW Pacific Highway respectively. The project site can also be located using the Washington County Identification Number 1 S 136DB01000 and 1 S 136CA01700. (See Vicinity Map in Appendix A for project location). II. EXISTING CONDITIONS There are a few building structures located on site. These building will be demolished due to the development construction. According to the topographic survey drawing,the highest point of the site is located on the West and the lowest point of the site is located on South. Current run-offs sheet flow from the West toward the East of the site due to gravity at an average slope of 3.17 percent. According to the Soil Survey of Washington County, the soil on this site belongs to the • Aloha Series. Specifically, it is Aloha Silt Loam and is classified as Hydrologic Soil Group C. Run-off of this soil is described as being slow, and the hazard for erosion is slight. (See Appendix B for Soils Information) III. PROPOSED DRAINAGE We proposed to construct a detention system consisted of 959 lineal feet of 36"CMP pipe to detent both street and roof run-offs. The storm-water then is being released into a water quality swale for treatment before discharge into the public storm system on highway 99. IV. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS Hydrologic analyses for the site have been completed following the SCS,Type IA Hydrograph method, with modeling by the WaterWorks computer program. This program enables the user to develop runoff hydrographs and determine detention requirements under a variety of stage-storage options. Analysis calculations, supporting information, and computer output are contained in Appendix C. 1. Impervious and Pervious Surface Areas The impervious and pervious surface areas of the pre-development conditions and post • development conditions are the actual areas taken from the site plan. 3 • Description` Pre_:Developed:Site``"'Pos :Dev 10 ed Site Pervious Surface 2.16 0.67 Impervious Surface 0.22 1.71 Total Basin Area 2.38 2.38 Table 1: Pervious and Impervious Area 2. Curve Numbers Curve numbers used for the analyses are based on characterization of the site's soils as primarily Type C soils. The curve numbers represent values appropriate for wet antecedent moisture conditions, which is typical of the wet-weather conditions for the area. Curve numbers of 85 and 98 are used for both pre and post development pervious surface and impervious surface, respectively. ‘Pre Developed Site Post D:ei elpped$ite= :Description Pervious Surface 85 85 Impervious Surface 98 98 Table 2: Curve Number 3. Time of Concentration Time of concentration is the time for run-off to travel from the hydraulically most distant point of the watershed to the point where the hydrograph is to be calculated. Calculations and calculated time of concentrations are presented in Appendix C. Description -Pre,Developed Site Post Developed Site Length (ft) 760 155 Slope(%) 3.42 2.58 TOC 2 Year Storm 25.3 14.2 Event (min) TOC 5 Year Storm 23.1 12.8 Event (min) TOC 10 Year Storm 22.1 12.1 Event (min) TOC 25 Year Storm 21.0 11.4 Event (min) Table 3: Time of Concentration for Different Storm Event 4. Peak Discharges and Volume • 4 • . • Peak discharge rates for the prescribed rainfall events for pre-developed and post- developed site conditions. The rainfall depths are 24-hour rainfall depths used for the Washington County. Computer model output is contained in Appendix C. Descri tion: _ Pre=`Develo ed'Site :3Post�Devele "r r,.�_:�:Ped`Site��; ffereiit.; =•��. Peak Flow 2 Year 0.59 1.09 0.50 Storm Event (cfs) Peak Flow 5 Year 0.89 1.41 0.52 Storm Event (cfs) Peak Flow 10 Year 1.07 1.60 0.53 Storm Event(cfs) Peak Flow 25 Year 1.32 1.85 0.53 Storm Event (cfs) Table 4: Peak Flow Rate and Volume Generated from 25 Year Storm Event V. WATER QUALITY Below is the water quality flow and volume required for the project. Analysis Parameters" Value Precipitation 0.36 inch • Duration 4 hours Impervious Area 1.71 acres Water Quality Volume 2,235 cft Water Quality Flow 0.16 cfs Table 5: Water Quality Flow Below are the water quality swale parameters Proposed Swale Parameters ; Value Bottom Width(ft) 2.5 Side Slope(H:V) 4.0 Channel Slope(V: H) 0.0204 Channel Roughness 0.24 Water Quality Flow (cfs) 0.16 Flow Depth (ft) 0.16 Velocity (fps) 0.24 Resident Time (sec) 540 Required Length (ft) 130 Actual Length (ft) 294 Table 6: Water Quality Swale • 5 • • The above information shows that the proposed water quality swale has enough capacity to handle the water quality flow generated by the new impervious areas. VI. WATER QUANITY -Description Pre Developed Site 46415061,6061$Ife, Different Peak Volume 2 Year 10,680 16,449 5,769 Storm Event (cft) Peak Volume 5 Year 14,893 21,193 6,300 Storm Event (cft) Peak Volume 10 Year 17,442 24,025 6,583 Storm Event(cft) Peak Volume 25 Year 20,796 27,661 6,865 Storm Event (cft) Table 7: Detention Volume From the calculations above,we determine that if we use 48" CMP pipe to detent the storm-water run-off generated by the new impervious areas,we must have a minimum of 950 lineal feel of CMP pipe. The elevations and sizes of the orifices should be set according to the table below. Description Diameter Elevation 235.56 Orifice 3.33 Elevation 236.84 Orifice 6.25 Elevation 237.01 Orifice 9.00 Table 8: Control Manhole Orifice Sizes and Elevations 6 0 0 • 1 i 1! I [ SIMpaliSt ilu, gil_ ..11 j tz_ in —7---- 1 r—- r li 11 uli I ,..g .- i i , .,......_ Maw* ,-.- '4 "'' I [SW!tie St I lizi____J:._ __st L... t 1 L_____,i r.1 L........_ I i L-;-1-<-- lb . • IF- c:.ti i . ii, • • •f• A ,' 1 P'--- I 1- I r—*--7{--- —RIF-- ..—--......_..,-,--I-- -A L____,...y..4 sv1R12.4kst 1 i 1 1 1 I 6- 11 I 1 I u))I - 1[.......:::------',„.- - i 1 ... .'/(( 11---I) ----- ',-- 44 --' --4- ) ,, ., , -----iWifielle a c. i pij 7,- tt ,.1.,1-- Ati. ,I , ..„-•• ti II ilswkitT's!:f--;"1 ,I R <„,,,,r4 :...,- =::::: 1 1----'sly st 1 1 4::::----1 i t ,■ (9 )',..-"D(', )( °3/*e.' 1.-- "-- .0 - ,•:-' .\\ ." I r11/ 1 1 gl ,,,,,,. I I i . t.-1 „", 11 444,1,_.,_,..7*--',/ :-:;.: 12,' I'Pao-Sylvania • I i 1g . fl I ig ill i v.) ....' .., .... ..9 - .. 4-, LI J i pAii.il i h, 1 N ..-.." '',:.., )) • SWIPaity 1 tO.:(------.1.7.=.7_7_17. —_-_,..!-.- -- --%.•'' I 1 ^,IFaA PROJECT SITE ., .., 1 . SIN Attanyi/St . ' SW q es St ,,., '•.-1 1 1 4___Iktfikr111(41 i"°flr- s ountl... E I , 4%.„-, ri4r 1 p--.1 €5: toi,[,,,,,o, -7..:::,71.J., li • ... I.,, c:c0----.:.•-1'1 ...-' :V A.', 11 „ 'sst \..\.SIVD iff) 13.1j if- 1[11 .„....., ...11 I W Krase il4pjftv_n'ifS'dig-LI -",,,■,--.6 11 V., 11 --, t . . ..,.k _e:......., I 1 1 4 ..4.■ '----. ''' svtl ity_n_tlyist.st L j i .?'''.. i* 1 VI i uT211---1 ri) fru '-:., r---73'---1 —1 i 1 163 1 t 1 9! I I . I I I= "'-'\?4.•.,,„ .'M. -- SW Menus°Wlit .-- 1 L 1 1 i '''''') 1 5' 1 1 11 11 , 1........ 1 ira- ., .-. I, .-.1 ' 1 1 .1 I!' fr IL f III Figure 1: Vicinity Map IP 8 • • • — __ _ ! I I 1 I f_ — II ,I t 1 I �` ri )■ • \t---- Jr- t I ii\iii\ \ \ t_-, -,:- , 4--L.„L-.-i., . A li ,. \ . \ \ \ ' , — - :\:. --,,,,, _. , ,„,1 I' \ ....\—\ )_ \,%r""k ., ' IA 1-ji ).1, 1 \ 1 \te r -J 1\,. � .i\. \ 1 \ ' \ ' r1-4 PROJECT SITE AREA— 67 -238 AC �,[ 1 \ .0�\-- 1 ' B AREA-a BF-022 AC /-W 1�'� \,_ \ i �� \� PEMOC AREA —ff;80919F-218 AC i ,ti t '`- \ A t FLOW LENGTH-760 Lf=1 �� is \ ' �� ,. A$1 SLOPE-0.0342 • 4 1 r \ t' — I `r` • i - gi '.'...:'.... ...Q11:1 1.1"-.-.. 77 7 V A il It II 14 _Li GtoP - ii : , . ,,,,A, - — / / N 1 f l` � 100" 50' O 10 ,- 11111.111M1 SCALE- 1" = 100' Figure 2: Pre Developed Basin Map • 9 • • • - ._ - - - I I I I F • - --I lwl--- - ---1 - G z. I I 1, _ _ .___ , , _ _ _____ I L , 14:„ ,, I , �• ------` ii - __—I ti i 1 . idi . rTmil I- - o :1-- ¢ --- PROJECT B1TE AREA - 673 SF-238 AC ! IMPERVIOUS AREA-74 9 -171 AC PErMOOS AREA =44618(SF=667 AC ROW LENGTH-11551.F I �, A142 SLOPE-Q0258 Ir■ - 1 1 1 I 1 i ' 11 z 4 1 , Pi I Ve ' 1 1+ ?V I 7)4 It i 100' 50' 0 PO 7 IIIIMIIIMMIIIIMi SCALE: 1” = 100' • FiMure 3: Post Developed Basin Map 10 • 0 .� • v _. . • . \ill. 1,d � 7 . ' "o• . ..,� .� _ -iC . y ' 4`�. ,- , /. •'•!t! ', PROJECT SITE k . 1.f .-Z'... • -• ' 41‘31/.0. - ;e ., - g n. I - .' ., - r • t . _•. m - • ii , Y k.f s I ra •A , . . , f .tom �, I _ '� , �, { F , r ` ;r lF , FiLure 4: Washineeton County Soil Map ,3 4 160.;.-.."1•4. E? 4' •r 't yL ' ..c 41. }:- a - P 1. �,•kz • 4, #.a ` � r•-t �t . y `0f .rL :- _ _ .44. 4114 ' '0:11, f a Asa - ;l:•r 1 f ►4._ ... ,.,,.:.,,. L. ..6 _ 47._ ,.. ...r.>,,zo.,_'t Y/M ('t✓ -s . •1- t f I S r I 1'_Y�r" i I. 1 . �1 '1 . r.: ...-A. r}a t y r4,. ' , - ; •- .t. ••a '• ,%• . S.. 7. .. , S C 1..if . N •a ? r i ' ,/• t.....s � c a /^ is + - • i. , •�1 MIIII •if' _ Figure 5: Washington County Soil Map • 12 • • • Hembre soils are well drained.They have a surface layer the"Guide to Mapping Units"at the back of this survey. of dark reddish-brown silt loam and a subsoil of dark The acreage and proportionate extent of each mapping unit reddish-brown, reddish-brown, and yellowish-red silty clay are shown in table I. Many of the terms used in describing loam over basalt bedrock.Effective rooting depth is 40 to 50 soils can be found in the Glossary at the end of this survey, inches. and more detailed infomtation about the terminology and Klickitat soils are well drained.They have a surface layer methods of soil mapping can be obtained from the Soil of dark reddish-brown cobbly loam and a subsoil of Survey Manual(11).' dark-brown and reddish-brown cobbly and very cobbly loam over basalt bedrock. Effective rooting depth is 40 to 50 inches. Aloha series These soils are used for timber production,recreation,and wildlife habitat. Availability of food, cover, and water The Aloha series consists of somewhat poorly drained controls movement and number of birds and animals. soils that formed in alluvium or lacustrine silt on broad valley Runoff is mainly from areas where the plant cover has terraces.Slope is 0 to 3 percent.Elevation is 150 to 200 feet. been removed. Sedimentation from runoff is high. Where these soils are not cultivated,the vegetation is mainly Maintaining maximum cover and using water control Douglas-fir and some Oregon white oak, shrubs,forbs,and practices on roads and logged areas minimize soil loss. grasses. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, These soils provide good sites for most recreational uses. average annual air temperature is 52° to 54° F, and the As a result of the heavy precipitation,these soils are a major frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. source of water supply.These soils provide good habitat for In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown game animals and some birds. silt loam about 8 inches thick. The subsoil is a dark-brown and dark yellowish-brown,mottled silt loam about 38 inches thick.The substratum is dark yellowish-brown, mottled silt loam and very fine sandy loam about 19 inches thick. The profile is medium acid throughout. Descriptions of the soils Permeability is moderately slow.Available water capacity is' 11 to 13 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 18 to 20 This section describes the soil series and mapping units in inches.Effective rooting depth is 40 inches to more than 60 Washington County. Each soil series is described in detail, inches. and then,briefly,each mapping unit in that series.Unless it is These soils are used mainly for orchards, irrigated noted otherwise,what is stated about the soil series holds true vegetable crops, irrigated berries, small grain,hay, pasture, for the mapping units in that series. Thus, to get full and legume seed production. Other uses include wildlife information about any one mapping unit, it is necessary to habitat,recreation,and homesites. read both the description of the mapping unit and the Representative profile of Aloha silt loam, 0 to 3 percent description of the soil series to which it belongs. slopes,located 200 feet south and 40 feet east of the end of An important part of the description of each soil series is the county road in the NWI/4SWI/4NW1/4 section 16,T. I the soil profile. That is, the sequence of layers from the S.,R.2 W.: surface downward to rock or other underlying material.Each Ap-0 to 8 inches,dark-brown(1OYR 3/3)silt loam,pale III series contains two descriptions of this profile. The first is brown (IOYR 6/3) dry; moderate, fine, brief and in terms familiar to the layman.The second is much subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, more detailed and is for those who need to make thorough friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; and precise studies of soils. common very fine roots; common, fine, Color terms are for moist soil unless otherwise stated.The irregular pores; common fine shot; medium profile described in the series is representative for one of the acid(pH 6.0);abrupt,smooth boundary.6 to mapping units in that series.If the profile of a soil in a given 9 inches thick. mapping unit is different from the one described for the B1-8 to 15 inches, dark-brown (I OYR 4/3 ) silt loam, senes,these differences are stated in describing the mapping light yellowish-brown (I OYR 6/4) dry; unit or they are differences that are apparent in the name of common,medium,faint,dark grayish-brown, the mapping unit,or both. brown, and dark-brown (I OYR 4/2, 5/3 and As mentioned in the section "How This Survey Was 7.5YR 3/2) mottles; moderate, fine, Made," not all mapping units are members of a soil series. subangular blocky structure, slightly hard, Udifluvents,nearly level,for example,do not belong to a soil friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; series, but nevertheless, are listed in alphabetic order along common very fine roots;many,fine and very with the soil series. fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; Preceding the name of each mapping unit is a number,or clear,wavy boundary.0 to 9 inches thick. number and letter, which identifies the mapping unit on the B21-15 to 22 inches,dark yellowish-brown(10YR 4/4) detailed soil map.Listed at the end of each description of a silt loam, pale brown (IOYR 6/3) dry; mapping unit is the capability unit, wildlife group, and common,fine,faint, woodland group in which the mapping unit has been placed. The page for the description of each capability unit and a listing of the wildlife group and woodland group can be found by referring to • 13 • • • dark grayish-brown, brown, and dark-brown brown (10YR 5/3 and 4/3) silt loam, pale (10YR /2, 5/3 and 7.5YR 3/2) mottles; brown (IOYR 6/3) dry; many, medium and moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; fine, faint and distinct, dark grayish-brown firm hard,slightly sticky and slightly plastic; and reddish-brown (IOYR 4J2, 5YR 4/4 ) common,very fine roots;many,medium,fine moist mottles; weak, coarse, subangular and very fine, tubular pores; few thin clay blocky structure, hard, firm, slightly sticky films in pores; few black coatings on peds; and slightly plastic; brittle; few fine roots; few medium shot-, medium acid (pH 5.8) ; many very fine pores and few, fine, tubular clear,wavy boundary.5 to 9 inches thick. pores; common, medium, black coatings; B22-22 to 31 inches,dark yellowish-brown(IOYR 4/4) common fine shot, common micaceous heavy silt loam,pale brown(10YR 6/3) dry; fragments; few, thin coatings or cutans on many, medium, distinct, dark brown, vertical surfaces of peds; over 60 percent of dark-gray,and dark yellowish-brown(7.5YR the horizon exhibits gray,clean sand and silt 4/2, 10YR 4/1 and 3/4)moist mottles;weak, particles in a patchy pattern along surfaces of medium,subangular blocky structure parting peds and in the larger pores;medium acid(pH to moderate, fine, subangular blocky; firm, 6.0)•gradual,wavy boundary.0 to 18 inches hard, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; thick. slightly brittle;few very fine roots;many very C1-46 to 60 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) fine pores and few, fine, tubular pores; few, silt loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) and thin, dark-colored coatings or cutans on yellowish-brown (10YR 5/4) dry; common, vertical surfaces of peds and in pores; coarse, dark grayish-brown (IOYR 4/2) common fine shot; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; mottles and streaks; few black coatings; gradual,wavy boundary.6 to 13 inches thick. massive;firm,slightly sticky,slightly plastic; B3-31 to 46 inches,variegated brown and dark- slightly brittle;few,coarse,tubular pores and many, fine and very fine, tubular pores; micaceous;medium acid • • 14 • • • (pH 6.0);gradual irregular boundary. Al2-6 to 12 inches, very dark grayish-brown (10YR 12 to 16 inches thick. 3/2) silt loam, grayish-brown (10YR 5/2) C2-60 to 65 inches, dark yellowish-brown (IOYR 4/4) dry, weak, medium, subangular blocky very fine sandy loam, light yellowish-brown (10YR structure breaking to moderate,fine and very . 6/4)dry;massive,slightly hard,friable;nonsticky and fine, subangular blocky, hard, friable, nonplastic;common or many firm nodules;very fine nonsticky and slightly plastic; many very tubular pores. fine roots; common, fine and medium,) tubular pores;medium acid(pH 5.6);clear, The solum ranges from 30 to 60 inches in thickness. Depth to smooth boundary.5 to 10 inches thick. bedrock more than 60 inches. The A horizon is silt loam or loam. The B horizon is a silt loam or loam that is 18 to 27 A13-12 to 16 inches, very dark gray(IOYR 3/1) light percent clay and less than 15 percent rock fragments coarser than silty clay loam, grayish-brown (10YR 5/2) very fine sand. The lower part of the B horizon ranges from dry;moderate,fine and very fine,subangular slightly brittle to strongly brittle. The C horizon is silt loam, blocky structure;hard, friable,slightly sticky loam,or very fine sandy loam. and slightly plastic; many very fine roots; 1-Aloha silt loam.This nearly level soil is on smooth common, fine, tubular pores; medium acid terraces.It has the profile described as representative of the (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 0 to 7 series. inches thick. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Amity, Cornelius variant,Woodburn,Quatama,and Huberly soils which A2-16 to 20 inches dark-gray(10YR 4/1)light silty clay make up as much as 10 percent of this mapping unit. loam, light gray (5YR 7/I) dry; few, faint, Runoff is slow,and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability dark-brown (7.5YR 3/2) mottles; weak, unit Ilw-1;wildlife group 2. medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; many fine roots; many, fine and very fine, tubular pores; medium acid Amity series (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 7 inches thick. The Amity series consists of somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in old alluvium on valley terraces.Slope is 0 to 3 B21 t-20 to 28 inches, dark grayish-brown (10YR 4/2) percent.Elevation is 150 to 240 feet.Where these soils are not silty clay loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; cultivated,the vegetation is grasses,low shrubs,and scattered common, fine and medium, distinct, dark Oregon white oak. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 45 reddish-brown (5YR 3/3) mottles; moderate, inches,average annual air temperature is 52°to 54°F.,and the fine and very fine, subangular blocky frost-free penod is 165 to 210 days. structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; few In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; brown over very dark grayish-brown silt loam about 12 inches slightly acid (pH 6.4) • clear, smooth thick and very dark gray silty clay loam 4 inches thick. The boundary.6 to 9 inches thick. • subsurface layer is dark gray, faintly mottled silty clay loam B22t-28 to 33 inches, dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2 about 4 inches thick. The subsoil is dark grayish-brown and silty clay loam,pale brown (10YR 6/3)dry; grayish-brown, distinctly mottled silty clay loam about 20 common, distinct, dark-brown (7.5YR 3/2) inches thick: The profile is medium acid in the surface and mottles; moderate, fine, subangular blocky subsurface layers and slightly acid ,in the subsoil and structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; few substratum. fine roots; many, fine, tubular pores; Permeability is moderately slow.Available water capacity is common, black coatings on peds; thin 9 to 12 inches.Water-supplying capacity is18 to 20 inches.Effecti continuous clay films on peds and in pores; These soils are used for irrigated vegetable crops,irrigated slightly acid (pH 6.4) • clear, smooth strawberries, small grain, grass and legume seed production, boundary.4 to 8 inches thick. hay,pasture,recreation,and wildlife habitat. B3t-33 to 40 inches,grayish-brown(2.5Y 5/2)silty clay Representative profile of Amity silt loam,located about 150 loam, pale brown (IOYR 6/3) dry; many, feet east of the road in SW 1/4NE1/4 section 20,T. 1 N.,R.3 medium, distinct, darkbrown (7.5YR 3/2) W.: mottles; moderate, fine, subangular blocky Ap-0 to 6 inches,very dark-brown(IOYR 212)silt loam, structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; few grayish-brown(10YR 5/2)dry;weak,fine,granular fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and many,medium,black coatings on peds and in nonplastic; many very fine roots; many, very fine, pores; few, thin, clay films on peds and in irregular pores; medium acid (pH 5.6); abrupt, pores;slightly acid(pH 6.4);abrupt,smooth smooth boundary. 5 to 8 inches thick. boundary.0 to 10 inches thick. C-40 to 60 inches, light olive brown (2.5Y 5/4) silt loam, very pale brown (10YR 7/4)dry; few, fine,faint mottles;massive; • 15 • • iSTORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN • Table TII-1.3 SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type lA rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. LAND USE DESCRIPTION CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP A B C D Cultivated land(1): winter condition 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush & grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86 • . Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. Good condition: grass cover on L75% of the 68 80 86 90 area Fair condition: grass cover on 50-75% of 77 85 90 92 the area -110. • Gravel roads & parking lots: 76 85 89 91 • Dirt roads & parking lots: 72 82 87 89 Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs etc. 98 98 98 98 • Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds etc. 100 100 100 100 Single family residential(2): Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre %Impervious(3) Separate curve number 1.0 DU/GA 15 shall be selected for 1.5 DU/GA 20 pervious & impervious 2.0 DU/GA 25 portions of the site . 2.5 DU/GA 30 or basin 3.0 DU/GA 34 3.5 DU/GA 38 4.0 DU/GA 42 4.5 DU/GA 46 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DU/GA 50 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 • 7.0 DU/GA 56 PUD's, condos, .apartments, %impervious commercial businesses & must be industrial areas computed (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Sec. 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system. (3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. Table 9: Curve Numbers • 16 • • STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN Table II1-1.4 "n" AND "k" Values Used in Time Calculations for Hydrographs "n," Sheet Flow Equation Manning•s Values (for the initial 300 ft. of travel) n, Smooth surfaces (concrete, asphalt, gravel, or bare hand packed soil) 0.011 Fallow fields or loose soil surface _(no residue) 0.05 Cultivated soil with residue cover (sS 0.20 ft/ft) 0.06 Cultivated soil with residue cover (s> 0.20 ft/ft) 0.17 Short prairie grass and lawns = 0.15 Dense grasses 0.24 Bermuda grass 0.41 Range (natural) 0.13 Woods or forest with light underbrush 0.40 Woods or forest with dense underbrush 0.80 *Manning values for sheet flow only, from Overton and Meadows 1976 (See TR-55, 1986) "k" Values Used in Travel Time/Time of Concentration Calculations Shallow Concentrated Flow (After the initial 300 ft. of sheet flow, R = 0.1) k, 1. Forest with heavy ground litter and meadows (n = 0.10) 3 2. Brushy ground with some trees (n = 0.060) 5 3. Fallow or minimum tillage cultivation (n = 0.040) 8 4. High grass (n = 0.035) 9 5. Short grass, pasture and lawns (n = 0.030) 11 6. Nearly bare ground (n = 0.25) 13 7. Paved and gravel areas (n = 0.012) 27 Channel Flow (intermittent) (At the beginning of visible channels R = 0.2) k • 1. Forested swale with heavy ground litter (n = 0.10) 5c 2. Forested drainage course/ravine with defined channel bed.,(n = 0.050) 10 3. Rock-lined waterway (n = 0/035) 4. -Grassed waterway (n = 0.03/0) 15 17 S. Earth-lined waterway (n = 0.025) 20 6. CMP pipe (n = 0.024) 21 7. Concrete pipe (0.012) 42 8. Other waterways and pipe 0.508/n. Channel Flow (Continuous stream, R = 0.4) k c 9. Meandering stream with some pools (n = 0.040) 20 10. Rock-lined stream (n = 0.035) 23 11. Grass-lined stream (n = 0.030) 27 12. Other streams, man-made channels and pipe 0.807/n** • Table 10: N Coefficient • 17 III • • BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: PRE-10YR NAME: PRE DEVELOPMENT 10 YR STORM SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 2.38 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.45 inches AREA. . : 2.16 Acres 0.22 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 22.10 min 22.10 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 1.07 cfs VOL: 0.40 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min BASIN ID: PRE-25YR NAME: PRE DEVELOPMENT 25 YR STORM SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 2.38 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.90 inches AREA. . : 2.16 Acres 0.22 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 21.00 min 21.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 1.32 cfs VOL: 0.48 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min BASIN ID: PRE-2YR NAME: PRE DEVELOPMENT 2 YR STORM .SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA - 2.38 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2.50 inches AREA. . : 2.16 Acres 0.22 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 25.30 min 25.30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.59 cfs VOL: 0.25 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min BASIN ID: PRE-5YR NAME: PRE DEVELOPMENT 5 YR STORM SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 2.38 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.10 inches AREA. . : 2.16 Acres 0.22 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 23.10 min 23.10 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.89 cfs VOL: 0.34 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min Table 11: Pre Developed Flow Calculations • 19 • • • • BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: PST-10YR NAME: POST DEVELOPMENT 10 YR STORM SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA - 2.38 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.45 inches AREA. . : 0.67 Acres 1.71 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 12.10 min 12.10 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 1.60 cfs VOL: 0.55 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min BASIN ID: PST-25YR NAME: POST DEVELOPMENT 25 YR STORM SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 2.38 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.90 inches AREA. . : 0.67 Acres 1.71 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 11.40 min 11.40 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 1.85 cfs VOL: 0.64 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min BASIN ID: PST-2YR NAME: POST DEVELOPMENT 2 YR STORM SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 2.38 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2.50 inches AREA. . : 0.67 Acres 1.71 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC - 14 .20 min 14.20 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 1.09 cfs VOL: 0.38 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min BASIN ID: PST-5YR NAME: POST DEVELOPMENT 5 YR STORM SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 2.38 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.10 inches AREA. . : 0.67 Acres 1.71 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 12.80 min 12.80 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 1.41 cfs VOL: 0.49 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min Table 12: Post Developed Flow Calculations • • 20 • • • Time of Concentration Calculations Project: SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY-SW 74TH AVE job Number: DALO07 PrrDeveloped;Coridltiot►s;=3-Year Sfomi'Everit Flow Flow Length Slope P velocity Segment Tc Accum.Tc • Segment Flow Type Mannings n (feet) (ft/ft) (Inches) (fps) (minutes) (minutes) Sheet Flow 0.15 300 0.034 2.5 21.54 21.5 2 Shallow Conc. 460 0.034 2.03 3.8 25.3 3 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! velocity(fps)= 2.03 v=k*s^.5 where: k= li • S(ft/li)= 0.0342 v=k"�S^2 Table 13: Pre-Developed Conditions—2 Year Storm Event • 21 • • • Time of Concentration Calculations Project: SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY-SW 74TH AVE Job Number: DAL007 : "-Pre=D"eveiopeiLCOdditlims=5 Year:Storm Event... Flow Flow Length Slope P velocity Segment Tc Accum.Tc Segment Flow Type Mannings n (feet) (ft/ft) (inches) (fps) (minutes) (minutes) Sheet Flow 0.15 300 0.034 3.1 19.34 19.3 2 Shallow Conc. 460 0.034 2.03 3.8 23.1 3 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 Ditch Flow 0.0(1) 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! velocity(fps)= 2.03 v=k*s^.5 where: • k= II s(11/11)= 0.0342 v=k*s^2 Table 14: Pre Developed Conditions—5 Year Storm Event • 22 • • • Time of Concentration Calculations Project: SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY-SW 74TH AVE Job Number: DAL007 ,Pre-Developedt_Conditions-10YearStirii Event Flow Flow Length Slope P velocity Segment Tc Accum.Tc Segment Flow Type Dlannings n (feet) (ft/ft) (inches) (fps) (minutes) (minutes) Sheet Flow 0.15 300 0.034 3.45 18.34 18.3 2 Shallow Conc. 460 0.034 2.03 3.8 22.1 3 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 Ditch How 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! velocity tips)= 2.03 v=k*s^.5 where: • k s(ft/ 3 fl)= OAI v=k*sA2 Table 15: Pre Developed Conditions—10 Year Storm Event • 23 • • • Time of Concentration Calculations Project: SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY-SW 74TH AVE Job Number: DAL007 PreDeveloped Conditions='25:Year Storin`Evenf`: :';'.:': .: :' Flow Flow Length Slope P velocity Segment Tc Accum.Tc Segment Flow Type Mannings n (feet) (ft/ft) (inches) (fps) (minutes) (minutes) Sheet Flow 0.15 300 0.034 3.9 17.25 17.2 2 Shallow Conc. 460 0.034 2.03 3.8 21.0 3 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! velocity(fps)= 2.03 v=k*s^.5 • where: k= II s(ft/ft)= 0.0342 v=k*s^2 Table 16: Pre Developed Conditions—25 Year Storm Event • 24 • • • Time of Concentration Calculations Project: SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY-SW 74TH AVE job Number: DAL007 °. .._ 7 Post=Developed:Conditions--2Year,Storm;Event; . - ._ _-. Flow Flow Length Slope P velocity Segment Tc Accum.Tc Segment Flow Type Mannings n (feet) (ft/ft) (Inches) (fps) (minutes) (minutes) Sheet Flow 0.15 155 0.026 2.5 14.22 14.2 2 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIVIO! 3 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! velocity(fps)= 0.00 v=k'°s^.5 where: • .k= 27 s(ft/fl)= 0.125 Table 17: Post Developed Conditions—2 Year Storm Event • 25 • Time of Concentration Calculations Project: SW PACIFIC MCHWAY-SW 74TH AVE Job Number: HALM • -• _-,- ' hiitIDexeloPed•COnditliiti3-Year StOrin Eient Flow Flow Length Slope P velocity Segment Tc Accum.Tc Segment Flow Type Mannings n (feet) (ft/ft) (inches) (fps) (minutes) (minutes) Sheet Flow 0.15 155 0.026 3.1 12.77 12.8 2 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! velocity(fps)= 0.00 v=k*s^.5 where: • k= s(Oft)= 27 0.125 v=k*s^2 Table 18: Post-Developed Conditions—5 Year Storm Event 26 • • • Time of Concentration Calculations Project: SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY-SW 74TH AVE Job Number: DAL007 _-Post-Developed'Conditions- 0 Year Storm Event..: :..F Flow Flow Length Slope P velocity Segment Tc Accum.Tc Segment Flow Type Mannings n (feet) (ft/ft) (inches) (fps) (minutes) (minutes) 1 Sheet Flow 0.15 155 0.026 3.45 12.10 12.1 2 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DMV/0! #DIV/0! velocity(fps)= 0.00 v=k*s^.5 where: k= 27 s(ft/fl)= 0.125 v=k*s^2 Table 19: Post-Developed Conditions—10 Year Storm Event • 27 S • Time of Concentration Calculations Project: SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY-SW 74TH AVE Job Number: DAL007 Post=Developed Conditions 25 Year Storm Event' • Flow Flow Length Slope P velocity Segment Tc Accum.Tc Segment Flow Type Mannings n (feet) (ft/ft) (inches) (fps) (minutes) (minutes) I Sheet Flow 0.15 155 0.026 3.9 11.38 11.4 2 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DlV/0! #DIV/0! 3 Shallow Conc. 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 Ditch Flow 0.000 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! velocity(fps)= 0.00 v=k*s^.5 • where: k= 27 s MTh)= 0.125 v=k*s^2 Table 20: Post-Developed Conditions—25 Year Storm Event • 28 • • WATER QUALITY SWALE FLOW Project No.: DAL007 Design By: KQL SUMMARY: _ 0.16 CWS WQ flow rate z::- -- 2235 WQ Volume A (ac) = 1.710 Effective impervious area only where: WQ Volume = 0.36 (in) x Area (sf)/ [12 (in/ft)] CWS WQ flow rate = WQ Volume (cf)/ [14,400 sec] • or CWS WQ flow rate = [ 0.36 (in) x Area (sf)/ [ 12 (in/ft) (4hr) (60min/hr) (60sedmin)J Table 21: Water Quality Swale Flow Calculation • 29 • WATER Q DESGIN DALU47 Man-Made Channels CIVIL TOOLS PRO English Units 1024-2006 14:02:25 Results Flow Depth _ 0.16 ft Flowrate a 0.16 cfs • Bottom Width 3.50 ft Side Slope (H:V) = 4.0000 H:V Channel Slope (V:H) = 0.0204 V:H Manning's N 0.240 Wetted Area v 0.66 sq ft Wetted Perimeter _ 4.82 ft Velocity a 0.24 fps Froude No. a 0.11 Flow Regime = Sub-Critical Table 22: Water Quality Swale Flow Depth and Velocity Calculations • 30 • • • LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) 2 YR PRE VS 2 YR POS 0.59 1.09 PIPE ORIFICE 236.56 1 0.59 1785.33 cf 10 YR PR VS 10 YR PS 1.07 1.60 PIPE ORIFICE 236.84 2 1.03 2600.06 cf 25 YR PR VS 25 YR PS 1.32 1.85 PIPE ORIFICE 237.01 3 1.26 3054.03 cf Table 23: Level Pool Table DISCHARGE STRUCTURE LIST MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. ORIFICE Description: Outlet Elev: 235 . 00 Elev: 235 . 00 ft Orifice Diameter: 3 . 3300 in. Elev: 236 . 50 ft Orifice 2 Diameter: 6 . 2500 in. Elev: 237 . 00 ft Orifice 3 Diameter: 9 . 0000 in. • Table 24: Discharj(e Structure Information • 31 • • • STAGE STORAGE TABLE UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. PIPE Description: Diameter: 4 . 00 ft. Length: 950. 00 ft. Slope. . . : 0.0020 ft/ft upstr: dnstr: STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE c----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- = 235.00 0.0000 0.0000 236.50 1614 0.0371 238.00 6136 0.1409 239.50 9746 0.2237 235.10 2.0923 0.0000 236.60 1878 0.0431 238.10 6470 0.1485 239.60 9746 0.2237 235.20 11.745 0.0003 236.70 2162 0.0496 238.20 6801 0.1561 239.70 9746 0.2237 235.30 32.114 0.0007 236.80 2468 0.0567 238.30 7129 0.1637 239.80 9746 0.2237 235.40 65.401 0.0015 236.90 2795 0.0642 238.40 7452 0.1711 239.90 9746 0.2237 235.50 113.33 0.0026 237.00 3024 0.0694 238.50 7768 0.1783 240.00 9746 0.2237 235.60 177.30 0.0041 237.10 3286 0.0754 238.60 8075 0.1854 240.10 9746 0.2237 235.70 258.48 0.0059 237.20 3567 0.0819 238.70 6371 0.1922 240.20 9746 0.2237 235.80 357.84 0.0082 237.30 3863 0.0887 238.80 8652 0.1986 240.30 9746 0.2237 235.90 476.18 0.0109 237.40 4170 0.0957 238.90 8914 0.2046 240.40 9746 0.2237 236.00 614.19 0.0141 237.50 4486 0.1030 239.00 9143 0.2099 240.50 9746 0.2237 236.10 772.39 0.0177 237.60 4809 0.1104 239.10 9470 0.2174 240.60 9746 0.2237 236.20 951.21 0.0218 237.70 5137 0.1179 239.20 9746 0.2237 240.70 9746 0.2237 236.30 1151 0.0264 237.80 5468 0.1255 239.30 9746 0.2237 240.80 9746 0.2237 • 236.40 1372 0.0315 237.90 5802 0.1332 239.40 9746 0.2237 240.90 9746 0.2237 Table 25: Stare Storage Table • 32 v . �.curio •+•icrt I i n� u n t.•tn-irrui • r.c,c FRCIII :Washington-County Surveyor FAX N0. :50.3462909 May. 31 2606 01:44PM F1 31/2006 10:13 FAX 503 580 1087 the L aiton Gang. LLC Qom. • • • WASHINGTON COUNTY LAND USE ANA TRANSPORTATION • SURVEYOR'S OFFICE I request that the Wasbingtbn County Surveyor's Mice reserve the following subdivision name: PROPOSED NAME OF WRITE OAK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION: • MAP AND TAX LOT NUMBER: I S136DB.NW 1/4 SE% Dix Lot 1000 l S136CA,NVW'A,SE'b Tax Lot 1700 • CITY JURISDICTION (Which ate) City of Tigard OR • Oregon 97223 COUNTY JURISDICTION: • • SURVEYOR'S NAME: David Foster COMPANY NAME: Foster&lvladdux Surveying,lac. - - --- - OWNER'S NAME: Steve Dalton I understand that if the name is not used within five years, it will be automatically canceled_ Name of person reserving name: Len Dalton Company name: the Dalton Company Address: 10160 SW Nimbus Ave# F1A Tigard,Oregon 97223 Telephone number (503) 968-2054 Fax number. (503)968-2084 • E-Mats: LEDaltonatthedattonco.c:om • Signature• -21�-F --- Date:: 5/5I io t9Le,//..t. .5 CP • Name approved Washington County Surveyor's Office t. ; 54-e.1-k-,0,...,1 e :143 ale a...,.1 cE, 5-0 3 c $`f '7 7 155 North F/rst Av*nu.1 Su if 99945 Witham, OR 97123 Fax ( )8449 41.13S•rsuCrEatsuRV EyNDA TAnahwEernGElsusNaMF�octil0-tt FRIT LIST • • • • - L ' WHITE OAKVILLAGE . DL Re.oM✓ Lf°L' O DESIGN GROUP INC. WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON . 0 cM1007Y 10 • •HMoti�. ea 9 9045 Suite 1 r Blvd. SW 1 /4 SEC 36 ,. TW 1 . 1 S, R 1 W, W. M . Portland,OR 97219 ` (503)225-1679 ' '' - V� ;a7v_ra.Wl&1l8't$aI",7t" JJLLT4L � r- i H I � i ]oleo 4 S. V F8E8 rmiii\t , E—.�`. W parts St 1p. 4 ttla f _ _ ..�tl ii I — — .) —� i E �.�,.0] i :Std aj . . " c ' - N.1.401 o" t y' — i e� (j� < LRO 1Q ff , rt " } t .. 17 • I &_J lea '1. c, r J 1 t. m 1> .S A{t i.St $ (4' Q F_ rJ:$f_. J y� --ii.. : Sw , t ;, J Et W .. r `" ' ` *Cintrin t • a. . ` N. 1• .7'1 t€ 1 .. I Y t I `` ` "' ;...;..•-,Sine Ditettyliath St.,- - `' 4" 0 0 W � 0 --- . -, . . 77 t i - - - i ler* - iii 0 f. ,.• sw E niiiurst sit • t . <',i' t N t I— U 1 VICINITY MAP I /' 1" = 600' Y\447. GENERAL NOTES I PP� 7\ 5�� N 1. ALL CON5IRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO CURRENT STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS, CITY TIGARD, CLEAN WATER SERVICES CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, UN/FORM BUILDING CODE APPENDIX . CHAPTER 33 EXCAVATION AND GRADING, THE AGREEMENT ALLOWING DEVELOPER TO CONSTRUCT o R E P R E S E N T A T l V E PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND DIE OREGON SPECIALTY PLUMBING CODE. SEE SPECFICA DONS PROVIDED. • ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2. THE EXCAVATOR MUST COMPLY WITH ALL PROVISIONS OF ORS 757.541 TO 757.571, INCLUDING 9200 SW NIMBUS AVENUE NOTIFICATION OF ALL OWNERS OF UNDERGROUND FAOLITIES"AT LEAST 48 HDQRS BUT NOT MORE SITE MAP . REV. DATE BY BEAVERTON, OR 97008 THAN 10 BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE COMMENCING ANY EXCAVA DON A "a =452-8003 3. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTROLLING SEDIMENT TRANSPORT WITHIN THE PROJECT SCALE. 1 60' /1 12/27/06 CID o] LIMITS USING RECOGNIZED METHODS FOR EROSION CONTROL AS APPROVED BY WASHINGTON COUNTY A 2/19/07 LHP Fi Iii 4. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO LEAVE THE PROJECT FREE OF DEBRIS AND UNUSED MATERIALS UPON SHEET INDEX COMPLETION. O O W N E R THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE TIE INSTALLATION OF THE UTILITY SYSTEMS SUCH AS N. WHITE OAK VILLAGE, LLC. • 5. POWER, TELEPHONE, GAS. CABLE TV,ETC., WITH EACH INDIVIDUAL UTILITY COMPANY, PRIOR TO ° CO COVER SHEET N 7955 SW HALL BLVD. FINAL INSTALLATION OF THE SYSTEMS SEAVERTON, "OR 97008 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AND PROTECT EXISTING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.UTILITY LINES Cl.! EXISTING CONDITIONS csi AND OTHER PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL PUBLIC W PROPERTY TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION UPON COMPLETION OF AORIL C1.2 TREE SURVEY • W ' PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL HEDDIWS ARETIN REMAIN uv PLACE AND OPERATIONAL MAINTAINED UNIX C2.1 SITE PLAN PROJECT R f` NUMBER DAL007 o p o L A N D S U R V E Y O R 6 ALL AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL SHALL BE STRIPPED OF ALL VEGETATION AND OTHER DELETERIOUS C2.2 TYPICAL STREET SECTION 3' DAVID FOSTER SURVEYING WAS ALL SUCH MATERIALS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM SITE AT THE CONTRACTORS C2.3 TENTATIVE PLAT Date: 11 708 NE 238TH PLACE Sale: AS NOTED ° U WOOD VILLAGE, OR 97060 9. ALL NONMETALLIC SANITARY AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LATERAL PIPING SHALL HAVE AN C3.1 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN r. ELECTRICALLY CONDUCTIVE/NSULA)ED 72 GA. GREEN COPPER TRACER WIRE THE FULL LENGTH or Dravn By. DTT 40 °° (503) 997-1100 WE INSTALLED PIPE PUBLIC LATERALS ARE TO HAVE MAGNETIC TAPE BURIED 18"ABOVE PIPE C3.2 EROSION CONTROL NOTES & DETA/LS �+ AND LABELED SEWER OR STORM. Designed By. GID CONTACT.- DAVID FOSTER CI C4.1 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN O 10 NO MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS OR DESIGN CHANGES SHALL BE MADE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION OF Checked By GID O THE ENGINEER AND WASHINGTON COUNTY. C5.1 ACCESS PLAN R D C / V I L ENGINEER II. A FULL SET OF THE APPROVED PLANS WITH ALL CURRENT REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS SHALL BE ° DL DESIGN GROUP, INC. MAINTAINED ON THE SITE AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION. C5.2 EAST-WEST STREET PLAN O 9045 S.W. BARBUR BLVD, SUITE 101 12. ALL FILL WITHIN THE BUILDING ENVELOPES SHALL BE PLACED IN 12'LIFTS AND SHALL BE C5.3 EAST-WEST STREET PROFILE 6 PORTLAND, OR 97219 COMPACTED TO AASHTO 95%DENSITY DIE CONTRACTOR SHALL EMPLOY A GEOTECHNICAL CO . U (503) 225-1679 /FAX (503) 246-2094 ENGINEER TO E T ALL FILLED LOTS TEST REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE COUNTY AND C6.1 ARCHITECTURAL PLAN 2 CONTACT. GARY DARLING P.E. C7.1 SIGNING AND LIGHTING PLAN XRFF UST - • I •I . ` , Um*: I 1 P D L elfxale: I 1 Resolved 041.0071.01 OLD—LOGO • aG007a - 2 .—. �. _ ,/ A� — -1 I DESIGN GROUP INC. •ua.,a.e \ \ �•I \tb\ `� \/ ' • _—_ -- r _ t " ` - _ . � --- t " x� - - __ 1 9045 SWBarburBNd. \s I _ Suite 101 \ vy /"`'>r - - ' =_ _ —— __ ___ __ - — • — '--=_ _ Portland,OR,97219 \ l _"Idis e _ \� _ _ _ — `~ "�y(` - ( )225-1679 J .� _ - 1 ice- k �c �. // �,�'�- � .. - _ /� � 503 2 r '`/ \i- �/ / _=/ to ..1'. \�i r S 00°11'10'W 4187�� 1 1 ,z •/ l / / - \/ \\ / i 1 r�' , J / '' i 1.335 ACRES / /`��- 'r / d \ G�IA- I,. {/ // / A j / / -- TAX/tOTy ar l / ;'� m \ / / P / / ' /' -4 .• N \ °oss9 \ ' S 00°2115 W III — / °,,1' / / S 00°�'15j W 962:4f �l S 1 \ �y \ - - - - o - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - s� j 1- \NtlS—NtlS ,,,,=---.. N ,�,`fy°f—NVSI NtlS-�-N —+�•Ntl �� / /� i 1 � � f\/ \ ,„ \ I I y I a�€ / � -1 I I I I z; 5/ ', /rs s s'ry \ I I ti j l tea*/ f 052 ACRES / / a a a I s \ \ I k I k 4M' a- / / m d� k I k 1 1 k I r I s\ I ^O I r0 $• 1 �. // /� f � _i / / O I O I 0 I 1 V \ 0,8 p \ , TAX LOT 1000 / rn \ O I 0 fn''/� I I i i \\z-L. \ illrr ° \ trC +4" M M M M P �--. . \ \ \. . J,9 \ I S DD°24"35 W 185.4E \ `'i-✓��SIT=CGA�•ETI—SAN - sAN—JAN—w=JAN—SAN — 0 y G 1I \y 8 UNKNOWN 0.004 273.17 8" UNKNOWN 0.004 _� Ir 0 \0 \tt, ■\\ I i ' S.W. 74THAVENUE ---- -- ---- - z \ A 9\s \ �c I 1 1 ` -I O \ f„9 \ r I I O (9 I n• z V 92'.-1,., \ a TAX LOT 2300 I I I I I • \ -. I IA Z,n °o o � I I s \\ 9y\ - - -- - - - o • X ,:. t k I k I I k I ..t.. U) ^O I ^0 1 I 1 S I X \ �9y\\ \` O c. O $ $ $ I W \ \ I 1 I I \ ,f, \ I I I I 1 \ . -----F • S 00°2435'W 100.01Y -i_ - - - - - - - ' 9y \ . . \\ *\ TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY SURVEYED FOR. \ WHITE OAK LLC \\ 7assswR4tteLw. TAX LOTS 1S136CA01700& 1S136DBO1000 WASHINGTON COUNTY aV DATE BY d 9 1• / \ LOCATED IN THE SW 1/4 OFSECTION36, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, c:3 \ \� ` RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN SURVEYED BY •w 92 \Z WASHINGTON COUNTY,CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON FOSTER SURVEYING,INC. I `' N \ • SANITARY MANHOLE DATE OFSURVEY.'MARCH,2006 50265749307,5a OREGON 90 i TELEPHONE POLE cr 40' 20' 0 40' \ - CATCH BASIN co moo \ LUMINAIRE ti SCALE t•= 40' POWER POLE IA. VERTICAL DATUM.CIIYOFTIGARDBRASSGAPNUMBER36/NCURB, REQSTERED PROFE5570NAL Q I GUY WIRE NE 78TH AVENUEANDPFAFFLESTREET,,=ELEVATION 229.75' LAND SURVEYOR PROJECT :. GAS VALVE • NUMBER DAL007 - a FIRE HYDRANT _ Dare 11X18/08 • WATER METER • DECEMBER Q 19130 U DAND A.FOSTER I93• $018; 1•-40 • O RENEWED THRU 12/31/2006 Drawn By. DTT QQ Designed By. GM O Checked By. GID 1.7 1 • O O J 0 W g 01 . 1 2 - XREF UST • • • 0 E a .• ` 'I TREE ASSESSMENT 'e ag$ p °a°' ' TREES UNDER 12" = 31 NEIGHBORING TREES = 9 _ 1 -I $ ST""' TREE NUMBER: TREE NUMBER: m n co m i',1 . DESIGN GROUP INC. •"^^^ 01,02,03,04,05,07,08,09,1O,11,12,13,15,16, 18N,22N,24N,4ONA,4 DNB,4ONC,40ND,4ONE q L.1 -11 Ill 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. 18,21,25,26,27,28,30,31,32,33,34,36,38,39, AND 4 0NF. a , cn CO m T1 D s Suite 101 40,41 AND 43. �' t- o (I) Portland,OR 97219 . I r. d O. O n I. (503)225-1679 o V - TREES OVER 12" (HAZARDOUS) = 11 NEIGHBORING HAZARDOUS TREES = 15 o• No " * D p (mj) ' TREE NUMBER: TREE NUMBER: o Cl) X9.9 PROF 06,14,17,20,22,23,24,29,35,37 AND 42 08N,11 NA,11 NB,21 NA,21 NB,21 NC, 21 ND, s O d+;;,w 4��y 21NE, 21NF,44N,45N,46N,47N,48N, AND . >> Z a) m m PRESERVABLE TREE = 1 49N. - • TREE NUMBER: m -1..09,0 004, 19 I EXPIRES 4.31-O7 I NOTE: SEE TREE ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THOROUGH TREE ANALYSIS. • • \ 8 / �1I �zw��° �_ C ,"/19 I" ':��; --1._______L CT J �� = �_ � Q C C ��_ � � d C / M111■111=11111111 1.11A Mille Ts00X11D1'W 41:7° Z o co >- L co 1 9 oL N J -0 V• L W S . L Q 0 I1J/ / • . S 00° 1'15"(D 1 /-----C) - Vs '^ ~ .23' -/ Q • /4,,. \ 4. dS • 100 / 4L (O V • 8 0 p / N _®� REV. DATE BY• '>I . . ..";n\ Cn KA- 7-- N. S 00°2435°W 185.48' \C 1 1 ._ C N 0 0 v /� N S.W. 74TH AVENUE • W — ti I`' PROJECT ` 0 • Z \l -' NUMBER DAL007 3 Dare 1103r06 h • d %" 1 a S p 0 N ( Sole: t'=30' Drawn By. KRF • O -I MI to - K '"'� m Z N I Designed By KRF 0 gl _ < * rn Z = "O D 00 Checked By. GID 5!::' (T7 (5 scarf: i--Jo' 0 z Fa , - , c 1 . 2 Q 30 75 7.5 0 30 • rn . • • MT UST • • • • ` Lbw*:1 , Ps IfacW:I \ . Rssohb D4007DX50 I . D L DAL007A1 VG \ I OL "7••• \ . D-LOGO STAMP -o — — DESIGN GROUP INC. 9 I 1-- 0 Unresolved Cl _ — — . 9045 Site b r Blvd. Portland,OR 97219 225-1679 J- _ I SI TE PLAN �5��°`,..-.may 6 t9t60 i , . ‘144.44511r0; I EXPIRES uJ1-01 a 1 . . . . . WA TER QUALITY ACCESS PARK y� _ _ _ 1�'''' oy TRACT A o no y I . 8 4. tv ,q I I f 1 O ti ---1 L____ W, ' v LOT 24 L G ' - -Io f I 7 I o o O o o o I �L ti —I ti � ti , I I I ro I ti I O I b I pp I v I -61 TRACT C -1 Q' z L.- - - - I •:'I I I I I I 1 46. 0' 0 LOT 25 - -- I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - _ �. I I 1 fl 2D.p - Q w D I - — I — O 0 — III 2A.50" 1 w I-- 1C : I , I I I I I I "^7s•', I"C" I I F^ . I I li I ;rl I I I 1 I I WY I I O I _, O I O ( _, O ' -- 1 -- 1 I I I p I I N I (,� I Z. N I I I I ©_, �" V FUTURE � �.,�- 1 "B.11:67 n� .--'-35.50' RIGHT OF WAY 20" 10" 0 f '",. l'::..i.:;:.) _ \ \ .-__ - - _ - - i • SCALE: 1-= 20' TRACT B I I I \----___ _ _ to. _r NB" 8 I REV. DATE BY I:: Q I -Qi 12/27/06 CID N I I I I I I I 1 I 1 0 2/19/07 LHP vi 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 / I I I lij I 1 O I I I O O I I O I O I I O I I I 0 1. r. y 1 I O 1 .v N •1 .• - o I I _L __ _L CO _L__ __ _ __1____J__ �_ 1_ J_1-[_____(_, :l___ _ _ __ __ ti —__ _ _ _ PROJECT \ _, NUMBER DAL007 I - I Date 1tAf 6 N I I1 `�� — — _ _ °0 1 I I g W DaR By: OTT Designed By: MD o I SW 74TH A VE 1- -- — ec o — Chked By: CID o 1 — I t .4 6 CU SITE E PLAN C2 . 1 i. r = 20' xaes USE 0 S ` : poltaov rl-'�l` PL LINE PL ~��^��" rw •PL PL 25.5' 29'" 3.67 -. _1 r DESIGN GROUP INC.4.5' rt . rt 4.5• •U^+ 10.0" 10.0' �' • r 10.0' 10.0" 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. I Suite 101 i i 6" CURB 6- CURB �i �� 6" CURB 6" CURB i Portland,OR 97219.--- ` _ �1 (503)225-1679 s/ CONCRETE SIDEWALK SOUND WALL F^ CONCRETE SIDEWALK ( MOUNTABLE CURB BOTH SIDES i.\. �.,d'luso`'4 • I, MOUNTABLE CURB BOTH SIDES . / 1 ,s 0 o ASPHALT PAVEMENT - LEVEL 3, i"DENSE GRADED ASPHALT PAVEMENT - LEVEL 3, ii"DENSE GRADED L 00 BASE ROCK - 1- MINUS 12"MIN. % BASE ROCK - 1-}"MINUS - (12"MlM) ASPHAL CONCRETE (4"MIN. - 2 EQUAL LIFTS TYP) 1 ASPHAL CONCRETE (4"MIN. - 2 EQUAL LIFTS TYP - ( �} COMPACTED TO 95% T-180 OR MATCH EXISTING { COMPACTED TO 959. T-180 IewaES u-a or OR MATCH EXISTING { OR MATCH E \ RMATCHEXISTING i SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% T-80 LEVELING COURSE - 3"MINUS - (2" TYP) ,i LEVELING COURSE - i"MINUS - (2" TYP) • SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% T-80 ) OR MATCH EXISTING OR MATCH EXISTING J ! OR MA TCH EXISTING OR MATCH EXISTING --) . s r r SECTION: A—A A 2 SECTION: B—B `� /1\ C2.2 N.T.S `� C2.2 N.T.S -,---,` • v `_..,..'\... ,...-.✓,-..''--r'.-.,....',._.'�.... �.n...�ti..ti.��--- �`J��..., .-„n_, ~�-�'�-\._.,. .......\ .�✓'-^- �""/-,1/�- �, Z w 0 0 I— Li �\ ROW ,, �.� Lil 46.0 0 W PL (1 35.5' PL 10.5' ��''� < Q x 5.0' 11.0' 1) O F—F- J + " CURB 12.0' , L Q � 6" CURB [�' 6" CURB — ` I U CL CONCRETE SIDEWALK-/-- . l �l , ' • C . / . MOUNTABLE CURB BOTH SIDES • t ASPHALT PAVEMENT - LEVEL 3, i"DENSE GRADED 1 ( BASE ROCK - 1- "MINUS - (12"MIN.) - ASPHAL CONCRETE (4"MIN. - 2 EQUAL LIFTS TYP) COMPACTED TO 95% T-180 OR MATCH EXISTING j OR MATCH EXISTING r �( SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% T-80 LEVELING COURSE - i"MINUS - (2" TYP) i r OR MA TCH EXISTING OR MA TCH EXISTING 1'"' t' REV. DATE _ BY - n. J) 2/19/07 WP•�``- 3 SECTION: C—C r AC2.2 N.T.S �,_^s.... P.- �^�.,_ _�^-ti'i'`-�� ....1..-rte' I. 0 0 n N • U. Q PROJECT O • - p� NUMBER DAL007 3 a • Date= 11.V8016 N V • scale: AS SHOWN 1. 0 °lawn By DTT • J Designed By. DID O O Checked By: GID 0 O J _ C2 . 2 C7 2 . • • • NAME:G:I0AL0071DDIDAL007C23.dwg DATE:FEB 21,2007 TIME.:3:31 PM 9 $3 t l I 0 Iii I / S o �•I 6,?o-6\ 1 ql. n a m I o I I I II I O I V I I I j `1 I I I I I I I • T-00-76r _—J N. I I I c I M,00,00.6BN I „ _ , 1 11 00'62 9Z'SZ T T 7 O ° II z' I a I o I I l I — �° o 1. I zl r 1 �S \ I I 4 v F a N r^810, r ,'A :I'O l 14 I I m1 ^I I I I $ , I I 1 (\ I -- -- - _ -_-'f _ I ' I M,90,. 1 JS m 1 P 06 651 tt-3 10d2f1 zo 6z scar ,ss I I 1 ny�8� f►'Z6 3,SS,8Z685 I .0. M,S0,6Z68N I w _ 3,SS9Z68S ....-4, I IN L 107 s sg►c'L d# - - `s I$ 6 6tii �- 00'06 "-..• ,�y 1 0`'�6 X11' I% owl - _M,90,6Z.68N _ 00'6 �� / LB'►► ■3.60.62685 ►1S'►-�OO � � \ I I I I d� Oo iqS Vi” I I III Iv Z'969'I 0, I Iv 9 107 0 4 3S 086'1 to 3s z86'1 > I II g _ — — 9 107 _ I� —£Z 107 — I M,90,6268N 2 1 3 90,62695 3 90,62.685 w 68'89 0099 00'89 1 Iv ►'198'1 v ti 35 9c9•l In, !S WW1 vl I VI S I 107 ' $I I I 18.____ I I°o 6 107 la ZZ 107 $I l I I E l I I - _M,90,6Z68N_ _ I _ 3 90,62695 _ J _ 3 90,62685 NI • 00'69 0099 I 00'99 - ' I m I I I I II v In, 35■•■913'1 N I 4 107 $I I.1 3S 9f 81 Iv !S 9F8'1 v $ I A I$ Ol 107 Ig lZ 107 $I I I � r5.96 M 90,6Z69N ° y _ 3,90,6Z68S 3.90,6Z68S 1 I I H I •Or'69 I l 00'89 - _ 00'99 I I I I glv !S f'L98'I vl 1 ro ° N £ 107 $ 35 9F8'I I 35 9FB'! v I UI$ I 1$ ll 107 I$ OZ 107 °pI I F _ I �_ _ M,90,6268N - I I I _ 390,6Z68S I _ 390,626BS I $'a g INI I 11'69 00'89 00'89 _, pl a J I3 1,., is Z'OLB'1 I$ $I c ti $ e o ,°o V I 1 . 8 Z 107 2Io z oIv is 9r8"I HIV 35 9r8'1 e $a $ Zl 107 alg 61 107 J.: rl 1 I II I 1 _ Al 90,6Z69N _ I� •'' �I _ 3 90,6Z69S _ l 3,90,6Z69S _ ' 1 I Lf'69 .i 0099 - 0099 m tit I oI li IS f19'1 $I Iti In I 1 107 N 1 9£13'1 3s .1 7 p -- -- — £l 107 8l 107 I I I I m N _ M,L0,6Z.69N _ 3,90,62685 3,90,62.685 I 1 �I— f►'69 I I 00 89 112 0099 I ' I I I I Iv d5 9f8'I Iv f5'959'! " I 1 I . I I$ 41 107 Io LI 107 $1 I It I II I I$ is cots _ _ 3.90,6Z68S_ _I- 3.90,62685 _ . 1 0 10 Vd1 NI I 00'89 - 0099 I I 1 I 71 III I.--1-.100.,...9....,6, q 3S Z90•Z � �5 I!1'L �I I 9�a r� I ;x Sl 107 Im 91 107 I I I p0.q6 '!n 6 89'9f OS 01 _ I -10 89 • % I .0057 4, — OO SI _ — 1099 �L - - - - I OS'SI-l00'0!vl I T 81"[22 M,SL,es.99 N 1 y / I u I I / - 9C'SS - 1 - $ _ ZO'99l - - - Z9'fl9 • -- -- I i 96'SCZ Al,SZ,LS,88 N - pl - vl 4i I - _ ►C'fSZ 3 SZ,L&BBS I Oda I - - - - 0►'fSl- - - - _ - - - - I I _ _ I _ - OS'►! L 1.61 1 m I I I 2 g1$ I ' I ' IAIc, I I T- I I o I 1 T an ofa irI I ) i'0 I Oe '- - - - - - - - - - - - - I n S -°,'a '.1 00 OS ~ CI I C' •f1 a o I M,II,L0.68N 00'SZ-- I 0I —L9 OS'►Z 1L!'►! 1 I ^ppSIN r6' '6 00'62 . I I I i I I I l I I I O p 'r 1:?.' 3S evroz 0 3S Z'oroz cI p i I t:9 LI 107 19-9-9Z 107 p • I I L� - - - I I I I I - - - - - - - - I • I - 6L'Z► —— 00'6Z _ 00'52 3,1!,[0.685 I n 1 f 0, , WHITE OAK VILLAGE I RE. N� e m ) g g '` m \ D TIGARD, OR y 4.6. yQ N n� z \J ' ' o , m y Swo Y'�oa 6 7a 0 ` 6 6 " V e°c; 0,m g c ri.,_ (`,J*`Jl 2i ; j TENTATIVE PLAT ��o� %REF LIST • - II . _ ___ . . • S Lt woht:7 \ .„ BERM LIP GRADE TO ENSURE `.... ., PsItscohr 1 'ink \ ---- -- ----- ---- m s.• ,..._ PROPER DRAINAGE AWAY FROM . • RIM 22135 \ t..?. INSTALL BIO BAGS RITAINING EXISTING BUILDING AI AI Resalvod IL- 221.50 DITCH INLET '10,, V ,.. W LL RIM 22.150„ N. t. **`. CW0070150 %0 i , . 'lc 222.00 N N. .. . • st. . ea uy 0 .." -1 0 f140071060 \ DAL0070.170 • I\ -.---225-t-..- ---- .:-.-- -- ---• .----- ---- -------....---_ -- --- ---23-6:- — - m•-•• • ,p--. - Ar ,x _ _...,_ _ DALD07701 , ____ --__ ___ ,......_ •--- -___ ____ __ ---- --- — — ------ •- - ----- -2- — - .7•• __ I- — '-'-' _..- — — ___ — 1196' DESIGN GROUP INC. i ,- - 2 , ---_- - ------'.---- -;:. - ;*, - .,_ - i ,_ ;.-_ _ _ _ .__ ___ x x %. ..- -- - I 4'CIMINLINK faSTAIPOID 4$... ... .. ...:,....-......,-..r""r"...L.2` • ..r ......x,••,---= FENCE 9045 SW Bator Blvd. dove7.10 / — - .... .. . _v,s,.. .--z--e. _ .. ...- '..- , , -1._---,--=1. ------.--. ---3... -11--11 III 'i do1007x20 . _.............t0001.)?:-77. '-"' • Suite 101 clo1007.40 , 15'WALL Portland,OR 97219 • ss ISZSESENNERIZMEMANIMMINERSEESSEMEMMagENEMIMINNIIIIMMIIMMEMOMMITEMEN ..----- ' 1 MAX threlealwed -..o...ii ..gr (503)225-1679 / .7 ,7 ,7 1 1 ' -.. ct, / 1, . 6. il, .., . 1 - ,, I 'I . t , ..::: ''' ..., ,.., • r •R , 1\\,BIOSWALE r- . I 4' ' s. .-..NN, 1 I ..? 2,1 5,, _____, 1,NI, t.„..,-- .,..-' z • ti Ark 1:1,k* 4., ,,,, 7' 1 J „..., . ._ .._.... ISLIZIPROlifj, aP • . WV 0°'', / ct_ ..-...-- ... 40 I Nite ij . -?1, A ,,,- .., 5'WIDE CCM,'13.■161 0 A TY /_c' ,../. -...... 4? A. 12160 4. S . ., 5•SIDEWALK cr ■ . . 1 GRADING PLAN . - • - . WATER OVAUTY SWALE --' . C3.1 1" = 20' , 1114,0T 3 SECTION A—A . • . • C3.1 NOT TO SCALE ExPIRES 12-3,07 . . • ' . • 'N. , ' --,....... / .„..- • / AREA DRAINED \ • -/- ---- 1M * Ali BY CURB air ...,_ / /..... G - k Ark A% I GWENT FENCE VW . --.. •-•-, 24o /'-----24°---•-•\ _____.--XX— \ WI 14g7 i --- ____ • •••• .-:.,, -••••,-- ...,.., 4'MAX RETAINING WALL -. t„ ----'----------/ ....,..-\--''' 1 ----. ,,___,..... <----' -.-- - - - 7 ',... .....- —* . ... ---- -- .--- . •-.. ___ _..._ I „,,,.....---- ■ A sN----- 5--- _ -_ , -..... ------''' ....._ _ ________ - ----- — -- -, :T.:Z.1 - --- -- — -----,- — -I f 1 ,•7____t rA7 --1.7....7-7 1,_-.- '7.- —7.7......7,,—... ......_—_—_ •_____ _---7-=';- ... -"--____..... „7":-.--..--___77-_ ,....,,....__•-..;-::' -"------.--'7..._ _,,,,,,..--,- Te,.. ..\ — ____-=--. __ _____------- •••• ---7-,------------------------- , /, ,-- ____-- -- --- 7_— ---'40, - -1 --- -- ^., _ >4.1..--„,-„=„..".2:-., _,..,r____. ___-___.-z-- -=,:_- -,=-,-22.v_ii__ 7.x----x--.„...2,--E._ -. --_-_-___c_;,--- ------ .x / -----,—-„.-- - z ---71=-• -- --'-'"-..._-....... ...-mg=it x a7.6.g....r.a... x="---- x=x---.-- - ' ...,..........■.,..,,,, - .1-.t...--2.:.-,..,-.. lin _....__100001 .:....- \ - ' ::', ,..-- / ,-, ---.. N _ 11 , ---A_71 aln .L- ,_ 7,.,,--,,,.■-:,,...<-„---- ........ , r- 1:s •,. .1r./ . ;,..---- -...., ehir,ngs-.,-7-c or...,„_.,r,iliii1114_,.................. Aoh. \ ‘,.. __I" _ __...,,,,, j, . _ -,, i ,- .....- - , 7/23/RA 176;1; ,,, 'r" \:..- E.---,.., , „. -7 ‘,,, '' - 4.'77---x ' iv (....D 1 1—Lx ir ...._ _.. __ _ ..1 0, \ 0 ,..... , 1...gdi „.... - I i , . . . . .. __ ...... / , : / ,.. .. . . . ...„„, 1 . im 1 . z, . „.- . . 7 , • MI ........--, ,r- ... „-- 7 Lims00017.101,11-q°' ...._ /0 > 0 .,- , . .. .-- • ,- i 1 --i / / . g .7 ., 7 , Nt / rs• / a %, / / -•'/ ' LAT 24 - .. • 1 __ --- 1 i - i V Zi .s. / (..9 ---- ......_ -- z' r,-- r- r- r- ./' / r ,.....,- 0 0 0 Et c' 20' 10' 0 G/ 20' /\/ / • I -*. '.: 0 0 0 0 1 0 /I -4/ 0 -1 • ./. /. // 1 N. '4 ' ' t , 11111 !1_5 / SCALE: 1-=,20:, I il - - C4-1---- .'.'l • • --I ts.) Iv -i P.) 1 -, I --t P.) 0 --I ___, Jr .------0,- I I - ,..1 /'/.... '11 ,'' ' -__ _. y y /TRACT C / N. - WE- -,:t 7 „/-, • , ..- . N. -•., A..... F- Z 1 / _________„...-_ r-- ,41,' . LOT 251/ __ ..-- — --- ,,, — --/ . •,' i \/ ,1.• ' - --i -- I N. • \ ---- — I / - :. „.„/I .7' -Z__ , ._.,,,, ----- -.- / ,i - r'''' ../. 1 - ' . I • ., ..„--- \ ..,-.. ; • - - ,, ,/ -,..- .7.- • ..,-- ,, -I I z \ — _ y .. r+. '-,:=---------'i 2 / I , , - - Li...I , . „ i, , r ..,,,, „... _ _ r , , ( a_c ..,-_ ,__•,_,,,„_-_-7-,..-,,, _ _------ -__—_ ___ _ .. _ ,..._ ...\\,.. 1_ . .. ,, . . „.... ,,, .\, \ • ..., ... . .... ) c, \ 1 , . •• / / -' In • 1 ... / I . -1- I f„,,-- Il /I I o- ■ .„,,. i / I ; / \ , ,- i .,,,, . / , ---...1. • „., 1 ,- 1 • , [ ---. / r- 1 '••i / J. 1 0 • 0 .0 ] 0 0 •-•..„, "M .../ u ',.: / ■;. 71--1 CS't---r:21---I _.--- --- - fl II • ''''.,''•,. 1 I 'lir I .... . ._ 1/ --- I IZ) I C: I 4. irn !:,, / 1 11 7 ...• /1 1 :I I 1 / .■ '.'.±" I il L7 ...,.-. I I I I t... i • ,..• ------------ _ — — — — ,,,/ I ,__, •/ I [ . I ...• i 1 ‘1? '" \ ....•' ..,A . i ‘ . ,..... , . , REV. DATE BY Z / I a. x \' / A 2/20/07 LNP / ci 41111 SEDIMENT FENCE - --' \ f-... *-*'*•%.- , . ..,, / 1:/I CU W7 II ,. I , 1 .0 / / . 7RA_G2718/ IT ,4411111ir ' I r.-- 7 II / , irs I • i,%111■ NI . rs. I. / 1111W/ r 11111"111111111.11111111111111111 I. I . . cz. -• / I ki ■ ): (NI \ ' \ Mill 1 ■ CO . / ! INIIIIMOMI 7.4. 1 I i r I I I to ' / i v ; I.L. .7 ll ,' __. • I I / I li Ce ,/ IT 1.,,,‹_ ___ - .; i d ----250-- PROJECT . 1.-- i -I- rP I rc;j 1 1-/ -1 / ' . 0 0 1 C) 1 A:) 1.- . O 1 ws7,4U Ge4vn .NUMBER DAL007 / To '0 ' ,.. STRUCTION --•I ---- Z * • N ; 1/—Or" I (A Li .- ENTRANCE VgIV j /*/ . --I- ---- .4*- I I I ---- Date: 11/0606 ft, / i 11 I _ —/' ti. - / I-- -- I _L ----- — — 4— _ ,-.1--- — -r - L ____ - - // I Scale: AS SHOWN ____ ---- / t... I /-/ / /— --- 1 ---- ...■■ / 0;rc.: ■ L / / rz -- , „ 1,•-•.,p.--, , 0 Drawn By: DTI. I I ,... 1...7.41., \ ,.4--—L.... --—__——-—--— , -- --—--— • '74 141/(...,-_—. --- --"I----- ..----- ---- -, ----------------- ../ -.. ' ..— --- -, 1 .........ga, -""'-4,, •.. \lir — Designed By: DID 0 ' / .-....-.....—.--- ..-...-■_,..,.. - - ', '"""a'•-•-"-'''--- ,14 ' ''.-', ifttl I t ,a- • / O -,.-..-■ c--- ..,...-- < \ .-250, ,.''' -n:4 "74019 0.A ..". / Checked By: DID r.T. • ----_ — .-- , — — -- --- •,-z - LEGEND \< I ‘ • \ii . ,-- - - - 1...., z' I •„.g.,11P,..M.,_ --- „, --- ca A__i___.,,,..--- A A -..1 N. , "Rkpl---7..7--,-- _ sz 2 GRADING PLAN 92STING-I'CONTOUR 4•MAx RETAINING WALL ,II I \ I I' '?...• -,-..,..---ue, : . _____ - , -0 \ .., • ziaf,z.,\ i - ---..‘- — (.6 C3.1 1" = 20' ----245---- 'EDSTING 5'CONIR-.. if 1 i •. I.\'' -. ----- — I --.... \\ itroi0011111. --- ' C 3 . 111 244--,/ PROPOSED l'CONTOUR ..,,,:. .. .1,‘::c :o4s:•_.:;,:7,4-0 004 324.1::—. 7,1;4—SAN—SAN "S : Z 245 ; PROPOSED 5'CONTOUR ' I 1-• ---- ., - /- 1 ...., -....., „ , .‘ _ z , ,„ - I , T1 - _...-____, ______________ , XR£F UST , • ` H _ DL Ih/Ixvk:I _• AAeaol.+e „ FLOW FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL FILTER USE STITCHED LOOPS • MLA77Dx5O =-- FABRIC OVER 2�x 2 POSTS ':•� 30-MADE ROLLS DESIGN GROUP INC. AILQD7OX60 , DITCH BOTTOM MATERIAL • F.:, OLD-LOGO� 11111111:4 m - =� _----- 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. •ST 62 10 vm _„` -° 'r O Suite t01 I SECTION A—A c Portland,OR 97219 laa (503)225-1679 DITCH INLET 70 `�ii!!!�� / ?gr ��aS �/ m 6'(MAXIMUM SPACING) I I, `',Ra �► AREA DRAINS QED PROF ��s �o a/N� MAY BE USED SHORT TERM w..` FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW . 19160• .:. _:.�.•..a..:o._ W/UTILITY WORK AND W/ • : o'' • PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT A ��ie,'r ANGLE BOTH ENDS OF FILTER FABRIC .r�.I :d61 . FLOW • FENCE BOTH ASPIRE OF L TRAPPED • - '� I-II 't�� NOTES: EXPIRES u.m•m //RADIUS p,�� IIII��I e llimj 1 • ■ ■■ •■ •• 1. BURY BOTTOM OF FILTER FABRIC 6- // 25•MIN. '••A',. VERTICALLY BELOW FINISHED GRADE./ ,•.4 ..'SIC pHfo�! 2 CLEAN PIT RUN OR 2-MINUS GRAVEL 4!P_ O� l q - .;4' .Ip ,w�`; INTERLOCKED SUBGRADE REINFORCEMENTOgS�`' * : PLAN u� AND ATTACH / 2. FENCE POSTS.NE OR STEEL • GEOTE IRE.AS REQUIRED *pp,. '^'�..a•.7 3, STITCHED LOOPS TO BE INSTALLED DEPTH CATCH BASINi DOWNHILL SIDE OF SLOPE. in •20• MIN. FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL TOP VIEW A. iTREEN ACCT ALL AREAS OF FILTER FABRIC J_ 2 GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TEMP. BIO—BAGS 3 SEDIMENT FENCE 'Q C3.2 N.T.S. C3.2 N.T.S. C3.2 N.T.S. F- W a w a ( z EROSION CONTROL NOTES • Q-t1 d U) 1. OWNER OR DESIGNATED PERSON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL __I x MEASURES.IN ACCORDANCE M1TH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS 2. THE IMPL£MENTATTON OF THESE ESC PLANS AND CONSTRUCTION.MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT. AND UPGRADING or THESE ESC FACILITIES IS > 0 a THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED AND APPROVED BY DIE LOCAL JURISDICTION, AND • • �� VEGETATION/LANDSCAPING IS ESTABLISHED. THE DEVELOPER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE AFTER THE PROJECT IS APPROVED UNTIL M£ • .:1. 0 Z LOTS ARE SOLD. . a' >. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING UNITS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION DURING THE 0 o 0 CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, NO DISTURBANCE BEYOND THE CLEARING UM/TS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE MARKINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. W H ry • 4. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION MTTH ALL CLEARING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES, AND IN SUCH A LL'---• MANNER AS TO INSURE THAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN WATER DOES NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM, ROADWAYS OR VIOLATE APPLICABLE Z WATER STANDARDS. • I S THE ESC FAGLITI£S SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE MINIMUM REQUREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS ONS DURING CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, 0 THESE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE UPGRADED AS NEEDED FOR UNEXPECTED STORM EVENTS AND TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN !1 WATER DOES NOT LEAVE THE SITE lJ 6. THE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THEIR CONTINUED Z FUNCTIONING. 0 7. AT NO TIME SHALL SEDIMENT BE ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE MORE THEN 1/3 ME BARRIER HEIGHT. ALL CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE UNES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING THE CLEANING OPERATIONS SHALL NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. VI B STABILIZED GRAVEL ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. 0 ADDITIONAL MEASURES MAY BE REQUIRED TO INSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. F✓ 9. STORM DRAIN INLETS BASINS AND AREA DRAINS SHALL BE PROTECTED UNTIL PAVEMENT SURFACES ARE COMPLETED AND/OR VEGETATION IS • _ L'•1L RE-ESTABLISHED. LLJ • 10. PAVEMENT SURFACES AND VEGETATION ARE TO BE PLACED AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE. 11 SEEDING SHALL BE PERFORMED NO LATER MAN SEPTEMBER 1 FOR EACH PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION. 12. F THERE ARE EXPOSED SOILS OR SOILS NOT FULLY ESTABLISHED FROM OCTOBER I THROUGH APRIL 30. THE WET WEATHER EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES WILL BE IN EFFECT. SEE EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL(CHAPTER 4)FOR REQUIREMENTS REV. DATE BY S` 13. DIE DEVELOPER SHALL REMOVED ESC MEASURES WHEN VELETA TIOV IS FULLY ESTABLISHED. o_ • CI • - u; -GRADING NOTES -- - z ti 1. ALL ELEVATIONS AND GRADE UNE SHOWN ARE FTN/SHED GRADE OF PAVED AREAS OR GROUND LINE. N. 2 GRADES S ALL BE TO SUBGRADE IN THE PAVED AREAS AND TO DIE ONES SHOWN FOR LANDSCAPED AND OTHER AREAS IN THE N AREA 10 FEET BEHIND DIE CURBS THE TOP 12 INCHES SHALL BE TOPSOIL APPROVED FOR PLACEMENT BY THE ENGINEER. N .1 SUBGRADE NOT IN STRUCTURAL FILL WILL BE ROLLED AND COMPACTED TO 952 RELATIVE MAXIMUM DENSITY AASHTO T-99. 6 ea INCHES DEEP. W Lt.i 4. SOFT SPOTS IN ME SUBGRADE OF PAVED AREAS HILL BE EXCAVATED TO A DEPTH OF 18 INCHES AND AND BAG(FILLED WITH 4•-0'CRUSHED ROCK. COMPACTED AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. Ili PROJECT Q I 5. ORGANIC MATERIAL (TREES BRUSH ROOTS STUMPS"ETC.)SHALL BE REMOVED FROM lilt SITE STRIPPING SHALL GENERALLY BE NUMBER DAL007 9 INCHES BUT MAY BE DEEPER IN HOODED AREAS STRIPPING SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AREA AS DIRECTED . BY THE ENGINEER Dae ,IAfiOB N 6. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL REQUIRED TO FILL DIE SITE SHALL COVE FROM THE BORROW AREA AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. THE - Sme: I_=20 U BARROW AREA SHALL BE RESTORED AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OM ER. O 7. PERMITS REQUIRED TO HAUL MATERIAL FORM THE SITE SHALL BE OBTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR FROM THE COUNTY. STATE. D,xw,BY OTT O -..1 AND OTHER AGENCIES AS NEEDED. ALL FLAGGING AND TRAFFIC CONTROL REQUIRED SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR d GO ci 0 B CONTRACTOR TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DUST CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION/HOURS Checked BY. DID 0 _ R 0 ' J (, C 3 • 2 . • EROSION CONTROL NO TES AND DETAILS TAIL S z XRFF I/57 ` • • • • . • L . D `""`a`:' `. . LEGEND -• • � � STORM PIPE 04L0071:070 • EXISTING STORM SS SANITARY SEWER LINE DESIGN GROUP INC. 04L007..01 • MANHOLE W WATER L04L007..01 an-Loco s 4°4 CATCH BASIN 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. emW7 4Q �''4 ® Suite AREA DRAIN Portland,OR 97219 0.-°'OMeO ® STORM DRAIN MANHOLE (503)2251679 1 STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT O SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE • QED PROF 'S PUBLIC STORM IN SS-0— SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT 'p,1■se T'�o , 1 99W .V° Iv1W 9 -- ° WATER DUALITY Alik © ® 0 WATER METER \ 0.....a DITCH TAUT SWALE 9,.,..\.y OU7FALL o& BLOW-OFF VALVE1�G EJOSTMC CBAATCH �s., ?�; C- FIRE HYDRANT \ °.� d . - . - � $ -- DOWNSPOUT EIOSTINC DITCH I E>wwLS u•wd1 J rNL£T . EXISTING DITOI ��\ � VEGETATED SWALE . '.77.7.,:,-,,,..--..,-.; .a.......,...a.M._ .,.x...r.,.__. .a..R ..�., .. C ROCK TRENCH s ER` k Elk 1 UTILITY PLAN 48.DETENTION 4 C4.1 1" = 20" PPE o - I WRET CONTROL y� W`- —� W ® a SS l - 1:111. SS SS SS B'SAN/TAR YaNfR SS 1 SS - SS SSA_ —_ r` 1 i WATER OUALITVACCESS/PARK ��'- '/� ° ■ O - - ' - 0 p C 2 e e _ e e e e e .-- O 1 « w v •w v w v w v v w v w v—moo -t ( TRACT A I w o/wAT£ ti �4' RUN£ • 6 D WATERLINE - - - y1 I 1 I I I I I Q Q ti I I I I I 1 ti X • LOT 24 I;.: 3 - - V - I 0 U1 If I O I O I O I O I O I O O 1, .__I._._.. I W Z ' la ti ti ti y I ti CONNECT TO I N I N I N I ,.09XTING MANHOLE I :t 1 • N I " I o f `D 1 w I v I rn TRACT C LOT 25 I F1R£HYDRANT L 13 ^-1— _.I 4 I 1 W cr N — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — II _ __ __ __ __ __ •-NVS-NVS-NVS-WS NVS-NVS-:'JV�-rv'7S-NV'S- - • I I -- `•; 3 • U-: •I I I 'iI I I I I I I • 1;'', 1 I ,1 I I I I I I I I I I I r O rl I 1 SANITARY MH N I RIM a 242.40' H ( O O 0 0 0 r0 O /E FL - 2J.19J' ti -.1 ti y ti ti y I••,' I I I I I I n 1 co b O - N C a l',:.". � y t 1 I 20' 10' D 20' V Q 1 = .' REV. DATE BY I �8r D.I.PUBLIC WATER 0' /2/27/06 co N SCALE: r"a 20' 12/27/06 p0 ri Iii �♦ V V V 6'D/ WA7�L/Nf V V w V V ;_ 1) O is . : a ■ e ■ Q : e ■ e - - ■ c _ c e c _ e e - - - e 0 I- 0 s ss sS AMTARY.=a.. • • 8'SAMTARY NER SS SS TRACT /Y_S _o 1 .'.•: n. o 1 1 1:.'. I N 3 1 I I I I I I :. I - I I I 1 I I p'- PROJECT I- I - NUMBER DAL007 O 0 r- 0 I O O O O O p� 0 I 0 Date 11/06/06 3 I o1 V I I (n 1 I t.l I ry I I ~ 0 Sc e 1- - 20' OI I I I 1 I 0 — I FIRE HYDRANT Drawn BY. DTT • o �_ __ / L Dead BY. GID •O __— COVN£CT TO_-- Checked BY GID T M�-2.: EXlS7WC WA TER• 2 UTILITY PLAN I r 1- / o I _ _ c 4 1 W t SAN-SAN-SAS-SAY:—SAN- SAt:-SA„- ''- 1 n i:Ni<Slen,:/C.0O2.3.:7. .,. I ..% 74TH AV E ""==UST " • �- \\ | • 0 ' "~�'' � °°~�' / I | ' \ | `/ °~-- / \ \ \ - �I ��,"°�"�, ii • �� , � `/ .\ '� \ ,„ ` DESIGN GROUP�C""�� `OLD-LOCO / ` \ `\I \ \\ ` � omomw~a"m" a*o"=�° I 0 ,��" ~�"� ' �| \ \\ ``' �' \ ` `\ Suite 101 pvma�.onno1� | '\ m»muu�mr ` | \°~~^� \ ' ' i ' `\ \ ` � a\ `� '\ ' \ � s �,�� \ ` L_LLI ' I -SCALE: r=20' � / ----s ~ ^ ~ 20 I | \ �� / // ` \ 6+00 / '�D . �="^ |• Z - - -~-- - �-- - -4--- - ----I- -/ ` '--.1 | - - - -- - \ \^ \ ^ | � !^\ ' \ ^_ _ � . / ` . � ` .�� / • / .` ' / / / ` N� / \ ,~ --/ -- ---- � — �/ / c, `�� p ,cc - --- --- - � -- — ----�- - r _ � ^ /" :� ` -� ` $61 1 ` | i / /| ' '/ � � �, `. v . \ \ `, c� -^r -J 1 0• | ' |' / `'' ~` \ �- \ / if / /// \ \ \ ( • I I ^` � / / // / \ � \ � \\ f ' \ \ | \ ' I / / / \ \ .1 \ / ' � . \ I / / /'/ / / \ -� - - T - � \ ) '_ \ / \ / / '// / � ' � � T | ` \ \ 1 ` U/ 1 / � \ \ X` -- -- -- | I \ ' / /|/ / � � / �` � ` ' / � \ / '/ '/ k >/^' . � • \ \` � i \ \ / \ � - - - -----| \ ``^' |` ` ' � - - / �^ {`- �-/ I r• \ a \ ^^'\ / �' / � i�, / \ , / \ ,-7. --='. _J Ct -CC / �A . > O u/ PUBLIC EAST-WEST STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN • SCALE: /' = 20'SCALE: -° 0 O 1—~ / / • ' / ^� /' | / / bd ' / / � � / } | / / / / /) / / / � � / • / / i/ I /� / / /� / / / / / i \ / / / / � / ( �. C � � | � / ,' / ' / � / | / / '+ / - - --� -� -- - -f- -- _._ --/- -- --- 1 ---- --- T ` / D~ i SCALE '~�' I \ / � 1-. • == DATE BY ' � / . \ un / " ' I �0 � j0 20 / ^ / / � /,wo , $+ I � / rJ--� + / � fH - - --1-4 - ----�' - \- �iii / � ` UB—// EAST- W�S7/ ST �'/ /� �- `` 1 . `� / / | / ` N. | OO `` / ` \ — � r �� f � 4 � � � CO / �----------------- ` ---------------------- ------------- ----------- ------------ ` 7 � � �� `` / / � | ` ■ \ �� | � �� ` | ( � \ ` �� ` Ili l b] / � | / I / I | ! \ / PROJECT � ` NUMBER o^mo / / -_ � \ | I \ ` ~~^ ' | -- ' | \ I �� moo� C•i I /t ) \ i | \ / ! I '=. '^� N. ' / / / \ \ � � \ /' / I / "~~"r "° / / | ` \ \ I \ �� / / l \ \ I -- -- -- � \ Designed By °~ 0 I; / / I \ ) / / \ ,,/ p.�"� o= ` '| / / I 1 / I , / \ 1~ a o PUBLIC EAST-WEST STREET �� }.^ .� , T PLAN lii :E SCALE: /. ~ 20' 5 ° 2 '� ^ xaer UST • • • - • , D L °I ' j 500°°° �` 2.14x______---- DESIGN GROUP INC. srAYFGm ; PVI STA • 7+64.13 • •041007x7.3 250 ` ! EEEV=Zx28t -vim _ ._ 1 0.___I 250- 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. eorods.2o A.D. 4. -1.28 m a ' Fl CENTERLINE GRADE ( " 1 Portland,OR 97219 W --EXISTING GRADE I a▪ ^. K v 39.16 A w i T CENTERLINE 2.80% . i< f6 a'°'�O ▪ w I - ------- --- ------ AT CENTERLINE (503)225-1679 +- - r --—.•..W - --- —-. ■ 1^ m N 03 Q I I i I o W P` ae$y FUTURE FlNL41 1 �--� -_ I I I + to o�c ` 191.0 f .� -240 GRADE AT'CENTERDNL __—__--"' 1 —' i o- i 240 J •� -- --'-- _ EXISTING GRADE AT I i a rn i • V-- i■ CENTERLINE I 1 I I -230 ! i 1 I • I I i I t i 1 X220 _ i X---- -- __.— -- ----- — z2II- 1 I IA I � i V . W 1 iiir c J c I- w O J • PUBLIC EAST-WEST STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN Y 0 E-0 SCALE: 1" 20' Q < W 0 O 0 . . wi- . °.. CO I < w I I ' .240 i i 1 I 240- 1 I i 1 m _ O LOW POINT ELEV= 215.40 I. 1 I I 1 v ' LOW POINT STA a 1130.36 �'�• i L e REV. DATE BY TZ PVI STA a 1+39 I PVI STAi= 2+50 CL PVI ELEV 4. 215.05 PVI ELEVI= 221.31 n I I N > - N 230 c e D-44-111.09.5 i A-B. 4.16 +. ti i S "' Pi + K e 4.94 I 1 K a+43.01 ti ti a s ! 230- Q N m i F I 40.00 VC I I + m I E W _ N w __err N I W W I 4.43x _.11;......,-1111 l N. D 03 N !:i I E i - J 14 220 Fm m _ W I _ I -, P. m I I _j ?20- V Iii I — I I` d 1 -- '.95— -- i ti - • PROJECT O _2 --��• I Q • NUMBER DAL007 a �- -,..t___-_,(41_,........"-'--- �'i'r t I 1 _ Dam 2n&000T vi 1 i U - i 1 Scale: 1"=20 I i I p [ Drawn By. LNP 270 ' • sil I I € i - 270- Desisted By: LNP pI ! I! I i • Checked BY GM 1 I O1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6 PUBLIC EAST-WEST STREET.IMPROVEMENT PLAN C 5 . 3 _ .:, . 2 SCALE: 1" = 20' • • • NAME:G:IDAL0071DDIDAL007C61.dwg DATE:FEB 21,2007 TIME:3:26 PM lilt ill f i “ l v...15 :! I _1� ,.-.-171I 1 IIIWI �• -'\if Ilf .,i.I luau' :: t :��I �_,,=mil BE i- III- :- a IIE=I l I'; ono I'_ o 1 mini Ir. • �� •. •,4,:Fr,:. a a o�0❑ CI 9 ❑'0 0 0 HU 0ao0an ooIoo Edit. , y+.. �.RA:1f.L1'.CLt.. ..._. • i ;I :E� -._ 1_x I 1• 'I 1 ICI F, 3 �t 1 3 I d b"_ E� 1 II 1�� [>j _ ->,I 0 I _oil • • iI i 011 • • L -1- 1 I t -- 1 fEs I'I 11 € I - , 1r_., — . .. _ _ 1 _ • MOTE OAK•UAJT ,.CE OAK•UMT'9 • ..,.,s n . Ti". �oa 6a --- 1I 1°II I w 1 : '1' 1114 I `r mg..... i� 0'000; .L° ❑❑❑0 ❑�❑❑❑ 11:11; .� ❑000 Olt ❑i❑a❑ MIA. , 0000 ii%- urcT.u.u.L. ---_ I.nunnn. . • . • • y g� ( -I II/111' I i om :�1 I ■ I V - `�" _I`� ^K _ 1. o [11 I L �,r ' J'� �IIilLJ'I of 047 "s+I 11 Ill �I'-e.�� Ill . i 1r. � N __- ill _ --- :: :_ ___11.11_-_•(,),-,:t.- ._._..-_.._.__._.._. _ ...__. -- - — ill WORE OAS•OW E . WORE OAK.LNT A • 0 ! i i 3A I I WHITE OAK VILLAGE 4 Rte - co rn p o TIGARD, OR E.�` 4�A Nag E �� e s ARCHITECTURAL PLANS l��o�� • m Z r a n . , , , • • I . ' • 0 XREF 1.157 . . , Ltstatle:I PsItacele:I • D L - Resol.ml' K2 a D4L0070X50 S.WOE - DESIGN GROUP INC. - 1:141_007,01 • . 01.0-LOGO - ----- • "PEnrCTMAN PAM' - ------ itsrALL LOW I.Eq-1.UGH'C • 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. STAMP= 0 - i _ .._,-.---- ....-.-.-..----.. ....---...._. da1007,10 Suite 101 4111 UnnsoMml • LEGEND Portland,OR 97219 (503)225-1679 — ucHr POLE INSTALL LOW LEVEL UGNTING • . ID SIGN IsoPROlics GINee4, Z..,"°,+19160•. tr. • ' . • . ■ V41,71r . /4 EXPIRES 124147 J • 0. . .0 0 . . - _ - ____ - --- - - - --- - NO PARKING GN • INSTALL uaNT POLE _ p_ z .0111111MIIM111111 EINI ... : • .,......_ . ,.,.... ...,..„ . II -I ). 4— 1 w . .:: ..., , .....:......— _ . . . . 1 0 . z .00, INSTALL UGHT POLE (..0 o I ' Z — — 1 r... — .--_ ._ ..,. , • -Now , 4..,:g N PARKING SIGN —I ct F- 4r ... , . ,i'‘.z.1,....,,,,...,_ .. • .. 7.-‘ / t ' ''. _.,..,.....-• .' • ' Y,r, <cg _j- ., . -,•.., I_ I • 20' 10 20'0 20' II 0 : MEI 1M= Ni SCALE: 1.■.. I II I I •• •-.:I ' • .., •. • , . 1 NO PARKING SIGN 0 —— ,,- . I • . "..-- • • (.9 . a (I) ' .;,.. I I -•..• • I .,.! I . , ...z.,::. I , . • I • ,,,,. ._ 1 .....: SIVP SIGIVOVE wAr-DO NOT EN7fril R SIGN . • .. REV. DATE BY 1)PARKING SIGN :•:::. '-Os \ '''. ... 0_ INSTALL UGNT POLE . co \ c.NI , ■ .-, ,......... vi ---- --- .: -::ip0 IN1TALL uGHT POLE I CLi . . ...,-. -- I.= . ' — • . lwAILBOX CLUSTER I . . N. o o (NI 1 1 1 , , , • , , , co I I i 1 14 . ' . Li. • PROJECT ) NO PARKING SIGN " NUMBER DAL007 LI/ 1.— .;c 1 1 / t I Date 11A)6/08 I I 0 , I I I Sca1e: 1'gt 2cr I 1 I I ...: 1 "WM-OAK VILLAGE"SCN n. ,C \ •— I— I ,.., I -,1 Drawn By: 1ARC -• Deskjned By: 1ARC N. 0 49 ' - ---1-- 1 Checked By: GID 0 I . \\INI ' I ——; ,.. 0 .f •:.,:.: ■ F..- . o , I‘ ''::: 1— ---_. _ 1 . I LIGHTING PLAN ..:c C7 . 1 f .,_. • ..::-.".''...'''''' Cti sx . • . . . • 0 xRET 1.151 • - . • . lta-ple: 1 PoRscede:i I ' 9 I 0 0 . . • ft... • . • D L T4L0070X50 I •5**ix N 00°11'Odl-Ex944 —.— . DAL0070X60 225 230 - DESIGN GROUP INC. 041.007r01 N _ ---- . , REDESIRWLEADJ__. - --- ---°-- - --_, --- - — OLD-LOCO • V ' ,7; ea. --x A.'■••■•-• x,..... .....Z... .--..; 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. 6,1007,10 . V;ic••.a•fpiT44,:,..Z.J50.,...1.`.,..`-•rz•4••.a;,•,••••••,:,••• •=•=,•.•'.•-•••B;F:=.4.:•... 4.1-,•-:,..1•41;;•.„:;;,.• .,,`.T-2 "...:: ...=.711;A......,..Tial......S.7;:ia•=r-TiW..1::;:'•_1=.T.TAFfj.i.•,ot.9:1.RE5T... ..iaCf97.&SE•c......q.747,(1.,..',..-,c.;•:.,.:,,t,- • 41111.6.1007.10 .4 r....-'4A-t. T.:',...• OCt.4 ,--.-:4e-444.1. 1.,..-,.. ..1-Fi.;_,,ZecTIM•7.7.17,..; .0:,,,,..0,:toi,›y;.;,.*:„As. .,,,,,,..,lioziakz,„- ,, :fv,,,,oi:.v.. Portland,OR 97219 unresonad • In•...'•.-••••'.."•-....':::•:•,.-1-":::12;.:::,......Z.7:17...invtimpiqz. ..6.1-3u231:,..24c-k..:,, :.-5..as..,,..4ls..e. • (503)225-1679 1" . . N - S 00°11'00"W 4181.76' . ) 1 - - . .1 LANDSCAPE PLAN . C8.1 /" = 20' • . . . . . . . • .. ,,,.,, ■, ..., I / , , N .., I I . HOBBS&HOPKINS SEED MIXES PROPOSEDV4A77W SHRUB NET AREAS. F*O-nur 840 NA71W BIO-FILTER MIX P);OPOSED NATIVE TREE \ . MT AREAS:PRO-17ME 710 PDX PLUS I / , - 240 240 .....„—x—x— I ‘;V WLF f PROPOSED NAME 0 \ * * 0 I ITV GRASSES fTh _ - -------__ _ I ----* — •• _ --_ _. - • - -- -0 u • - - C:)•'• ,,,-■,._. ,X—. .___„--. ,j(—.—. —x—x x x—. .—.—— ... -- ‘,trtfr.-.7477.175-.0.7.,.......• '-------- ' - —-- .--,- --—-•-•-•220.0mgmmt.o.F.B.1-50...)w cOrirrr0,(0 1'- •# WI/ Mil --0777= 1:7)0731:7000110 cr co c)Gs 0 C5 A4111iiiIiped,o _ _ _ -v--,e111117 111511- 11111111111Millaill,S156/2126 °''''''' - 0 IQ-.=;;•:.%.•-/ - -, „vire/34. 6-='n,en-,,t-v.4.4y...-••••., ..e,..:::,...:77..... •:• ..!.,-::‘,.V.,,,..5.---v.,,-,,.,- .0'••-vr,r,30,..:wzc.,.:•e,s,.:-.4,,,,a..s.t,,p47-745,e31..,-,;>-,_ gow..,-,-; ::. 4:?, W res..e0.&A-*:-: •-,-,-,9•4•74Z,-iit="41,41-'went0;*42AN'41.0S-0.4f44°-''"c44-.K....):4:/ -4-,- •-•---e-'z'.....'- '-e.----ivlit4k/4,•4,4w44,4„tio- .1.":,..16,4•': ....-- I :VI!!,„:.•,'0.....AP:rif -,::...,....,,,v.)0 kowtoceta.4*ton,q!•?..,,,,-. A.v..4,- - .-. ..• x—x—x ctoi:,-..-"z•lok4:.4.4•,..ie:44.4 co,,-;=/-4.-.,... <,:;,...F....!-- kof-0.-6:::•,.....ydee,,,,,,,c.c....ife.....14;,..4%)..w.-, 7 Z tk.491454.4,;;•V*4S:15:114 -1, co 1W0.4.0:04t:',q,,iripMF .5. . 9 .antrf:',..S4.*14.tit,f,t 4iii 0 C 0, 0 • ' 46:: " ..e-a. , -.-1 ct — 0- APIO 4's",4%0 0 I: :..1—e-- 411..., 1 1.-4 9,1 ,e1 /111111111111P— 0 i, . I I I I I 1 '...'- c'44 ":';; . . *'' .4 V..Wo-Se.,<NfrA C9±5 rir..........1.. ,. I h - —i--___ 1 1 i i < o i■ ... 1 - .... illitek..,*:, 4,00 4W4t,f4Z = !, 0 . 1 953 :/ I •.4.41 .4;,"V:64..2. , Mi. 20' I0' 0 20' I . . III ... ...., -- SCALE: 1.A, 20 ) CO I' CA) 1: I' 1 I i I I I I I i I I I i I • I .., . . .. 1 17,4>. . :;s4/t.:4:;:..."<;;.....: %VW. ,,,•+.2.,,,,::'`.2.4,4•4“rpi a Z . •N) ii: 1 !;*f*: ,• S 00°21'15"W 162.47' \*,-.);:k..'-tA:::::, ):*,/,- ,......:::::;:ily:::::: ..."..v.,... 1 i: S 00°21'15"W 1 .• 00' 411' . ' 1 .4, ,•4 444A4CV::, 721 AIMXW•04,042.A,'•• il i) 4V i, 4.1"4011 ..v. 7 _ —4- - -Z-7- - '3.' I 4 'f a '.2*•*2f,44M01 — - II -i - /----7. -7 I") '14,4A..Y..ittilkati • 1 - I C . I '.. • . I „•11 • I I I I I I 1 . . • , ,...., ( ,, ::, ... , 1 I I • ,'..-.• • ..-, , , , , , , • , ,.. , Ill • . 542 -. ,.. I r- .. 1 • I I .- I I I I I I 1 1 • •' • . i 1 1 1 , 0 i I IC) 1 0 ... --.. •-,:-, ... , 1 FtEV. DATE BY I I a) r io' (0 ',..I,1 • \ .. :,.................... 01 0 0 I I° . (.. . I I ,, . .... i. z . I I ci. a, ,,...., ,..... ..., _ TREPPEE SERVE EXIS7ING OAK ,rIcs4 I . se I vi -4. 4Ik , z 1 I 01 • '1. _ • (.0 ;''''1' 0 = 0 0 IC) IC) c., 1 1 1 1 1 41 YkkAlk -n 1 - i, ____,---_ cf n) I 1 • I - I 1 1 1 1 1 1 4titis,4,-Whz3;;.4.,AN:W' _ u. ,, .-,.. <--.<..:: :---. ...--,.7 „,,,,--v I I • 1., __„... 1 v...44;i:4•;-<;-:•:- 1$1:M.44,•., N ' 250 PROJECT I I . •NUMBER DAL007 I .. R 0 i. i, i■ I (-) 1 . I 1 1 I I :7■"*.tif:YiligNita M''''.**Z-f• O **401$ ,c....+:4, •;VO..-11AP./....", Date: R.' 1 il I I I I I I o'f•1.4.1,MS;••:•:,:•:.• ..,....4>•:. ...4,:,•22.247.• eAlVixf•,.,,..4? II_ ..v .,........,......v.<••1,,,:te0,..2-avOLly. I I 44-••n.<,:•••,•••2:,),0-:•2:44*.,..71..... , t■ 'I) OCZ ,•;••••!,2.1$5%-!.,,VVY:•,V.,..,2.&e:•,'''. Drawn er MRC il 4:;:::::AV-::i.**:t::::::•:::"X.S..eye::;:•./. .sr, ' I i, __ _ _____________ _____ Demg.d By MRC 1::,....,•%...Z.,04,..-4:021::34W:N$• ".2- . ....,........_.-— • "ki - — _ - _L _ _ _ _ — — L - _ _ _ ,...0.0.0.......0...... 0.0SM C2COD(SjaCICLOW 0 o o.o.o 0 oo 0000 o.o.s.1)..o.o o o o.o•o.o.o olVrea.riftz.4.;,..Wociaol,tabi.,..re,i,ao o Checked By: GID -1.51:3 -,•:• 0 \ --I 250 ',.170 •••• 2 kr.' ..cp. ,, .,.... .,- _______ , LANDSCAPE PLAN 1 •S 00°24'35"W 185.48' I I' '-f:. cI 1 I 0- C8.1 1 = 20' I ''...: .. -..-... . ..-- 1111. . C 8 . 1 74TH AVENUE ITI •'- • -—--—--—--—--- • XREF Lbl • • LfxeM:1 PLANTING NOTES _ D C0070X50 WL - Dv.007DX60 I. CONTRACTOR TO REVD VERIFY LOCATION AND DEPTH Or ALL EXISTING UnU77£S AND 12. PLANTING BEDS TO BE MOUND TO A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 4'ABOVE CURB TO O4L0070x70 SITE CONDITIONS PREVENT STANDING WATER. „,0, DESIGN GROUP INC. DW-10G0 2. AFTER PLANING, ALL TREES TO RfCLEVE 2 I/2”OF MULCH 1J ROCK AND DEBRIS(LARGER THAN 2'IN DIAMETER)IN PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE - ill - * 07.10 REMOVED AND REPLACED INTH NA TI YE BACKRLL REASONABLY FREE OF STONES, 9045 SW Ba7bUT Blvd. doC10h20 J. PROVIDE QUALITY Or PLANT MA TERAL ON PLAN OR PLANT SCHEDULE, WHIcHfVER PLANTS, ROOTS STICKS AND OTHER FORGIEN MATERIALS Suite 101 u.=emA.e IS GREATER OR TO COVER AT SPECIFIED SPACING. Portland,OR 97219 14. ALL PLANING, NfIOH IS PART Or THIS PROJECT SHALL OCCUR IMMEDIATELY AFTER • 4. MEASUREMENTS CALIPER,•BRANCHING GRADING QUALITY, BALLING AND BURLAPPINC PAVING AND CURBS ARE IN PUCE. REMAINDER OF PLANTING SHALL BE DETERMINED (503)225-1679 SHALL FOLLOW THE AMERICAN STANDARD OF NURSERY STOCK BY THE AMERICAN ON A STREET Br STREET BASIS . ASSOOATIQN OF NURSERYMEN, LATEST EDITION. 15. PLANTING STRIPS TO BE H)DROS(£DED 1417)1 PRO-TILE 303 LAWN SEED MIX OR 5 ALL PLANT MATERIAL TO BE USED Ov THE PRO.ECT ARE TO BE APPROVED BY THE APPROVED EQUAL IMMEDIATELY AFTER TREES ARE PLANTED. OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 16. NO/RR/GATIOV IS PLANNED FOR PLANTING STRIP AND STREET 1R£ES O M ER IS . 6. THE PLANTED AREAS AND PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE MAINTAINED(INCLUDING RESPONSIBLE FOR CARE AND MAINTENANCE OF PLANTING SIRUP AND STREET TREES WATERING)AND GUARANTEED BY THE CONTRACTOR THROUGH CONSTRUCTION AND A AFTER COMPLETION Or WARRANTY PERIOD. 60 DAY ACCEPTANCE PERIOD AND GUARANTEED FOR OVE YEAR FROM THE TIME OF PROVISIONAL ACCEPTANCE Br THE OWNER " 7. .MAINTENANCE Of THE PLANTED AREAS THROUGH THE ACCEPTANCE PERIOD SHALL INCLUDE WATER/NG. PROTECTION FROM INSECTS OR DISEASE NEEDING, AND - PRUNING AS HELL AS REPLACEMENT Or ANY PLANTS WHICH APPEAR TO BE IN - DISTRESS DEFECTIVE MATERIAL AS DETERMINED BY 7HE OWNER SHALL BE REPLACED - " IMMEDIATELY WITH SPECIMENS OF THE SAME SPECIES AND SIZE AS WE ORIGINAL. WHEN INSTALLATION HAS BEEN ACCWPUSHED, SUBMIT TO THE OWNER A NRITTEN . - a REQUEST FOR FINAL INSPECTION.NOTIFICATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF ALL WORK WTLL BE MADE BY THE OWNER TO THE CONTRACTOR IN WRITING EXCLUSIVE OF THE • POSSIBLE REPLACEMENT OF PLANTS SUBJECT TO GUARANTEE, OR IF THERE ARE DEFICIENCIES Or THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETION. THE OWNER SHALL MAINTAIN AND WATER THE PLANT MATERIAL AS NECESSARY TO 9. MAINTAIN THE PLANTS IN A THRIVING OND/RON AFTER ACCEPTANCE. . - SOIL TESTS TO BE FRONDED BY CONTRACTOR AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE " . 10. SUBMITTED TO OWNER CONCERNING ANY SOIL AMENDMENTS OR FERTIUZATION . REQUIREMENTS DURING INSTALLATION, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER OF • 11. ANY CONOIRCYNS WHICH MAY BE HARMFUL TO PLANT LIFE SUCH AS POOR _ ' - - DRAINAGE,HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ETC THJE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL • MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO ADDRESS THE SPECIFIC SITUATION. I.T�1 In • 0 J 1— .-_1 cc W jO - a . Q Q Q • • Tree Protection Plan . , Required- - HEMDV6ILdU AIU DAMAGtl 0 I�— CO U . . . . • BRANCHES BY PRLNING ACCORDING TO RECOGNIZED L. Q . DO NOT CUT LEADER • 1. A Tree Protection Plan approved by the City shall be required prior to conducting any development activities inchiding,.but not limited to clearing,wading,excavation,or / demolition work on a property or site,which requires ministerial,minor,or major. ' • development approval._ • "" - ;;;", •.;- -• 2.• In order to obtain approval_of.a.Tree Protection Plan;an applicant shall•submit a • plan to the City,which clearly depicts all-trees to be,prese'ed on the site. The•plan must be drawn to scale and include the following--, -:-..t s;,: a a.- Location,species,and diameter of each tree on site and within 15 feet oldie• RIEBER tip� D • site; • " - " " s GALVANIZE WIFE. b. Location of the drip line of each tree; -• " • • c. Location of existing and proposed roads,water,sanitary and storm sewer, • irrigation,and other utility lines/facilities and easements; - two STAKES PER TREE • d. Location of dry wells and soakage benches; - - ` • . --e.. Location of proposed and existing'structures; " ' - - 1 _ f. Grade change or cut and fill during of afterewnstrTrction; " i _ FINonISHEnDGFRomRADEsinGF PAId WAY•g Exi.Sting and proposed impervious surfacac: ,ENACT,HEIGhT(MIN.6') I wAlx 10 an•' h. Identification of a contact person and/or certified arborist who will be STREET TREE(MIN.HZ CALIPER) REV. DATE BY Z responsible for implementing and maintaining the approved tree protection plan;and • " J� SET CROW OF ROOT BALL AT FIMShED GRADE i. Location and type of tree protection measures to be installed per City ITEMOVF BURLAP FROM TOP requirements." ' ":i.: ;,;. - its OF BILL _ I MUCH:BAIL OR WOttOMPS(MIN.s') • 3. For minor,or major development,'the Tree-Protection Plan shall be prepared by a - gcertified arborist and shall include an inventory of all trees on site,their health or hazard = CREATE SOT.SAUCER BOTH TOP501(nW.Al ' condition.and recommendations for treatment for each tree. �I SIDEWALK K. li �!�i1= S 11=1-11=71- N ROAD !x,-11 I-11.=,...—,..—,�u—.,e ..1 11..11=11.=11= X r. IF_ i ,97.7,-P..17". 1111—.11`.11-11 I. —L=.11.=11-11.=1L JI II„IL=,.11.,E R SOIL W 11=1L==Jl: -'1=11= II=.if_II-I1 q •is .1111.=.11;_1.1=.11F.11=11#11 1 . lr it milf=1I°II • ” ROOT BOLL NUMBER DAL007 O =gir11:irirn nilit irii 11".=11 ni=l 1[ F. PROJECT =fl.lr=.u.=.11=i=.n=n=1r-11 a I x.11=�1:n=1l!I 1=1r JI"" COMPACT 9ES01 TO ECM PEDESTAL TT—Tr—n Dalc TO PREVENT SETTLING Scala: )'=20' n. • Drawn BY- MRC DOVE STMES INTO O O UIDIS1LI EED SU3S01 Designed By: AMC O - (12'MIN.) R Checked BY. GID O J Q W C 8 • 2 c.., .• . . . . Z • . �0 s� 4'BLACK VINYL NATIVVE WAATER QUAL TYRMIX 4 DS MEADOW MIX alpha CHAINLINK FENCE .o COMMUNITY 'ice,. � IIII.•• i isl i- W,fir•,•�•a,A iii tiro. . _' � r• *' evc.:,,-.. 1o2 T 7 '��'�1�'`7 4 7 DEVELOPMENT 5'WIDE PERVIOUS 4'SLACK VINYL PEDESTRIAN PATH CHAINLINK FENCE 5'WIDE PERVIOUS OVERSEER WITH SUM/ARK SEEDS 4'MASONRY WALL 6'WOOD FENCE PEDESTRIAN PATH NATIVE WATER QUALITY MIX AND MEADOW MIX 4 r7 Am' -- - — - — .wArPifO�.[� jeT'^•.P.,6x.T'''' 901-.- _-...IMF 2.,a..l•\C-• .Y4,...977....'-Z a\\\.�i::::':;7Ya:_-- -.1!11!2...,,`..�\Q 4.Y, \.. .. U ��, Pi �� P�_ 9� 1 .YOG L-i'1'Y,a',%;� \\C.a.B � I titi• �Af / - - w .t..::,..'.:?" ! LOT 2B CHAINLINK FENCE '�� 'R �l- m. �.., ",,,I.L _.- _ ,��y� ..�� .�� t��l „ „ I9. 6 i EmA '.BL � : ( ,1111111`�t ;�I 1 I I I I I I 1 ..._:' LOT 27 ' LOT 24 i �:•.Ø4'- ` Z 4 re„ _ _ _.___ • .oT 23 Lor 22 Lor 2r cor 20 for1s Lor la ca> O LLJ I CL STRET TREE 3 Q- O. O C7 (n .• -GALLERY O PEAR ,.;i!' `,� I H I` SUNMARK SEEDS LLJ Z I NATIVE DECIDUOUS TREE .! !!! I PRAIRIE MIX I- _ Z 0 -ALDER DI I I I I I I I TREE PROTECTION Q -DOGWOOD ,!l► FENCE. SEE PAGE 4 -SERVICEBERRY 4ll/ I I III OF HALSTEADS TREE -VINE MAPLE lull', LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT!O LOT!! LOT 12 LOT 13 LOT 14 LOT 15 1 REPORT. NATIVE EVERGREEN TREE Iry��ICI 0 -DOUGLAS FIR sr I I I 1 I I I ill I -NOGNS CEDAR ��lddd -INCENSE CEDAR TRACT E \∎ I -WESTERN RED CEDAR ,r \ • t a ORNAMENTAL TREE ,�e, , CFA to .•. .•. .•,1 .•, II',' I I -DOGWOOD \ © r ' . A' � n . - �r�. � la , -FLOWERING CHERRY - -FLOWERING CRABAPPLE \ ,\` I -STEWARTIA EVERGREEN SCREEN TREES C1 -CANADIAN HEMLOCK •-- - I .i `_� I REV. DATE BY -IRISH YEW '* +�� -ARBORVITAE •,t=:,.m o NATIVE SHRUB I y�i e—® -�.4's .4-,...j,]` \• �..II) -RED TWIG ADOGWOOD I I I I I I I�� — W' 1::%% P I 6'MASONRY WALL t' I -RED FLOWERING CURRANT - i III I -ROSE LOT 7 LOT 6 LOT 5 LOT 4 LOT LOT 2 LOT r -SNOWBERRY 20' r0' 0 20'3 -SPIRAEA I I I I I I I TRACT D-PARK I i iI e ORNAMENTAL SHRUB I I I I I I I - w I I SCALE 1-.20' -FIRETHORN d I I FORSYTHIA - vi / -JAEPANESE HOLLY ��•E�;!\ E;• E\ .� f�la1�' -RHODODENRON _($,�::I . i 7 7∎\�i�4�eI� p �'.,r.',I� ,WF�JW�1 I __ !off�J\i§C' _ , PROJECT -SPIRAEA "° '�• ' �'!j, - , NUMBER DAL007 m ORNAMENTAL GRASS •" PROPOSED ENTRY �� ':, \� I Date MONUMENTATION -FOUNTAIN GRASS 6'SOLID WOOD FENCE \ )� `�-1- Scale: -TUFTED HAIR GRASS I I I - — ® I I >. I Drawl By GROUNDGOVER I -CRS=PING MAHONIA I \ .�'<•t, I Designed By' -BEARBERRY I 74TH A VE • Checked By LAWN I I \ .ti- r5`'-. I L - - - 1 ® GRASS MIX I --1 -SUNMARK SEEDS NATIVE WATER QUALITY MIX(BET AREA OVERFEED) I -SUNMARK SEEDS MEADOW MIX(DRY AREA OVERSEED) Ll -SUNMARK SEEDS PRAIRIE MIX(UNDER OAK) XREF UST Ltscvfe: 1 Fs1tca le: t e., Resolved WHITE OAK VILLAGE .. RECEIVED MAR 2 1 GROUP INC. DAL007x01 2007 DEIGN :,,' OLD—LOGO sTAMPOID GON CITY rIGAI D 9045 SW Barber Blvd. i! daIOO7x 10 PLANNf NG/ENGINEERING 9 Suite 101 Unread Portland, OR 97219 SW I / 4 SEC 36 9 TW P • 1 S 9 R I W , W . M • (503) 225-1679 i e ,, 41� w Hv : �tt P R in.S�,� G I x,g '`$O : ---- "0 ; N 0.4..., 4 19160 "cr 1:ter, :`,,,,.. : ?Ipost .:,, ..,... ,K�. .<. .. , ._.. __, , ..�-,r_..>.Ar., , ,., .gin _�. ,�.! st,,,' ' 3., ' t,, " '4:',.;' ''''' I 44. 1 .,.wv,..H<!Nv"Pc .. ;,r.:.3::.r.i3 .iro2,3.i SF„ e F ._� 'H ivi:. ,..T s +, - �; i 41,::4'....." .,ril: 1 I I ~ V .,. :•'?s,r .,v .ty mxia'3 ,.Eaa.2 i h''a at^.vs 'Yda i v,. 1r :' EXPIRES 12-3i-Q7, , , ,,,, ,- „4: 1 11141111 II',, *4 , t WEI iii Ake I k kY„t'-' ,_A'lx.�"' S.-.,t , ... KS+' ;4 � max.:..x,� ‘,,,,__,I, 1':':*,:::. <, k, , x ,- ,. - � „gam�T!Is ` ,..-; f, ,.,c , i-.� ' ,�. �; �. � .-: =, Vie gx„. � >,�� . .'.,V..�.,.' .a2 T.. rye i+ SS- L < ,,',. —IR kivia , ...„ 0 1 i _ a a -,:i , . g , rr , fit , 2 "fie''''''' ' . ,, xs- , , fAE:c;I ,,,,,.. ,,- g ,,,,,i,,, ,. . 3 h x. fir^ it § . ,q ; ..-. , ,,. ,setp, . . 1 t � yt i^ U' 9 ,�.� `3 a t” „ $�: yk h i 1.1.1 1 col � ` ; ... _.. ,., . _. , ..„,. . . ,.. ,, 4,,,,, , , ,„. ., , :, _ - ,143.0. (.9 , .. g °:-,,, ,,,,,,-, , ..:&4tv At St , , ,, , 00-'° i.14' I-- • , :(,,,,,,, , ,' , - . .., , „,.., ', fur iiiii t ,„, .,.. , -,-- - ' ,, 11.1 : 3 tt �. iy' UJ ,i, .1 x �'' ^x=.4,:.. ytOr ,- et".i, h�yws?.im gt. Ei2`YC x_„ ,, . 1 .., > 0 I , ,itik_ ,-„, - , - ,„....„.47-, , ,, _,,, ,, ; „„,.. , , J , ., .400 , ,,,, .4? : "1”" ' 1. 2 „,: ,,fic.r) „Iv," -'-: „, , ', i' wu , ° at . 1 --, , -,N r, - 11��11 .t. . . „1/4„,,,,,,,,, -,,,, _,,,. 7 '‘,., ,' , .., , ,., ; S I '44.4 CI r, .. , efo',174' ,•,, , -.-,, : --.,,,,,, ,, , st i,,,A.' -,-., -it ,,,-' ,.,. <( § i.,,,,...„0 --- SW DartiYtouth - -�.. > J 4 9 , WE- 0 i $I ;X,x 4 9„, ,.: ,, iiia - ,,,: sik4 :. __,,41,,,,,,,., - ,, , St ; , ,,.! a 29,,,,,7 1 I ''* .,, jrilt N 1 : — , I -a. -_, _o , t, - Z 1 1 w � i :4":::' , ,,, , ,, VICINITY MAP ,„ , , � . ,, 1 " = 600' i M. 1 . ? { GENERAL NOTES IXIr 4 „ , 1 1. ALL G'ONSTRUC71ON SHALL CONFORM TO CURRENT STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS t TY OF S N ry' DI T7ONS OF APPROVAL, UNIFORM BUILDING CODE APPENDIX 11 ' CLEAN WA 1Rf � COVV t., CHAPTER 33 EXCA VA T IO�VN AND GRADING, THE AGREEMENT ALLOWING DEVELOPER TO CONSTRUCT �', PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, AND 711E OREGON SPECIALTY PLUMBING CODE SEE SPEC/PICA TIGNNS ., A �` o R E P R E S E N T A T I V E PROVIDED. 9 ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2. THE EXCA VA TO? MUST COMPLY WTH ALL PROVISIONS O ORS 757 541 TO 757 571, INCLUDING r NOTIFRCA770W OF ALL OWNERS OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AT LEAST 48 HOURS, BUT NOT MORE l REV. DATE BY 9200 SW NIMBUS AVENUE THAN 10 BUSINESS DAYS, BEFORE CCM�tMENCING ANY EXCA VA TI'ON. BEAVER TON OR 97008 SCALE: 1 ''=60' , 112/27/061 GID 503 45,2—$003 3. TIME CCN�l TRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTROLLING SEDIMENT TRANSPORT WITHIN THE PRCI CT LIMITS, USING RECOGNIZED METHODS FOR EROSION CONTROL AS APPROVED BY WASHINGTON Z ,12/1 9/07 ILHP COMITY'. • 4 THE CONTRACTOR IS TO LEAVE THE PROJECT FREE OF DEBRIS AND UNUSED MATERIALS UPON SHEE7-- I COMPLETION. ° O W E THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION Cr THE UT7LITY SYSTEMS SUCH AS POOR, TELEPHONE, GAS CABLE TV, ETC, WITH EACH INDIVIDUAL UTILITY COMPANY, PRIOR TO I I WHI1E OAK V�'LLAGE, LLC. 5. CO COVE? SHEET 7955 SW HALL BLVD. FINAL INSTALLATION OF THE SYSTEMS BEA VERTON, OR 97008 s THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AND PROTECT EXISTING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITY LINES C1. 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS' AND OTHER PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL PUBLIC PROPERTY TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION UPON COMPLETION OF WOit?K. C1.2 TREE SURVEY 7, TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL METHODS MUST REMAIN IN PLACE AND BE MAINTAINED UNTIL C2. 1 S17E PLAN PROJECT P ANENT EROSION CONTROL METHODS ARE IN PLACE AND OPERA T1ONAL, NUMBER DAL©07 () LAND S U R V E Y O R 8. ALL AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL SHALL BE STRIPPED OF ALL VEGETATION AND OTHER DELETERIOUS C2.2 TYPICAL STREET SECTION Date: 11/06/0C W MATT RIALS. ALL SUCH MATERIALS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM SITE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S C,�'., TENTA 17�VE PLAT DAVID FOSTER SURVEYING EASE'. Scale: AS NOTED i 70$ NE 238TH PLACE WOOD VILLAGE, OR 97060 9. ALL NONMETALLIC SANITARY AND STOV?M SEWER SERVICE LATERAL PIPING SHALL HAVE AN C3. 1 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN ,� ELECTRICALLY C�QVNDUCTII� INSULATED 12 GA. GREEN COPPER TRACER .WIRE' THE FULL LENGTH OF Drawn By DTT w (503) 997--1100 THE INSTALLED PIPE PUBLIC LATERALS ARE TO HAVE MAG iET 1C TAPE BURIED 18" ABOVE PIPE, C3.2 EROSION CONTROL NOTES & DETAILS `` CONTACT DA V1 D FOSTER AND LABELED SEWER OR STORM. Designed By: GID Q MAD V4THOUT PRIOR PERMISSION OF C4. 1 PRELIMINARY tU TILI TY PLAN sE a 10. NO MATERIAL .SUBST MI T IONS OR DESIGNN CHANG ES SHALL BE E Checked By: GID THE ENGINEER AND WAS iGTON CXXAITY. C5. 1 ACCESS PLAN g t I V I L ENGINEER 11. A FULL SET OF THE APPROVED PLANS tTH ALL CURRENT REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS SHALL BE cl DL DESIGN GROUP, INC. MAINTAINED ON THE SITE AT ALL TIMES DURING COINSTRUCTIOVN. C5.2 ,EAST—HST STREET PLAN O 9045 S. W. BARBUR BLVD, SUITE 101 12 ALL FILL WITHIN THE BUILDING ENVELOPES SHALL BE PLACED IN 12" LIFTS AND SHALL BE C5.3 EAST—SST STREET PROFILE % PORTLAND, OR 97219 COMPACTED TO AASHTO 95% DENSITY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EMPLOY A GEOTECHNICAL CO a _ ENGINEER TO TEST ALL FILLED LOTS, TEST REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE COUNTY AND C6. 1 ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SO3 225 1679 / FAX ('503) 246--2194 TO THE ENGINEER. w CONTACT. GARY DARLING P.E. C7. 1 SIGNING AND LIGHTING PLAN . 1 XREF LIST 1 ID 1' Ltscole: 1 Pvitsca le: 1 Resolved i CAL' 007x01 DID–LOGO , / , ....___. do1007x1 1 \ s,----- --- .....— – - -- / ,./'----- ____– ----\ DESIGN GROUP INC, Unsold -,, N N , –__. 1 r`--No, 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. \ \ 7. „...------=-1/4 ____, * , -....40, ,...._............._ --. ,....\------ X=-- \ \ tIl it 9 i■ ---- \414ii- i .... N ...., ilY.• ' ...1 ....Fr., * i ..., "'It , , .. " . .-----. '''> rm.. --- -.. ..„*... ..., ^". ------- -......... .....—...-. -.---... ........--. ....,,,_.,_ „....... ......■ - - --"""".'..".. ."'''..."""* Ba•••■•*Z.0...-** ---*--* --"--- " . '72i 4';" ilaiMilie-'7: **-.."''' - ,_ -....m...7.7' -- .4,..; ,...;...--....;.................... „.„,......... ________ ......._____ „.........=*::::_,==.7......7*;r.....:::=......=_. * ,../7 r................., ............... ...._::.............::.........................z. ___,..,..... ......„. .."'-.-." - , ,....*..........-7.--,..„7..............:".'"'"'"' ' -- al / ---, \ \ / , 7.......-..04777"7...,..„ k, / ,,,, ;*. "----- --- 7"-- ""'--.. 77..Z. ----**':-..":":17.----* -..."..*""'..-....- .1.7"'":""'".......- — ......-....- ."--- 7...,. '..-- --. - -7- -4-- -.7--' ----;- -----= ,,,.=---- . ---: --7-_,., *4'1 -----,_2 — -_77- ..- ,...- *N. ., , i--- — —am ...„.„.....:74677,/II. .... . - ..... _ ...7._. ,.._____:___ ......___ ._..., _.z....._:, _____ ,,, .., _I--- 77:— ---%-----::—— — 1 1 .41 , "f- osi. IMO 41111101;101.1111•111110111111 .4 . .... ie.» 114'''...;•.■ ....■ --lir- -- ----* „: , ----- ,,, ------ ,,----- L.....7: _____ --, :,-,'"..."./' \..- (iie / 1/ ...... ,.....— ----... ...............--.-...... "".... '''' 311 — C \ \ '''ti Suite 101 Portland, OR 97219 , (503) 225-1679 „ – ,----- ,...1.:: ------ .. e ...‘ r ----- _ L--- — / ,-, ...."N/ -,:. *1 ,--„, 16 \r--" \------ 4k,--' r , , .,..._ ...... ,._/ _ , / -,.. .....„... ,. ...._ _ , , Cl) i _, / „„.. _ _ ..... ,„. „- ., , \ co \ tp co ,57 \.„- .., ,-k oi 4.6 ..„.. •..-• 7 ,7- ,,--- 7- I " . ___ 4,..........L.s......04,,-,„,...x . , — ..... , , - \ S 0011,60B W 41 7.\. 1 2 .- (1 \ / _„ / z. ,----- 1 x ,r, : 1 • cx) \ so / // 1144' -,...........--- /- -). _ --- ,---' " , „----- --- / /, ry. / „--- „z .7-- ,e -",--. --. /-. „- -- , j - --, 9 0 , ....1 \ I r` ,- / 1.335 ACRES ,..- ,, TAX LOT4.700- \ o 6 \ „,- ,, ,7 „..--- „,--- ., ,p -_,\ 1 , / ,---- / ... /- / m ,. NN, / ....a, / $.'” I .,' /. ..-...---' „e / r / 0 ,,,/' , ! / 0 6- 3,,...z,_ Tr P?-1/0 \\\ \ ( d., ( '" Jr( ,// /,,,, / Ni, * co I / ---- ,...." ..-- ,..- --_,.._ ----- .,,, , .., „„, / ; /// ,.. 7 / / '■ ./ L. bo P ,si ile-- / z . „-- /NN> - 0 \ ,/ -.,4\1 , ./ - ix. \ 0 cP \ (/ Vili( aNk S 0002115 CV .1 ''''/ - -- -- — --- -- / v „.„---- r S 00°2111V-W-162:-47` - \\.. ____ — - K2 -9 \ 40' ,--- / /- , \ ) , z .-7- e .4 , . --- . , ...---- - • _ . ....._ ---- 1 "-- -- - ---- MIMI/.• ■MettIO t\\\\'"'"..... .a0010. .110.1• 4.0.01■ WINNOW =MOM WON. ••■•■ M.A0 41k1.0.1• MOW. ,1 ••••••1 WNW , *".•,- • ..... ,'''''''' ''' ....,_.....,,,-....... ,,...-- \ ..... ...._ ,..„---- - ../— „--/ 1 \f NVS NS r MAW .020 190.68' NVS 0 NVOSUNI040M4 0.03.34V4 NVS NVS \ N k ---771-1 N V 1* 1 , ," / I / f Af/ It I I \ --, / , ,----- 7 ■ , \ -,,„... I, i ,,-- ,,,„ .......—04—_..............„-—_., ,, I/ / . \ \ kP -94, \ \ ..„„ ----„, ‘ 1 Ii." - 7 co, 101 f P 8 t I Z 'Z' 't'i 5 ''' ,'1/ .°* ___— / , z' / zry. ----- .„------1 / \ \ 9 ,..-- .•/ ._, .,'/ kr , ,,, [ / 1,-i OS -71.052 ACRES „- Ali, \ -4 „,--4 i ■ X X X Is. -- /7 co I r-- r-- ro- \ \ \ k N c3 - . 1.---- f`-' •„- r-- 0 .- -- I / / Z7 '/' 7 r./. ,- ---- , \ - ....,, - ......._ ............ ..,--. -7' / 5' r 1 m ; / ii/ 0 0 to —us 0 -us 0 —us t ...... ...4 ..00, ....4 ...di ( D i • ,,, ' , 0) a 8 8 § § ki co /1/i ,- .........- ill in \ I\ \ . ..„.-. .......- ----- — ....___. ......- .... t , / i L _ 0 z ... , , _ ..... ................__. I ........_ \ ...... / ..._ / __ __ __--- , f -- / ...._...... ............- ---- 041g .......'.."' ..............—•■•••10 ' • i ,./.10 \ ''' N'.• / — / I ..................... .-- -..... -..........-- I- -.... ..--..--...... -.- ....... \ 44 ... \ .,... IC-"-- ,) 1 \ --_,„ , _ ..--......--................., S 00(24135"W 185.48' 1 .., ' ' , . , ,, / --- —SeNcr ---(7---, Nr.,..E . A o. ,7Z-NN — SAN tiN SAN SAN --C-- SAN AN \ P -7 ,., 4, ' - 8" UNKNOWN 0.004 273.17 8" UNKNOWN 0.004 win-I rt \40) V.34.. \\ x ----- --\\ S W. 74TH AVENUE > 0 Z / _ 0 1 1 0 0 \ ti;,,,s -4,•0 \.:,:j., "ro \ -11 5( z_ I < < 0 \ ki \ dl d? \ 0 Nh.ai TAX LOT 2500 1 0 0 0 \ 1 d) 4,*-- \sr- \ *-1 . sc 0 ii N5-. i 01 * 1 , W I-- 4' H 1"-"' co 14, A.) "el ."1 ""1 '`.1 1%1 Is Is )6. sic I ....... \ \ kp \ _ ....._ 0 I x r-- 0 X 1-- 0 t k 0 I -1 >< ri- r-- 40 *-1 X 111* \ \ 1 Ka /a, rill, .46 \ \\ \ ......1_. 1 § \ 1 1 1-7 ' .------ ..... ...... ...... s 00-24.35"w 1400.00. \ 1 _ ........ Omalms. ■■■■■•■• ••■•011111n1.1■10111a1IM •••••■• ...... ...a. t121 \ \ \ \ \CP\ 416.0,..,4z. SURVEYED FOR: , , n„,.,,\ TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WHITE OAK VILLAGE, LLC. \ \1/4...v \ tre 5r,,„ WASHINGTON COUNTY 7955 SW HALL BLVD. REV. DATE BY ,- BEAVERTON, OREGON 9o26 X LOTS 19136CA01700 & 1,9136DB01000, ,..a. Z TA LOCATED IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, I \ \ \ , -9 \,,, Z RANGE 1 WEST WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, f WASHINGTON COUNTY CIT Y OF TIGARD, OREGON SURVEYED BY:. I FOSTER SURVEYING, INC I ''..' \ 708 NE 238TH PLACE WOOD 14LIAGE, OREGON 97060 \ \ 0 or SANITARY MANHOLE DATE OF SURVEYMARCH, 2006 503-667-830Z 503-997-1100 1 TELEPHONE POLE 40' 20' 0 40' \ • CATCH BASIN I !!!siiern \ I;' LUMINAIRE c REGISTERED .....\ SCALE r .0, POWER POLE= 40' VERTICAL DATUM:CITY OF TIGARD BASS CAP NUMBER 36, IN CURB, PROFESSIONAL I GUY WIRE NE 78TH AVENUE AND PFAFFLE STREET, = ELEVATION 229,75' LAND SURVEYOR PROJECT NUMBER DAL007 GAS VALVE 4i zt FIRE HYDRANT OREGON Date: 11/06/06 r:. DECEMBER 16, 1980 kil 6 WATER METER DAVID A. FOSTER 1934 I &ate: 1"=40' RENEWED THRU 12/31/2006 Drawn By: OTT 03 lil 4. tii Designed By: GID -r ci t Checked By: GID k) 2 8 CI K 2 4 ."6 C 1 • 1 Z 4 ___ CiLtsccvle: 1 I�: 1 � 1 TREE ASSESSMENT R Resolved r:::i la2LODTx01 TREES UNDER 12" 31 NEIGHBORING TREES = 9 x } OLD--LOGO it ST, � TREE NUMBER: TREE NUMBER. . DE T. Unresolved 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18N,22N,24N, 4ONA, 40N8, 4ONC, 4OND, 4ONE n. , ., ,{ . a ti ma) 904SW rbeBlvd. 18,21 25,26,27,28, 30, 31, 32,33 34 36, 38 39, AND 4ONF 1 c ' ,� � � �. sue 101 40, 41 AND 43. as --1 "` PoandR 919 ' c l� a �' i • 03) -169 2 (.0 2 . 0 0) 0 "-fp:, M 0 ss._,_t_._._____jr,„240 TREES OVER 12" ((HAZARDOUS) = ii NEIGHBORING HAZARDOUS TREE. = 15 - c TREE NUMBER: TREE NUMBER: ( 0 0) o .4, —1 06 14 17 20,2 2 23,24,29, 35, 37 AND 42 08N, 11 NA, 1 I NS,21 NA,2?NB,21 NC, 21 ND,: � t � � � � ts0 21NE, 21 NF, 44N, 45N, 46N, 47N, 48N, AND > . .P'RESER VABLE TREE -- 1 * G T NUMBER;1 19 EXPIRES 12-31-07 NO TE• SEE TREE ASSESSMENT REPOR T ' , FJR THOROUGH TREE ANAL YSIS.N■,, -----,..„_,_ ----7 ----,__,„_._._._____t_L____::._. 0 _0 46- a * i a 2 . , , Ar * ., :..siceti ._ _ _ ,......___ el zi i -----* ' -■ste.......".. 0: le""----------..___----..- .' / 1 yr. >.rwr,r�. fie, +.. +t i ...�+www.._w. ......,..._.. ' ! ; .w...w� .w � mow' � "----• t' r'rwm....r 411111111111.11" '1111111111111111111110111111111111 ........... 11111111111111111116 fr -.•---71\O � " '''rte (Q 5 1 11 W 41 : 7• O ti "�erf co g41' / ---- .1 5 0 67 e) _ rri ♦co ___B < t. (f) (...) •ti s V�.1�p4_ , •t , h i _ jea64.--A 6 A el _ e W I= I'd it - - 1 I '' N H I ....._______________ � '�5 a ~`~ 6 ftL (23' - 6 1' mato fill -''''-'' '*-.-'' '''•-.,„A l"t irk Sig / \ I 1 "It •. 0 . , yeti ' = 0 0 is„,,,,,..„..7+„r � 11 a 7 , • a ‘ir..... 0 iis, r ii ,, / e/t,,,,,e)-€4 250--- /94711:1 /4,-1° ---------------'- .--~'"_ � REV. DATE BY -- j ii„,„, , , olk aisk_ or-- (1)-- -:.et-c6z7"--1 Cl) c, . ***S.0.4 0.,-"Gt -e) - ' -'w ., . --- - ...... 43, (1)---- t.) ® tr(3) tt1 •e. 4, it S 00024'359W 185.4$' •.. , -...INNINIIIIIIIIIIIIrk t..cs, . 0 l \S. W. AVENUE ...._, r. \ 41.............. PROJECT a Z NUMBER DAL007 cti Date: 11/06/06 di i89 ..—p 0 * 4 ,P a l *_ t Scale: 1 -30 m .. Drawn By: KRF til *1.. * 21 O i i 11 '' 8 Designed By: KRF irn 5>1 Checked By: GlD I h K 6 r<7. ;5.,1 -0 5-3 512 o 2'<' cli 11*°' M prnco AK --# SCALE 1 =30 r (tic al CJ rlmsllrnlmmalaillaalimimil cti JO 15 Z5 0 JO m ' INN — _ ,. ..---'\ C 1 • 2 1 z 4 XREF LIST t Ltscale: 1 PSItscakt: 1 Resolved 1141.007DX50 124L007x01 kflity OLD—LOGO —fr• DESIGN GROUP INC, srAmpGID 011111111 da1007X 1 0 MIIII010100.111111111111r ,1111/1111114111111111111W 41111011•41114‘ ■4111111.1111111 • 411111111.1. 9045 SW Barbur Blvd Unossolved 4.0 ‘4, ‘4, 4-• tan 4• sZ• 4, ‘4, ‘t" ‘11, g, • Suite 101 40,/eN -4, -4" 4, 4' . 4' 4, \‘‘ 4, 4' 4) 1, '4/ s4' k e a• " . Portland, OR 97219 • frissialo (503) 225-1679 .. •.. . . . • PROfts. SITE PLAN 191N 60 4,P hc 1 " = 20' c . 4•t` N 15, VA% Cl/ 4„ ' is DIkIt‘' 4h I I EXPIRES 12-31-07 I .A . Aim SEIM 01.1110 .. 0011110 1101111111111.111111111111111111101111111111111111111111111111111 4k S MOM 41.111.11111111101111.1111111.1111.1.0.1. .4444 4111111P421 741111V1 • • '*•''*42.:•.**, ;• ' • 444; s. .;4.* ••■••. . 4-4.* * 44 ,4! .t. WA7ER QUALITY ACCESS PARK' .1 to r.) f NOM 0111•011110•1111111111•1111111111111111111111111111101111 OMNI anumIr 7RACT A 1 (01 ulluI •' ' ; t: :4 . Cr) •• . . (44 1 . "A " .• • • (.1 1***" . .• 24.00' , ••■••■•• ONI•■• 4111••••• *M. "44 %115? LOT 24 I • 1 • . . CZ, - "fti t9 Ni) .. .• TRACT C (.4 F.) op :1 46.00' 61. > LOT 25 .; , • r 20 • , . 14:t < 0 s., - - - WON. .11110.. *MIMI .10•11B 01111000 • 0 .•. 0 2 .50' •=11001■001011.111M 41111.011101.1111••■•• ONSIONIO • o IMO 4111111111111! S AMMO IMOD . 410c c I . 1, IEF7 1 • I •.• • r- : J .,.. *-1 \I I ;pc 00 . 0 # # • C*) 164 "Oh. (71 • .•.• •. • . UMW 1111111111111111 1 11 tum . IMF I RFUIGTUHTREOF wAy 35.50'- 0 ,,B PiP 414A°1111111.1." .. 0 • .f • • • • • • . • • • • • ■ •• • •* 2)- • .*'• ',* • • 1 1 • . - ••, .:- • - • , , • '• • ••• •• .• , , •• .• •*.; •c' " • • . • . .;• •.-• •• ": A I I I I . •• . . • . „ 20' 10' 0 20' \■ r\.) (.11 . •0 0 SCALE 1" = 20' TRACT I.:3 1 1 I s=s=o==m=A==s==u==T +==rg=uiv . •- .8 At c:1 REV. DATE BY Al 1 2/27/061GID .1 Al 249/07 I LHP I 3 1 1 1 1 I I I • I r— r— r— r- 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 "wal "41 "14 I 41 ."41 (31 44. r\) •rne.41, %""I 1 .41.00 / 011111•110 •=10110 4114.1* ONIIMOO 011111•11•■ •NIONIM 4•11111111M •■■■■■•• OMNI. ammo. •■■■■• all■•■• 41111.111. aw.M. 0 omisa.magfaiml 01411111081111 411111111/1111111 41111111/1111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111.MINIM IfINMINEMONMINMONINO 41111111611.111=111110 01111111111111.■41111M1111 *NO OEM 1111111111111111111.1111111111111111111/111111111 *MO SWIM 111111111110 1111111111•0111110111111111110111111•••■ 01111110 MIN PROJECT NUMBER DAL007 Date: 11/06/06 1 ••1:57 \I • • ••••••* Scale: 1"=20' 1 I csi C tt1 Drawn By: DTT Lt. , •. . r• (31 c;)S w 74TH AvE Designed By: G1D ItC • , •, , .", Checked By GID — — •■•••110 ••••••• MIMEO • • 8 SITE PLAN C2 1 1 " - 20' • 1 XREF LAT.= Ltsca/e: 1 Psltscala: l ,,-^-,."'._.--v-'...N,r .s-, '—-v' - .\.,- ---.,`fir....-_-\/--",,,-.,/---.\, ---1� r- Resolved .------/ �� t-� TRACT `��_�. _--�.��-� `\.---�!D.4L007DX PL LINE PL \ cL 1 25.5 - 29. 17 �— __c-� DESIGN CROUP INC. iii sr c�Q ---- 3.67 I da1007X 1 t? 4.5 -`` ` --- 4.5' --- - \ ..(' ,' \,.. ' r , �,� 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. t 10 0 10.0 . Unresolved E7 �.,, 10.o „ „ o.o ,� , .r----' I Suite 101 r �`\, �' " 6" CURB .... � ? Portland, OR 97219 ii ,�. 6 CURB 6 CURB �� _ � 6 CURB 1( ......................................................................................... —II 1 (503) 225-1 679 ! ( SOUND WALL ' r i ` I) CONCRETE SIDEWALK `` '' CONCRETE SIDEWALK 00 PRO" , r ` 4G �'�, -.vim (__' MOUNTABLE CURB BOTH SIDES 7 +4 , 19160 '� i c r- ` f MOUN TABLE CURB BOTH SIDES 0., ( 1 -0 i5, 'ow .C' ASPHALT PAVEMENT -- LEVEL 3, " DENSE GRADED <' ( ASPHALT PAVEMENT -- LEVEL 3, i" DENSE GRADED " �; Rp L DAB" �, " " � � BASE ROCK -- f— MINUS (12 MIN.) Z A ROCK — 1-- MINUS — (12 MIN. -- 2 E UAL LIFTS TYP } ASPHAL CONCRETE (4" MIN. — 2 EQUAL LIFTS TYP)8 SE � ) ASPHAL CONCRETE (4 MIN.. Q TYP) � � COMPACTED TO 959' T-180 � EXPIRES 12-31-07 COMPACTED TO 95% T--180 OR MATCH EXISTING t ' OR MATCH EXISTING 4 OR MA TCH EXISTING ) ( OR MATCH EXISTING — " �, -- " MIN S -- 2" TYP TYP .- LEVELING COURSE' U SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95� T-80 ,, SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% T-80 LEVELING COURSE MINUS — (2 ) 1 ( ) OR MATCH EXISTING OR MATCH EXISTING !' OR MATCH EXISTING OR MA TCH EXISTING .,, _ ' `' r 't t �, i ( 1i l l �' r„, , 1-----, ..,. .\..._ ,) ,, `° -, 1 SEC TI N A A E Tf DN• B B ; --� A . 1--- it ._,- X2.2 N. T.S ... �,...�� .� C2.2 N. T.S f .f._ :,, _: Z‘...___„,,`�.,-' /`ti .r„,„...1 ___-' ---it -•••_.,„, -�.. LL1 0 Mr1 0 0 w ,r,-----./--',./--'-V""--',/''—''''v,'—'•\/°— -\'''—''sv"--- —''./'''—N,/ v" —*s'v"---.''ve'--" -"'""',,,,-----\/'-*-'\,7----'s.,,,'.- -,, _.1 x U) FUT �, > 0 I- ROW __ q W 46.0' \ ``�Y "`L \---.. .'r Ili I PL ”' 35,5' 10 5' < ir W 0 I 7 0 11.0 �, '....' 5.a' ,! I— O 12.0' 12.0' (,(1) hr. s CURB " CURB . ' ._, C `---- .--_—__----_.-r �—_ r-----_. } 0 0 .. I •°•.i�,MF`.r.#t.�.�a_�M�r.I��.A�1..�+lra�_t 'Wii:�:ws!�:�ti� `e MM 1. (-* \) CONCRETE SIDEWALK Cl. l I r\ r MOUNTABLE CURB BOTH SIDES t < A PHAL T PAVEMENT -- LEVEL 3, " DENSE GRADED 'f t BASE ROCK — 1-4" MINUS -- (12" MIN.) ASPHAL CONCRETE (4" MIN. -- 2 EQUAL LIFTS TYP) COMPACTED TO 959' T-180 OR EXISTING OR MA TCH EXISTING , \,.,7 SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% T-80 J LEVELING COURSE — in MINUS -- (2" TYP) '\.. OR MATCH EXISTING OR MATCH EXISTING ,�/` cr+" f �., 3.' REV. DATE BY \,____.\ ) A\/NI2f 19/07 I LHP \---\ 3 SECTION: C- C ; \i--/ I i ..........„\._, __.. N. T.s , _.� _._. .- I I �.. � - ,,,, J._ . .........., .------N___-___".........„-,... ...„......„,,____, I I I I I I PROJECT NUMBER DAL0O7 cti Date: 11/06/06 Scale: AS SHOWN N CO Drawn By: DTT 0 Designed By: GID ib Checked By: GID N ch pi O g Q R 2 g v tii C2 . 21 4 NAME:G:IDALCKMDDIDAL007C23.thvg DATE:FEB 21,2007 TIME:3.-44 PM , I I -i41 i IA ,se 2 N,N ii" 11! II CIS aC:3 o N., )c k •• ...■ Li -4 0 Arammor I Of I I Oil° C) " 11"1 0 (i) 2 hi I II r"'1 I i i ...... ) J I 4 ) NI I li 1\ S N) )•,. PI N I Col II I r■s) -....j I 1 ..".,,..1 lb I ;$; muooioa69N M.,..., AM* 1101111•NIMMENW .ij 4 .1;1 I I I I oo.6e oo.6e 9e.ge I ' "*.0 v.--.- ....t .. N3 .....i I i****" I N 1.4: CI It,. I I I .... .:,,E IcA (J) -.4. r- '1 c.z. , r- "co 0 A f2. 1... (' 4. (44 c") 4*. rts.lc I P\S ?NI) ' ' I (i) "4'11 .11 lbe rill I("1 I 1 nil r4 1 Ny) 441) I i Z ......N. i fz) i r*"*"' tzzo i I U 1 , (4..46L1) Is. I* 13 4°N I .a'abIll 41.90,6Z69N. .........-1S .. .. ........ .. 4.. ........ .. .. ........ , .. .. ........ .. .. I I 1 1--- 06'6g1 egras....auavid- 5.i.; 3„FG,F4611S 1 'GZ-- At g0,6Z68N 9t -.,.4) (J4 )N 3„cg,8468S I IN Z 107 _is g wiq Z )4# I\ .........,,.,....,..... 1010 001801■1.1. 00'06 •••■•■•■•■■■••■........................„, .6.41%(14. ...c1(iNcs):\s\ ,... I c' ..- N%. -" o. I 1 1 M.90,6Z 69N *0**1 p, /..Cf)ii,C)s. c°1' ciq.bA 0 I b\i #1 ' .°° '' t 1 4 # kr iii-** 3„*06Z68S I *1 * , c- """"~%.„00. %a t:\‘\Y *6' 41 6 cx \ i ' i \ IN e'9691 ill .4 c,.. i, ,...,„... i JS e96`1 P.) is 086'1 i c4 IN:6N 9 107 (» ,. (2) 1 9 107 c) is° re 107 ) 1 1 Ia. . I I : 41906Z6RN 68'89 .c.:12 N 0) Ca 3.90,6e.69S 00'89 - --- --1-- -- -- 34,90,6Z69S 00'99 N to 4). \\ I (1)I C) 2 I f\,) I I *1991 1 N N) I P.:4 ha _IS 9c9`1. IN) _is 91'9'1 N liaae: 18 9 107 81 I IN cs 6 107 N I2 ee 107 2 I 41 I I . 41.90,6Z68N _7 1 490,6Z69S 3.90,6Z,69S 4i 00'69 00'99 00'99 ?hi! 1 ---------1.--------- I! dS *4,98'1 IN ha _IS 9C9`1 N IN PP 107 fzsi c. , 1:,1 ..is 91‘9`1 Its..) N C) I 01 107 I2 IZ 107 (z. • -.... 15.98 --- I P' :to, 1E! I I c) 41.90,6Z 69N ... (,...ii 3„90,6Z,69S 390,6Z68S 1 (/) I 01'69 -ft to H 00 V9 -- +".."."-- 00'99 0) c..)I tv (z) t,) _Js f'.‘99'1 I IN) ...is 91'8'1 It ..1S 9C9`1 t:■34 i I 21 N N C) I (...i. 8 18 11 107 I© OE 107 (z) I (A (2) (.1) z I 41.90,6Z 69N 3„90,6e.69S 390,6Z6SS 11110.111MMINUMMINNOMISIIMMINNO 0.1••• i e*69 0089 00'89 1 e -1 z 0 ----J--------- r ,13 ...4S e'OL9`i N112 N 4 IZI I tzt) ;E 111 1 N) JS 919'1 .1 ItY, ..1S 9isfri N ...t I z 1.07 2ic) z 2 N) 6t IN 4: 8 et 107 iz),.- 4:18 61 107 N'I Inl zi, k3 co il......_ co .......4........4 I i 41„90,6Z 69N 3.90,6Z68S 3„90,6e.68S I Lc.69 r4 00 99 0099 P: I I i t is ran >4 C4 I t‘l IN) IV >4 I 107 (z) >4 _IS 9c9`t is 9r9`1 c.) ........ .... OM talifIllfaraftaraIIIM OMNI 8 fl 107 H_ ____1(%) 81 107 (z) P3 01 I -N) ill„Z 0,6Z 69N 3.90,6Z69S 3„90,6e.68S 11.1.11111011111■••■••• WINO ft'69 00'99 0099 ........--- " F + I I I IN) I p.) N3 I N N dS 9firl N _,,s 9firl c,- i c;) *1 .107 I2 Li 107 (:), I (..) 1 It 390,6Z69S i i 11(61_ ...15 00Z`f 57) 3.90,6Z69S -. ..... ..... - ..... a 10Vat Ni 0089 00'89 I - Po (41 F3 KAI 4t.1 CO -39.9 39oz p ...is tire ,00. 0) .,_ --.............„ .....Fistzt. ..... gl 107 I 91 107 I .44-‹ *90.9eze; 99'4 g l' ,00.,,e)ss _ in.9c .....0g VI 00•gi _ 1099 I 10'99 I Og•CI 00.01 , .„ ,,,, I aryee M „ge ,zge .89 NWMAIN MO. WIIIIIIIIINIM.......... AM. 0111100 WINMINIMIMIIIIIIIMINI.A. MEM 1 .... 7 I 9Z ) 991 i VG o eo' ,Z9rt??,) --------- - _ . I 96'gre hi .se ,eg .99 N - t)I ......I - ...... - J 41141/11 EIValial~~00//0 411111111111/1111MOMM.01111111110 OilliNisragiab MOM filMANNISOmmanasosili Mai NIIIMMIWNAramitagaINNIMN• 011.1111MMONNI■immo. .. /4ze tzrge 3„ge,M88S I I t .ik 0*T i V/ 09'PI i 1 0 (J) a.:1 !..:t) (4 I I P3 C:71 I t`) co (= 0 i 1 Ni I N. 4) ,,, ''' 1 (:);:l --N -.< CO "*.j. *....i.j I NI 4 Al -4.... I A, ., rr? 0 0 (go i ):N. I s:0 1'40 i r.1., •■■■101■.... a.,..... ........ - - I (S711 1. 4 to C) 1 I j i 0 -AY 'II C)44, c) Ci .34, ***1 ri t° Al„11-niZaCION I 00 VG - c) I I (Ncoi og.te zi.lpi .00'0' di-, fc'61 196 5-6.63 Ns (11 la 4 I I 1 I z c) z c..) , 8 ..4S zyroz -4 (:'`' _Is evrose ?:t o t.„, o r.,- i t i --:-..' ze 107 it; =. 93. 107 5"1 Hi 14 I I O... aim. ."..... om... 6L'el, 00'6e 00.6e .. .. ........ _. .. ........ 11111111 MEV 41.111■M 3„14za6es / i (c) C7 ct) 0 0 a) .. ill 8 a c 33 ,,...0 (0 g 57 fi? m o ? 03 c- , , WHITE OAK VILLAGE m x rn co ..(` .4, s R f. C:rtz, Z.1 P,- 01 11-1 0 Er cn GI Q co = (1) < ......01sa 1.„....... Nis) 03 03 70 ■.0 `:5 .. -I ...... _... 0 - ''... "--- - - '1\713 c:: TIGARD, OR -,.. . _ rn GI .. +pit efim-No I th) o a) arc 70 r4 vp A. . 7) 8 a : Z ..A. !:‘) 1' ..'4N 44° eirl 8 to -, c • 0 0 0 II 6 > 46 4 t3 -.4 -.4 "" 7:7 rill TENTATIVE PLAT 0 io' s (Di, co i...... Fl• I.±14 W a 1 8.. $ iii gin •*si I3 12<3 411MIEWINNIMMIN111.111111111, -----, , - - ,...., . . , fi i:t f XREF LIST' k L • ° �� SD S.1 FL0 F ILTER FABRMARIAL---- FABRIC OVER P!,I!I1i#iJjk `; 36" WIDER .S 1. MATERIAL �� 1r 4 DESIGN GROUP INC. i 1 DALOO xO 1 R ;rt4: .� 1 ,, DLD-LOGO 1 ► : �4,; 9045 SW Harbor Blvd, ::0P76;I0 r STAMPOID AILI7L-;i77742471 Suite 101 dciOO7x2O t� �. o N N Portland QR 97219� SECTION A A . . u�. vnr �. (503) 225.1679 x DITCH INLET ° ��,. I 6' (MAXIMUM SPACING) j_.�'� 4C 40� PR js 0 (si. 0.‘e'i.ss 400 .., s , ,, , ,4. , I N,g tc,b, G 4,Nr(„4. Go . -;:e ‘10. ' '-,' 19160 # ,° 4/4/• 49 FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW `�. ?'?P . • •a• , MAYBE USED SHORT ° 3 �' P� • •'� . b •°• 1111 U'1'1l.ITY WIC AND _W .....-- 0 ' :''•; • ';•°• •.°• :° f G OF DEVELO M iT J ',,,, A ANGLE BOTH ENDS OF FILTER FABRIC �� PFASN U• di •:t).:•.• • ;4•. . ► o .. .• `. . •• d ! ' FENCE TO ASSURE SOIL IS TRAPPED ,pr DAc.41 ............ ,,,,n.tt, FLOW 0 ••0.•...,. .• •k ".7•':- •°•';.tt, .•;e*,... It - _1_4' s., ,00 t?• • °.a ° e' ,a- •,; ' • Yy NOTES ii RAnIU�..' = :„•,• •-•• :'• o � '� •.4 .� � � ��. � . � EXPIRES f2-31-OT �� 25 MIN. �. a: c.• . ..�;: no!,'E 3 . ; ALpB4% EN G, '"CLEAN PIT N 2 MINUS AL '4d o► C3 G i�, t �': � x c' �. ��' '�`�'' S a �� k PLAN} v ° '�' . 2 x 2 POSTS FENCE POSTS. SUBGRADE REINFORCEMENTS * 141344 ,i� , ; AS REQUIRED 1* * - f ,� AND ATTACH GEOTEXTILE, EQU \ c) '' 3. STITCHED LOOPS TO BE INSTALLED g,. IN. 11..... ��4 DOWNHILL SIDE OF SLOPE. DEPTH CAT BASIN wy 4. COMPACT ALL AREAS OF FILTER FABRIC (1) ,TOP VIEW 4. *20' MIN. FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL TRENCH. ...I - 1 GRAVEL CONS TRUC TlON EN TRANCE TEMP BIO-- /� 1 n 3SEQ/MEN FENCE C i- , 3.2 N.T.S. C3.2 N.T.S. C3.2 N.T.S. a w Q z EROSION CONTROL NOTES (.9 CP 1. OWNER OR DESIG NA TED PERSON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL J.LJ MEASURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS. ,...� H 2 THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE ESC PLANS AND CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF THESE ESC FACILITIES IS > 0 T 0 , HE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL ALL CCNNSTRUCT7ON IS COMPLETED AND APPROVED BY THE LOCAL JURISDICTION, AND VEGETA TTON►I,f1.ANDSCAPlNG IS ESTABLIS►HED. THE DEVELOPER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE AFTER THE PROJECT IS APPROVED UNTIL THE a Z LOTS ARE SOLD. C r THI P Fl PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIC�AI. DURING THE 3. 7NE BOUNDARIES C>F THE CLEARING LIMITS S`�IOWN ON S LAN S�itALL BE CLEARLY MARKED IN THE ELD (-9 CONSTRUCTION PERIOD NO DISTURBANCE BEYOND THE CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE PERMI T7ED. THE MARKINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE 0 ' APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURA 770N OF CONSTRUCTION. Ct Lu 4. THE ESC FACILITIES SHONfN ON 7HIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WI 7H ALL CLEARING AND GRADING AC77V1T7E'S AND IN SUCH A F-'" MANNER AS TO INSURE 7HA T SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN WA TER DOES NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM, ROADWAYS, OR i4OLA TE APPLICABLE H WATER STANDARDS. Z ' !OD �/ �. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. DURING CON 770N PER , THESE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE UPGRADED AS NEEDED FOR UNEXPECTED STORM EVENTS AND TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN t WA TER DOES NOT LEAVE THE SITE THEIR CONTINUED Z 6. THE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE E COAT FUNCTIONING. 0 ?. AT NO TIME SHALL SEDIMENT BE ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE MORE THEN 1/3 THE BARRIER HEIGHT ALL CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE LINES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING. THE CLEANING OPERATIONS SHALL NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER INTO THE DOWJNST7?EAM SYSTEM. Cl) fr 8. STABILIZED GRAVEL ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINED FOR THE DURA T1ON OF THE PROECT. 0 ADDITIONAL MEASURES MAY BE REQUIRED TO INSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. ir 9. STORM DRAIN INLETS, BASINS AND AREA DRAINS SHALL BE PROTECTED UNTIL PAVEMENT SURFACES ARE COMPLETED AND/OR VEGETATION IS LLI RE-ESTABLISHED. la PAVEMENT SURFACES AND VEGETATION ARE TO BE PLACED AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE. `- 11. SEEDING SHALL BE PERFORMED NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER 1 FOR EACH PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION. 12. IF THERE ARE EXPOSED SOILS OR SOILS NOT FULLY ESTABLISHED FROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 30, THE WET WEATHER EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES WILL BE IN EFFECT SEE EROSION PREVE'NTI'ON AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL (CHAPTER 4) FOR REQUIREMENTS. REV. DATE BY 13. THE DEVELOPER SHALL REMOLD ESC MEASURES WHEN VEGETA TTON IS FULLY ESTABLISHED. I 1 GRADING NOTES 1. ALL ELEVATIONS AND GRADE LINE SHOWN ARE FINISHED GRADE OF PAVED AREAS OR GROUND LINE. I 2. LADES SHALL BE TO SUBGRADE IN THE PAVED AREAS AND TO THE LINES SHOWN FOR LANDSCAPED AND OTHER AREAS. IN THE 1 AREA 10 FEET BEHIND THE CURB THE TOP 12 INCHES SHALL BE TOPSOIL APPROVED FOR PLACEMENT BY THE ENGINEER. 1 1 3. SUBGRADE NOT IN STRUCTURAL FILL WILL BE Ra LED AND COMPACTED TO 95X RELATIVE MAXIMUM DENSITY AASHTO T-99, 6 1 1 INCHES DEEP. 4. SOFT SPOTS IN THE SUBGRADE OF PAVED AREAS WILL BE EXCA VA TED TO A DEPTH OF 18 INCHES AND AND BACK FILLED 14f771 4a-ON CRUSHED ROCK, COMPACTED AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. PROJECT k 5 ORGANIC MATERIAL (TREES, BRUSH ROOTS, STUMPS ETC..) SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE STRIPPING SHALL GENE-RALLY BE NUMBER DAL007 9 INCHES, BUT MAY BE DEEPER IN H ODED AREAS STRIPPING SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AREA AS DIRECTED w BY THE ENGINEER, Date: 11/06/06 rz 6. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL REQUIRED TO FILL THE SITE SHALL COME FROM THE BORROW AREA AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. THE scale: 1 =20' BARROW AREA SHALL BE RESTORED AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. CO 7. PERMITS REQUIRED TO HAUL MATERIAL FORM THE SITE SHALL BE OBTAINED BY 7HE CONTRACTOR FROM THE COUNTY, STATE, Drawn By: DTT u AND OTHER AGENCIES AS NEEDED. ALL FLAGGING AND TRAFFIC CONTROL REQUIRED SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR. i Designed By: GID 9:<t a CONTRACTOR TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DUST CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION HOURS Checked By: GID ci 1 / ‘ 0 P EROSION CONTROL ND TES AND DETAILS 3 . 2 I:11z ,... __- _ - (,-,--;.„‘ XREF LIST ,- Ltscole: 1 LEGEND 12)1 poscoi.: 1 • PIPE Resolved 44 immicamilcm sToRm 11111! DAL0070X50 , , ' ss SANITARY SEWER LINE DESIGN GROUP INC. DAL000X60 ,,,,,A. DAL0070X70 EXISTING STORM ' \.,,.8\,, w WATER LINE VALOO7xO1 MANHOLE 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. DLO-LOGO 'III CATCH BASIN Suite 101 STAMPGID \\«, do1007x10 0 AREA DRAIN do1007x40 CI) STORM DRAIN MANHOLE Unresolved P o(r1a3722O5R-1967729'1 9 ,.., aciamicauramcmcaSzu STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT ....,„ AN 0 SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE \ vv. s .„ ttN, -\ CONNECT TO s, N 4 tPa' to‘)IPROffit ---1 ' ‘P 03 — , PUBLIC STORM IN 'SS 0 SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT 4.4 4 19160..11) $ 4,p 99W 4: r• '57 #'1., 1- CI \, WATER QUALITY Alai Ark EH 0 WATER METER A \ \ \ ..). ,T 92, % .041* "-•.-'I, EXISTING CATCH : .4.'''' . DITCH INLET SWALE OU MALI * 'IiP' %F 0-0 BLOW-OFF VALVE FIRE HYDRANT MPIIII" ..,, vo., 15 As0 cl 1 4410 0p49Se '17 V3 "\ I. \ BASIN -1"li (51 DSO DOWNSPOUT \ I -ici,‘ , 16 ...............0 I EXPIRES 12-31-07 I \ EXISTING DITCH INLET \ \ \ '7 .',. • ... , , 0 SWIM II.I.lb ,,,,x,..,,..v.0,..„,,,,,..NN,,,x,,,....,,...,,,,,,,,,vv,..\\N..,,N,0,..,,...v sv,...szvoN\\.\\\,,Nx...svo ox,,,,,,,,,,,,.,1/4,,,,,,,IN...:,..,,x,,0,,,,,,,,„.,,,miv,ox,NN,1/4.,,,,,,,wo 0,..\\\NN.,..\\...v1/4,0. N.V.0 N\NV.0 N ,,,,\NNV.,,,\NANNN,V,,,,X.,,NANSS 0,‘,.\\NN\NMANe.S.V,,,,NW,V...N.V.0000,,,,W0,,,,NV,V,V.,,,,NVONNNW,Vook.\\\..00,,,\VOONVONS,,,,\WW,NNVONNW.,NVONW., ,,,\WOON 1,,,,X. * ....—. ....... ..-- . .....i. O. .0. 4. 4' 4-..-.....-4—..-.....4.- 4 -..--,..-4....—..-.....4* .... ,.,,. ...-...........--.-- 4 4.solo OIMIO 111111111111111111111110111011111111111111 WOO ESN* IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIONINIAM IMO 4110111, 4 4 4 4. 4 4 4::› 4 es• atom 001111111111111111.1111111111,1111■0 s. : VEGETATED SWALE 1 44 ..._ ..... _..... _ _, .......„.._ — .... ...., _ _ _ _ _ ..... ..,... ._.. ..- — \ EXIS77NG DITCH \ \ „,,,,..,,.,,,„.,,,,,,,,..„,,,,.,,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,1/4,,,,,,,„ •,,,,, ,,‘,,,, , ,.,•\,,.... ,,,,......,,,..,,,,,,'NY:v.\..... N-..7.....\\NN. -....\\NINN-.....y....Y.NN Nms.N.N:N-1/47.\-.77N -N.N.N.N.N.N.7.N.N...NNY.: NN.Ny.N.N...N.N.\\NNN,:.7..\\Nar.........N.N.N.N...\\NNN.y.‘.....-41.1.\\..7.7.7....N.Y.N,NR.V.„.\....V..\\NA.N.‘‘.\\\"...\\,\\NNW,,,:',NUNN,,,N\\1" . r 1 ROCK TRENCH \ INLET \ -\;7, ...... MOM 0/0/M MINIM L ...J \ I Ailk Alai Ikgr t 1 liar C4.1 —UTILITY PLAN 1 n 20' 48" DE7EN770N PIPE * * 1 i OUTLET CONTROL Z ............ ara.a.a. ...a...a a,a, ,,,,,...,„..., ,,....a,a a„„,aa,„.„ a, a.a,a ,„.„a ,„„,,,,,,a mem moo 011111.111111 MOD 41101011* AIIR IIIIIINIO 41111111111.11110111.111111111111110110 OOP MINI OMR 0111.1110.000.1110.1.0 1.111 al--: 17 I '114111 "PIP_kbh.me lil 4 .. — _. .. ......_ ......_. ........ _ . , ..•, . • ...0101111111 — — S SS ,,, SS IIII nig X, s 1111:: SS SS SS-0 Mir 111 ...6. .. .... .....- Al. FAY. YAP IIMIOR far, „.., II, .1.1 NM MOE MOW *Olt M." ............... e AM OM MOW SIM .. ... / 'Air 0, SS a" SANITARY%WER , ,Ii___ Ai II r- 1 - - - - - - - - - losnolissaminosimmogiman , 2 • 2222222222 : : 2so im . at me ailiniammEzg 4,911 - ' -- '411"-;:. -.,..7rx. _. ma wr al • • al .4 In Is IN IVO 0 I • r 0.1111 ,,, V V V V W w w w anima IRO Vi V/ GO TRACT A , / -- ,, -,.. 0 , .. , I 1 • ii / --,._ 4* / 6" D`.1. WA 7ERLINE lilt " 1 ' ■,, ,, l'■3 ...,.... - mi 1111 4" 0.1.WA 7ERLINE 0) i , 1P,i ‘,.. , ., • - „ , — — 011.11010.11101111•11.00.110111110■11011111 ..... , 0.--1 it ....1 i ....... ,... al 1 J , . s • .. . al , .... : .., I > 0 I-- ... . 1 t .... . . . . , . .• $ ., ..... •, . , ri.- WNW. WM.. OMNI. 01100••• 1111 •, ■ , tpr/ it ,.. ....• • 0 0 $ ' 1 , . . , , t ... ,. .. --.1 Ii , . .. • .. ... ii . 1 .. ,, , .. . . . . . . . p...3 < < i . • , , . _ ii N Ct 0 0 I LOT 24 , - , .„. ... • > \ . ~ I I < ‘,... 0 ..... 1 _ AMMO OOMIT ON111011w foo , - . : . .-. I: < .. j ! r.-- --i r".. C.) --i r- -i r- --i r- -1 r- •.. . e .. , al on -------I--- i w }-- Z .„. ...4, 1 ...„4 :- .,- . , ___ _ TRACT C I-- 2 EXIX TING IWANHOLE , 1 Ka (2) to CO "• ' ') , ; .. al I LOT 25 ,..:, , , ., . F7RE HYDRANT . .... a 1 a --__ ____I .........- I Li $ •.' I--- I it i . . , , v) t, . I . , . 0 . ,, . I . .-.. + + _ MOM.. + •••■••■• .0■41.1+ ...... .......... + + I . . :,-.... .. AMMO •111111111111011=111101111101111* avass 0.11, 01111111111MMWMIMMOD IOW NOM 4111111111111111111111•11111.1•11•11.1 IOW IMO ONOOMMINIMMEN/O WNW ONO ■ , IMO MM. ■ . , al 1 I . I I . ''... • .• ,..... > -' i 1 k, , IIII I ---- NVS NVS -- NVS. --- NVS ---- NVS ---- NVS ------- NVS NVS -- NVS -- 1 ;',.) < ' :-...... IN I• 1 .... . •,-, ., -..,. _., I . . , • , ii -::,i ., .. I• I t.. ...: ••,.•. ...1 • „:1 a I I ... . ;t: II I .. . . -.... . .. ,. „ , al I SANITARY MH. r N. N r- N N N RIM = 242.40' i 0 I 3( i - . 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 :71..: . ,. . ....• I . IE FL = 21193' f, 1 I I $ ,...i. ill o , • • i - •..... '''l I 03 (0 *11 ....,„4„ C.:) *-1 *rah 0,4,4 ***I 44%,4 1\) **4 (04 .4*"1 ....4 46 I • ,..' .. . , "ft.li --1:1.- 01 .:. ',-. ,.!....,. • ., •; ii . \ I ,.. •••• - 1, , ' - , . , .., -, ,• .. ••• 20' 10' 0 20' 1 \ (i) 0 \ \ _ \ ..„ ‘ i _ ......: .... .:..... , . .. . • a REV. DATE BY /1\I 1 2/27/061 GID !!niiiiiel • \__ _ . , „. . ,• , _ , ,D., 1._ PUBLIC WATER . . . - 811t - - ‘ '. ' -• •,,• • - t .- - , .•,• '-•••• ..'. •.: . -, - ‘.: .....- ,... ..-.• :••• ..,•-•-•..- ; - •• .-,,,, „ •. : ,,-. • • . •••,.- •..•..,, .-.., •,, , .! ,• •-• ,, .:. • ,•-_,„ . ... . , ,,, . • .• • ... ... ..„•-•: -.- , .. ). ,..... a SCALE: 1” = 20' \ All 2/27/061 GID 1 \ \ . N.,..:;,,,., • W W W 6" D.L WATg?LINE v W W W `..N., 0 ill au es ',A 4111111:1 I it At''risi0 I I ,, S S SS-P..' "111111MMIO S I a., A. , V ss „ss , o ., .. • , . • :.1 , 1 - TRACT is-- ..,-.. , I.. -, i I I I ;" SANITARY 1 ' i I .. - , 1 . . :,. .• > 1 1 ; -... .. 1 0 1 ,-....-. ,. , 1 I . . ... • ,_ •••. 1 , _ 1 1 PROJECT . z i NUMBER DAL007 ck. r- r - r- i-.. r- ts > c;i 0 0 (3 0 o (3 C.) N. I Date: 11/06/06 tii Z 1 i • "**1 -1. 'i •"1 —I I ('' I 0 :z 1 C:r) ...4 N 01 4. (4 No '''-I Scale: 1 = 20' 8 i Z) 0 .... (., F7RE HYDRANT 1 Drawn By: OTT ,4: 1 i to ,a to / LL ........ _ Designed By: GID L .) , .1...1.1. ....mm.o..nl li AI ..... ...... ..... ..... — — — •1110W MINIM .11011■11•11.M.. MY OWNIM •10•10 II■ Imam. .11.1.11 SIONENSINMIIIMINIMMIIMIONI. IMMO 61.01414 0 Checked By: GID c) i ''''''11111111111101Pr\\N --- _......1 CONNECT TO A ..... -,.. ....., .... .... OHIO ■ 11111111. MIR 001111111111111111111111.1111111111111111111. AIM .. 0/NO ONO , , EXIS77NG WATER .... :: ..:''....:.--..:.\ , is\ II te\ A /•\ p■ IA i 2 2 U TI LI TY PLAN ...... .............amm.................... *ma.. ....... .10•■••■ ...moo . I 1, .....y.,...., . . . 1 C4 1 1 " - 20° 1 \',.. .\ •... :. . .\ I I 9 t -- SAN SAN SAN ----- SAN ------- SAN -- SAN ---- SAN ---- SI , : ..,‘ C4 . 1 (---\\(,..);i_ 1 .,. ., Cti i I . ., . . .., . ,..4.,” liNKNowNi 0.004 273.1-7 \ .'-:*'--;-N, I I \ , . \•,... • -„, • . . ,,., . . . I .-.. ..; , ,--. , ,:. 74TH A VF • .... i....., 7 „_... .., ,, ,, XREF LIST Ltscale: 1 1 ,,,,, t \ \ .-';... \ 7 --,,,, „„, ‘ , 1 „..„.\ Psltscole 1 / 1 \ 1 .%, \ , , t--, A. _ \ , 1 \ —-.-- / / *---,,,.. /' [10) , •-- I , -.\\ Resolved II i I I \ I 1 \ \ , \ \ \ 1 \ - .., „ , I I : ........ ....... ...... ...... DALOO7DX50 \ \ -: ,- --„, ', I { k DALOO7Dx80 i \ ,-, 1 . --'-' ., , .. ,. k 0 „,_, I \ ‘ \ \ I i -, • --- ,\ DAL007x01 \ x ....„--/ . .,,, r -----, \ \ - \ % \ . -,., _ . L-- DAL3CX80 I \ ,t ,,, -,...— ...- \ ,......__,,,,, .. T•••• I / , DESIGN GROUP INC. I . _ 1 ii \ \ ... , . , \ :, DLD-LOGO I \ ‘ 1 \ , \ 1 , \ \ ..,,,,, .,... I \ „-/ ,,,,, STAMPGID . \ 1 11 .. ..._ \ \ \ 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. x ,1 1 \ i . \ , ,, , dol007x1 0 1 \ i '1, , k i \ _ „„, II 4-24 9 ,.. , Suite 101 dal007x 13 ,,,, „ 1 ‘ i \ ‘ ,-, i \ --: , ,, \ \ 1 da1007x20 ; , I . ,,. Portland, OR 97219 \ , \ \-- . , , \...., i ‘ ..„ „ N \ , ix % (503) 225-1679 Unresolved . , ,„ 1, ,i \ i I I 1 ' \--, :. .. \ ,, ‘ 1 ,3 3?' S , . . . \ _,, t ,.........1.——— .., t i I '--' \ IX I i 1 \ t. \ 0 N C3 1, -, , ./\/”. I s - • \ In I I N \ N -„,,,„ P =-1-0 61 56 .1** \ \ 1 1 i i \ 1 ,,-- . ILO \ i \ i i _. -. \ . ttt N ii. . i ! I .1 \ ix, LL---''""------JI 1 ,..,' .. . .,, I i ) 1 t, 1 I\ \ \ \ '''',,.., 13 1 \ t . •tt- ‘, .:.-'. / 41114( :, , , N ,,. • — . . • , 4......... .. .I. ......... .. ......... W. .. .....WWW .. NW WM...... M. .1.0 ai......... .., ... .......... .r ... 411■17.0.11INI• ••••• OM* elkilIo ••■••••■ N•••••IP ONIDOMM IMINNIM ON.. '''s, N. .e..".. 0 1 .1 '".,: ''''' \ .•,.., ..,;;;,II■ ••••■•■ ...a .1P.... ........... "'S.,. .41... armor (I) \ I SCALE: "--=.201 1 I i ;II ,:. ,.N \ ,,...,.. -,, . N.. -... -- ''N. II / .., 4/ ca te 1 I c ._. . ... . ., , -,..,,, ,...,,.... '... _.s. 1, ' 15, 41/49-.1 CI i. :-1::::,:i.,..,: ,i,,,,„.: .,, i .1.,, }\\ \ X X X X X - X X \ 1 ";1: 0 „,,, --, x—_-_-- .'”, ° ---- II I . 1 1141111111711111111111111111111111111111 20 10 5 d 20 t 1 1 I - 1 . $ t . 1 I i \ \ \ \ — \ — '''''. 1: \ ,,, . 111111111. 11111111111111111111111111110111111111111, 0111111. MIN ' IPY II 1, i \ \ ..• ,--- \ ,,--',..: 84,00 9+00 \ \ 144.14 \ 6+00 1 / 7+6D i \ I I j i A I i \ \ \ \ , •-----, EXPIRES 12-31-07 _ 1‹, — — I — — I 1 I 7/ — I I I t Ict _ ....._ \ N. —I 1 ...-- L. —...— \ .........—.. \ \ A 1 • - I I I i RuBLIC \\EAsT - wEsT ST \ ‘ I 1 ii \ \ ..,.-..., , .•.,•/- ......., , , 1 , \ : / 1 , \ i ii . ! , , \ N \ \ \ 1 _.____j..........,.../,‘ :::.•'_:,'::'; .1' .:/*:*:::::. / 1 r ,\ • i 1 . ... N., ‘. \ 1 k \ s , • a\e) I 1 I I I 1 I/ '','-----'—‘,:.. ,-:-','',-'i:'.-.'--.:`,s:`,'''' :';'.'''," : .:.' , '''':'_.''''.'I : ;'...':,,',..''':7:':.''..*,N.:'.',-:--!":: :,",,.':,:, ,:!--- 1'":`, s. ''.:'.".. :','•,'" :::'_''',-,*:'::\''-,''.I-'-„..'',.:",,.':.: '!:‘:'-- . :, -., :—* • ' --: _,',,,':-..:'..-.:''.:-"_:' ..':., :,,,;.• ,.,'• \ 1 1 . I... i i \ \ I 1 I — ..,... ..... — ___ ONNION• .1.11■ INOP.VO ■■:......aft■ .Z.:.:.'...."'''''' \ / \ I . ■■•••''.."■•••■ ‘ 1 Nti4.1114C • _. OM. MOM . ■ 4M= SWIM •••■•■....■ SEW IIMIN• elli■1111111.1•IMM MOO •1•01• •••••110111111MMIMMO. all. 411111111, OM, .00 ■•■•■•■■■■•* MOM MM.111/081/MMIMINMINAM *WM ■••• •■•••■•■•••••••• OM. arm msamism•••■■ row \ \• 57' \ \\ \ \ ■IMMINNO ... , \ "le : i -, , -- - •-•\■N,,, \ -1 \ 1 \ 1,,,,, \ i ,..., --,, ) : I \ 1 t •-".". '''''' \\............ --,----- __I i i \ \ r\ . i i i I \ I i \ i , \ N„ , ., . \ ilk • \\ \ N,.I 1111 \ \ , I \ \ I ,t1 s'....••• \ \ I \ t N / f • N \ ',,, ‘,., I I t / \ \ A I / \ \ \ \ I i I i I —...... ......— ..... . i—....... ••■•• 41011■ 1 1 \ , \ i , \ .. ■ \\\ ,,.„ 1 1 lia :iii.tt\...‘;`v,c Ni,,i.0,,,,•os.,: k "' I i Id I ' i I , ,•9 \ N, • \ 1 \ \ 1 ,/ i i P 1 / i 1 i ' \. N \ \ 1 \ Nl ,,,., T. : Li I , \ // J , , i , i ( pH, , , •. ... .. • ' ..,. \ \ ,, •.... „..:.: _•., . .,.. , \ i \ , \ H I ,,, ,... - . . \ ,.... I Us! \ 1 1 , , 1 , L , .:_,-..., .,„. \ I / \ _, \ \ \ .._. . \ ir I 1 -' 1.1.1 / ‘ c I „ ,i 1 , ,..„ „. •. .,,, WWII/. OM.. \ I-----H\ : '. ,..,. , - .. •, I ,1 11— ,.„- ....... __ ____. ..., --..! `,,, \ ..,"..,, — \'-‘. ,./. . 1 ...., — . i \ \-- 011 I i I 1 i,,,, . Nr, ' , ..•-• - ,,„ tv 1 Cr \ i t ' .. \ : 1. IMO 711111111111111110101•MINNIMMID VIM =NW 411111111111.1= MI!21-111111110 ON= Cr FUS 1 , I i l'i ■ ' '''1 I ''', „, f ,, -''''-'--- --- Y.......■■*---y > 0 (f) puBLIC ETA STREET impRovEmENT PLAN 0 Z '' u) < cr SCALE: 1 " = 20' /...\< < Li 0 uj f— , H H (1) „, / I . : , . T < ,, , I i U.I .,/' i /1 ; I I / I / I i 1 i i i I I 1 I i . 1 i I i i ." i / 1 i 1 / i .- 1 / i I i 1 I . L I . 1 .I ...._,......,-......._„.„ / 11 .1. I I I 1 i , I 1 ( I 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 . 1 1 A i 1 I C.) f 1 0 1 I 1....... 1 N N % / I C3 . I I 1 i , Li 11 1 t ' i 1 LO 1 Ltd 1 1 i 1 N .... ..... ........_ .111••• 4•1/10 0.111111■••■■■ 41111M• UMW SIIIIIIIIMMINNIIIMINIIMO 1 1 i I I ID dININO ••MIN.•0 I.M.M■.. .,... WM/ 0111••■•■■■■ OMNI I f _T ________ __ __ ________ __ __ ________ __ __ ,_______ __ __ ________ __ __ 1_______ 0 . ('_ i SCALE. 1"=20 i i i tO II"•••• 44........mimmimi REV. DATE BY i I\ i . i cq i (f) I i I, 1 20 10 5 0 20 1 I I it ,11 Ca- 0 1 2+00 3+00 4+00 ' i 5+ I ii i I ___ , i— 1 1 i 1 _ — — . _ _ I _ . _ . i il. , — , i i i I 1 Ljj I I r---- l i I i — r-- ‘ \.. PUBLIC EAST_ wEisTI ST I i 1 1 1 1 .‹. I ‘ I ft..4 i 1 I \ 1 1 # I, I IN 11 ' i i ■NIAM 0111••• k ■ NOM •■••■■ ' ' O.. OININO n ...... *1.II. ' ` ....... ..... ...................... ..... ■ 0..............0 *MN MM. •■•■•••••••••■•••• MOM* Or .1.0111•1111•10111M0111014 011•1• IMOW IMMINININIMINIMMI■ MIND AMMO 0.011111110■10■• MOM 411111. INNIMOINM..■ mono ANNIM ONNINIMMINIIIMI■101. — ••••■ .1..10•111=101■1101 ••■••• MM. .011•11•1■ ••••• .1■11. 41011111■•■■ OM* NOM 11111•1111111MOIMINIIIIMMIO AMMO .1■11= ••••1111•1111MIMMINIM .. if. 10 t ! II lalftil* 11 li. I \ I U \ t % 1 f I i i \ 4,41 ,14Z , \ "IC (I) if 1 ‘, , \ 1 Z 1 1 , PROJECT Q. j, N. ; I 1 i 1 NUMBER DAL007 Ni I ,-__ . k it tii .„-- ‘ ! . , i---. I / II \ i Date: 2/15/2007 I N.. I 1 • tli , Scale: 1n=20' N i i , ‘ II \ I....: I N i 1 CO ili i 1 I Drawn By: LHP L. i \ I Cti 1 I a \ '1 I 1.- ,,,, .,,. Designed By: LHP \ o / 1 d __ _ ___ _ ty, .J / i It / 1:3 / c\i I • / k / Checked By: GID 41 i It V c.) I / 1 I ,, k i / 1 ,„1 i , "kJ /I / i k I I ( CI 4 K o o -.1 •zt puBLIC EAST— wEsT STREET impRovEmENT PLAN ,,,, 4 SCALE: 1 " = 20' C 5 2 0 vc . . XREF LIST Ltscale: 1 Psltsca/e: 1 Resolved g i i DAL0070X50 T I) 1.... DAL007Dxa0 50.0000' VC DAL007x01 $ ' ! ; # 2.14%_ ___ _..----- DESIGN GROUP INS. OLD—LOGO ± — t STAMPGID I ; RVI STA = 7+64.13 n i . �__ _ _� �_ ��__ _�__ _ ___. _.__�__ _�____--.__ _�w ___ ____ - __ ca __ �� _ __ 9045 Barbur Blvd. da1007x 10250y __.__._— _�_. __�_�.. ..____._._ __M.vM _ .___ .____ ___. .__. . _. _ �._ _ �'P�fiV = 42:8t" ..____. . _____ _ �_. _ i ---25 0-- _�n da/007x13 4 M FINISH GRADE t s M A.D. _ --1.28 � �- � + � Suite 101 z. a rnT CENTERLINE �% — da/oo7x2o c; r; K - 39.16 N _ 2.a x Portland OR 97219 M �, _.. __ W -- EXISTING GRDE ' Unresolved Q i + N v —— AT CENTERLI E (503) 225-1679 Q N V > _t-...--- Co) O� 8 } ....w_»r,......a...w............_........._. _..._.r.u..-_-........._....««...._.........s....+«+..«.r.a.-.._v..r,._-«+.......wr € -.• ........ ...._n...�.__ �.._.. ... -_..._..._.....+....a,.............«...u.a.w....._........ ..s-..«n.� _....._�,1��+ _.ryr_............._..+.+........->_..._r....+.r....r.e.......n_rw._. w..r-w-..«..r....._...._•r.._.._._. ...+..._..._...«.___. Q/1 j}j (n 0 CO S,0 OF co cV II .`�, Q > 4� 19160 4'� ~ FUTURE FINISH — w GRADE AT—CENTERLINE _ __. ___m _..— f ,., .. ? ....-- .----- '..-- >�•�y� r" 1 II 0�'" 'N --�' "' o'+ cn '� _� __. _.._ _ _____ _. .�_. ._._ ._ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___. _� __-.- __. _ __ ___ _ �w , w ,... Ir-- 0 / 1.5. 'A 4' ! O ...-- ""rte -.�-^"-'"" � i Q � '` y �� A.. %... •► .____ _ _ _ _� _ _ ; .._. ____ �_ - -� ¢ I EXPIRES 12-31-07 ..r— 7 �� EXISTING GRADE AT Q CENTEILINE V _ e .____. _ _w____.___ _ _ _. ._ ___ .— _ _ I _ _ ____ L --4--- 230— III -lie 1 t i _____ - r I _ _________________ ___ ________ _ . _ _..„..____ _____________ _ ____ _______. { t f b -220 dt_ -.— _ — _ _ .— _ . , _ o P -- __.____._E..____. _ _._.._.._,._. _ ._ —. ._....._._._ _...._.....— _ ____ __ ..____,______22a__ LU 0 F- iii _ ____ ____ _ _ I f � IA ir SINJ ir F"."4 ' 0 Can IA .1. PUBL I C E A T---- WES T STREET /MPR O /E�ENT PLAN 0 p • 20 < III SCALE. 1 � (.1,„ 0 CD 0.044"" LI I- . F-- F.- W I < al { 240 ..-. —_. _. .______ __ __ �__.___ ._._. ._____------------._—__—._—_.._u-------- _—a._ _ *__ ... .....___.. 240--. _ . _ 4 LOW POINT ELEV = 15.40 I �� _ _�...__._._...___..... � N � 50.0 VC � � Q REV. DATE BY LOW POINT STA — 1-30.36 11 .,,� II PV! STA = 1+38 PVI STA = 2+50 x < > ,.•- III PVI ELEV = 15 E-- I it o 2 .45 PVI ELEV = 221.31 la 230 _,.....�...._�...._»..�._____....._ _ �...,�. . _..�___...__ �._.._..._._�__--_--__ _�_.._.�_. _._.___.._......_.._.__..��..��._ ._�.._ .� 7 ._._. + K = 4.94 K = '43.01 N N o- t cy ._.,,,. �■ o 1 u� rn �� iw Q - 40.00' VC N. + of > v ,r E- C 4 N ° W > --- • ,; .► . -I — _____ --1----0-6--- s > > _...- z 7- Lr5 .-- i.;,- ....- ....„ 4c ,... &., 6. .....-e--- < , co ..... U f 220 _ _____._.._. _ __ _ _ __ _.___..._�__.M __.. ____M____ _..____�___.______ ___�.�__�_____� �__ r%� m ....�.._____ ate-" a __ �, ._— PROJECT ,,.. ,.-- ..."- .,� NUMBER DAL007 2.50 _ 1.4 ---e..... -- i Date: 2/16/2007 ____.��_ ______w _._ __ _ _._ _ _______.__.__ _____ _.___ _ _ _. _______. w_ _..�__ _ __�__. ..� ._. � �___ M ____ ______ _, ___._-_-..�._.._-�__ - __ __ o i Scale: 1"=20' � � i d m y Drawn By: LHP w210 _----- .�__......,_�w_ _m_ __ _. _� _.__ _ __ �,. _ ...m__.__.____..... —.—_*._.___._..__. - __., ----/*.. ._._.__ —a.�.V_....___..__ __ _ ___ __ ._ � _ _ �..�Y__ —._..._._ __ ._ __ __ __�....._.i. --�.._.-. 210�- 1.. `��" - � Designed B LHP o 9 Y t:,) j Checked By: GID I o w' o 0 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 0 0 0 d w PUSL I C EAST-- WEST STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN C 5 . 3 1 Z SCALE: 1 " = 20' • XREF LIST DESIGN Ltscole: 1 PsItsca le: 1 / ,.,- .. r- •i _ / - / / Resolved TAIIMMI4 QAT* 41441111,01,1'0 PPINVIITUIL ITT IINOMININIIIMI, ■••■■■A 44.11111,111,CTIP %.‘ ,............-.34. DAL007x01 DLO-LOGO DESIGN GROUP INC. STAMPGID t ; t 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. Unresolved 114 gatragner, 11,1114d 1221rarriftTb DALOO7DX50 .... Suite 101 DALOO7DX70 ,...._,.. _. ,......_3, 11-••■••.•••••••)---■1 .........-.-.......11=1=1.■.........-' Portland, OR 97219 dal007x1 0 T=u=1 I — . \ ....... . 1111111111111111MINNI 1=.0.= ... \ 4. dal007x20 tri < (503) 225-1679 =EC= I■ 1 :, %1 um 1 1111.41.4 Waal ir,,, ..... :. , -- ....,. .5 Z = 4 I. .... - M W. 1 if [ 1 CI mti ...5 __ :: . - . INLMI 1:021805M siiiill=1111=1111 VIII 1111111011‘11 * 0 W =___.. ,, 4. .... TT 4,0111 • 1,041.4 QtralEVA .61..11 tIrrC tilii \ 11111.1/0 1111 1 11 I L %SA) PROft G I N /t9,' 1111111 11M111 -± ■011 / A BS Bap OMNI .... 0 X S• i'. # # 4.44 40 19160 - INIIIIIII snow" / ,.... n) mormink- 1.-- di/1111k . ...... ..... imi . 10 t .-----imj . ill. 0 A Li rugmw , 0 ORE ; . . A\- \ G... , , 4, LITIAre I 1 CO 11•Il % M. ... 11111111 6.1. (I/ 0 §2 t an 111)ma Ina III Imo amnrilil MISR Pr II° / 4:1** 1 um ins glum rein il= I-minnum a"'mi aim,_, mil Ilia IT - 1 IMMO 1 k tlaPti .•Mb CION22 ME III iminum in== Ina 1 = k M. 3 NMI MU in emom mon ' = •••••••-•. :,.: 1 i 11111111 V• •• %I ChM% NMI WIN fru mon - III ill 1111111111111111 111111u°MI 11111 • 1 lasa.X-11 ....: ; IMMO -11111111110111 il NM NMI II Ini I = amil ii. 11' 11 aim Lim II urn ■••• • EXPIRES 12-31-07 liDillmAlinl ill urn 1111111,Nil 11— / v d ....\ . ... , e7irbj , \ I• -.1.,. , GET1 :11 SO II RN iA le , 1.11".............11111. MI IJI well= La fa EN ,a / , 0 .., minium zi .. 1 „. ,,,i DOD mu 1111: am 111 RN am . : n El ri --:: I " 1 , .1. it 511111111{1 El .0 0 : ED 0E: : aohniiii al 0 „,i ..,-, i ,.. = wiliontrim .--- Ima 173[731::] - 1 ....., taMalalipt a um li—4 II al. .."0 ..., , .. _L. 4__,. _ ,-. . , ,. mmi ....,.... 0cm i - as illrn -0 i T" D M _ - - (0 1 - iii.....a •- ... : ± Mal " tt!!!:"" El Ei CI —...-., I.= =_.. \ 1--41 n FRO.I NT ELEir::"AITNIOEIN E=I El lial .... —. 0 " FRONT REVATION or-Tv lip SIMI MRCSs 4.4.s ttt COMM UMW k . I ,, 1— x. COMM 01,13VOT ; t 4, T \ s.a. , 'lla ',a UPPER FLOOR PLAN 511=102L---.111 C.n MAIN FLOOR PLAN UPPER FLOOR PLAN V1.2.11.,wf .1.MR MAIN FLOOR. PLAN LLI u) arm rl W.i XT MX. 1 xi IIIIYI XX WY tat cart vc,in° Ta:17L IISMINT GIVIK117 I IT-1,1/' WM= IV Pl FT tilitgE 313 WI IT (0.9 < —_,I CI. it .1 > 0 Ct 0 aic:: I-- 0 C9 (....) Lid I— Iii I-- 1 (...) it 1 , , - , :•••- 2, 00.44lt 04 TT. -Li OTTMATI,.4 1 r I ,C -..........- ' 1 ' aejtumbri I I, =BMW* a..1 o Simi 1 i-----•.--ii ...... jiiii , 0 (!) \ 1 1•11111111111111•1111111111111 =1 ........ - I %S. ____)joassassesaasses losioss*as.. oz.,.ast .a jil) IX , 0). I o 2 ca -.L'ir" ,.. Wit it F ill . 0 1 k„ csataurou ,e/s\ WA mauxximtr \ -, ---- —I• 44 fl,.... Y MEN a r- -- marattopou 7: - aLt13/13Wki ....... < .., -.....„ ... ___Si.111 .:\ I _,,.. x hale yawn (....) REV. DATE BY - i ,N, F/ '' ,...-- ,........■,.. ___ -,-- \:t* 1 fr - /1/ .\:\ ,„,.._..... 0 iA\N. .. 0'.\l'ill 1 N.,_ /... 0-....,1 ,,,, .. K V , _:le, ..,,, 4'\.(--> ---''--2---:;2)1 1 rws :17_1:71. U 1 SIITAT fiatt4 ,..i...,..i 1 IIEN \ 1 r's'a I I 1111/11111111' -s../ . , Lif , \\N\., . '___,,, . Id...Pi \I" _ . .;', 'ILS:=1 1 sasaasasassmassaa..1 a I Wirt irs.,......,......t. ---t—", ir 111E111 t11,MN \t. - NM . II 11111 I , Li 111111 ..-...........--''""C In 111 /1 al n Mill ill - I _ ,\ 1 10 I 0 i f31113hDE INS Nu 1 El 1 !Nib .....-,t), I ir ...._ 4.•, • ;4 - - ;\\,, - ,, -A _— , ..„.„.s., ,•„,.,! n• le WO di mu tu lam ti am NW=.._...... 30 .... G 1 1 s, s. \ ' ,... 1 NW .., Etta. Ii N. ''' ' alit''''.."..' ' •1•••• I. ;.. -7/d I I r ' 11,•^101•610 ,,::, UHF= . ardiarmIl _ \ I 1 I ,-. att x tto 2 ,, MaSTAI ......-.. ,--)-1 ) 'ii I : 1 MD C iPt MIK'......j ,"\\: :. WI.."-al-Me, ci 0 , .,...., -. " ~ NNE Mal INNIS . - _ 211 II 111 fil -n CILi Li z 1 _ =MU 3 ,t . k, ; I a li - __ _ - ,_._ mom ma r ... . Ma 111 7,----1---II IMMO OEM ILI ZVI 171 \ ! Lill illime,' -1-1 00=1 : 1 —..---,.. \ 7.'''''' [1111._... 1. NI ••am las.,.........--...1. 1- ( / .,, . 1 I 1 El=El EN mil we onlm U Ei ri=I (.\---1 '4 ' , ;11.\\-- .... .... w. - -4----- OM ----- IIMI , . E:IEDE:1, 1 0 (1? I ; rm.', il rife' MIN NM i1/4.411.14 aliall MOM 1 f . .."."..".-H-. 71 . 1=CM II I FRONT ELEVATION 4 FRONT ELEVATION N iv-•f tf PROJECT 1 . 1 lac'-I air . M 1 Sr"OE 1 i trt•t*Aw NUMBER DAL007 et. co — _ ... I LOWE;t OM aroalo ; VS t Date: 11/06/06 iii 1:: L\I N. Scale: AS SHOWN \ .. so o L., ,-:. N \ Drawn By: MRC 01 Lt. UPPER FLOOR PLAN wet rtiul L.lo..1 ft MAIN FLOOR PLAN PEEILB•WELPLAN ...r.ftry., 'AI pn,* MAIN FLOOR PLAN tatative.a_Ara:4.--1 Designed By: MRC is- LITT Pi TIM MI 41r, 4:10 VITT 1•-•t I 1,11aa PlaMr, fc.-*ii:.,Ft I tr..T r --*----- 041,477 ;II Mort' ttIrr.09 0,,-f...7 ,y1.4- 1st/1r, Or,tap, sa•.,I-47- Q C.41,S2 kli),VI tb Checked By: GID -0 L0 t) N. o o -.., o o C) o C 6 • 1 o c: -.1 '4C is„ , , XREF LIST . Ltscale: 1 PsItsco le: 1 Resolved <2 * 5' HIDE DALOO7DX50 DAL007x01 — DLD—LOGO — _ ...------.. ...... I. ----o -PEDESIRIAISLEA711--. — --a— INSTALL LOW LEVEL LIGH G DESIGN lilimilmi GROUP INC. sTAMPG/D 69 —0 I da1007x10 ill Ir. ........ NINO OEM .... IMO IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. -: al- -41111111,7777-..-, : Suite 101 Unresolved ,.. ,.. Portland, OR 97219 Nsismill.111111111111 .--_ -,-,.-- .*--..:::.:._ .. ,,, --...-, -... ,- • ,- : • - - ,._ . .-:-, ,,. , .-, , ,, •,•.-. , _ ., -•$ _-. :- , -,, ,,„ ,--. - , - . :: .-:- , -.-_.-' ,. ,.." ' :'. „''....°'. '.'** .'' ' ■' '• ■'•' ''.- <•:. : ',::,'Z::,•', ...N1 , 11101111 ° , _ • , ° • . . , . . .................. r' ..,../....,IM....../ aniiiii.M.IMOMMi.... ' ' ' ." . 4010;.■. . ONO 0111110 WIN SENO OMNI LEGEND (503) 225-1679 ___ _ ........- ):Ir ai INSTALL LOW LEVEL LIGHTING LIGHT POLE ID SIGN cc,OPROlt s4 40 I bt,t4s, ,7.,_ 1 19160 4) ?le 0.4: •14 I 15, :440 Y I. EXPIRES 12-31-07 * * 1> I _ _ _ ....------ _ — _ ....... — INSTALL LIGHT POLE NO PARKING SIGN LE NO IIMIND EINNWIWINIIIIIIIIIMBIBb MEM MHO 4111111•1■111111 IMMO IMO ONIMION. OM* OEM 11111111111111111111•••••••■ WNW al= . I 441MIMPOPM/101.1111111.0 0.141W.4011111•10 ONNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIN WNW, MOM 011111111111111111•111111111MM WINO IMO t ...' Al MEM — • • , . „ .. ■■• - ' . " ' '* ' ' -1' - ' - -- -': -• •:-Alabibb.. ›., . . _ .- . r . . . . :',',I +1111111 ill .1 _. . ., .., CI. . , , . ...,.::-...., ----Alms- .. .. ......... .. .. ............ .. .. ........... .. .. 4..fs,....., ....------- 1111 I -,,:. A C9 Illy • , ..--- Z MI+ INSTALL LIGHT POLE < (.9 . . , . . . .„.. , _ ....... _______, Pr .....;,,_ N\ .......1 -giff i - 4.,...w 46,,, N P PARKING SIGN -,.. . .. I:.- -: I Cr I- • I ,..: , ........_ M... i, I •=1 * . , I > 0 1 . .X\, I -, - -- - - - - I (...9 . .. ._ „. . -_,. . . ,. . . . - 1 I 1 I / t..,. • .. , , .,, air . , • , ......I 20' 10' 0 20' : I:',,:--. I I 0 Pmaiiiiimliml . , ... . •.. •.- '• 1------""" NO PARKING SIGN I O2 Z III H SCALE: 1 n = 20' ,f . I H CD< .• L.,.......................... ....„ + ..... _ + ,::::....., ,::::..... .: ., , .. II 7 I -- - IMMO 11111•11111•1111.■ MUM NMI ONIIMONININIMMIN. IMO IMO n MINI MM. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMINII* VIM VIM 111111111111111111111111111■111100 OM, WINO I I H (009 } * ,. , I 4 m, _i41 li ligsl\k .\... Nt .„,...,., ' ' , .' I.A• I I I I I I I; ..1.:,-.. : ,•_,, :,.• , :. *..,'• I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 NL PARKING SIGN INSTALL LIGHT POLE I STOP SIGN/ONE WAY—DO NOT ENTER SIGN I I I i 1 REV DATE BY \ .....,„ ____, I -................_ Min+ ...._4; • ••• ,•,, • ;_ INSTALL LIGHT POLE I I I 1 N.......... _ I-- r. • ow ,. , KIAILBOX CLUSTER I I . . ,• r', I ""'0""" ,,':`'• . , I 1 1 . NO PARKING SIGN PROJECT . .,..z NUMBER DAL007 ..... co ,5, t'i 1.1,_ ) llir Ilk I I I Date: 11/06/06 .A.... ) I I }.... 1 Scale: 1"=20' 0 • I I cz, "WHITE OAK 14LLAGE" SIGN ‘ (N I / ...I* —I (\a Drawn By: MRC ..143 r \ L ..„,.. ,..... \ _ ___ 100.0 40MM OMMINEM11.1.11.0.1■11 OM.. ...... CU —4 Designed By: MRC I, 0 Z, MOM 411111M, IMIle 4.11110 SWIM ~A i OEM IMO IMO 4////// 0 IMO Illf 1 MUM MINIM 14 too Checked By: GID = I ...ft..,7 13 ...: -, ,, I c...) N... o i 411 o -..I ,...‘'t . I 1 ..... ...................................... ..... .."... .7.. 1.4 LIGHTING PLAN 1 .. „.... 1 LI ,, I I , - ;. ' 1 " = 20' ‘,) ■J Li \ 1 . . ...1 ..0 1 ...... ....................... 0 7 • + A4t+ �' SLACK VINYL OVERSEED WITH SUNMARK SEEDS 4 4 SLACK FENCE NATIVE WATER QUALITY MIX AND MEADOW MIX alpha ,o COMMUNITY .--.:_-..:-.,-= ' DEVELOPMENT• _ _ . � = --•• � � , I•� ii. t n ��'S'* ii♦jiR�•�, . - l � A > + ) . � � . i r� ':44%- L r ? , .,,` OA , .".t2 O � / ' + ' 6 � • „r � • ii A-" , � •♦• * • ✓ .• � / �3r + ,r /'rf" "� f/ .`, . / d ♦ f > . . • / ` , l _ • •✓iJ d � A ' ,/ - • / ' : • r • . .1�- „ • "- ,* ' r ir 0/.14> , + ' . ° , ' ., ,,-‘ 7--wriyows---..:/. ,'. ,- > f/ s � sf - ;•.'"V , ! ” ' r , i r'', r irri`.•, r st)t � t,. ... - ---- r � .Ar ' ti W. ., 4...."/ 5' WIDE PERVIOUS 4' SLACK VINYL PEDESTRIAN 'PATH CI-IA INLINK FENCE 5' WIDE PERVIOUS OVERSEED WITI-! SUNMARK SEEDS 4' MASONRY WALL 6' WOOD FENCE ___J PEDESTRIAN PATI-1 NATIVE WATER QUALITY MIX AND MEADOW MIX ' -r . ,% < ,r✓ •� r t I / 7-+r ! I�1►I+oLIILIIS��.earw /I�w� matarAr.oeta r rillllr�swora'I-- wv a�'r:�.rr�cM�.P�i •1lL�iI+ •.7rlrntRrt.�'�'�if _ I!"+)n'°�°^J'T M^,,,,,arr- JIIRJ►��!'Y�!al.[.'r,.i:.A!TY•O...,..0.,'�M.r ,...+r..k JRt.Yiv1IIcar.ra J d ✓ / _ ��s�r rir• :rrr��or�+z s��a•�r_.w.�A�.•ar..r-...wi_�svi►.r tu. r�:ct��iiii�r .t I./WO rvr�--•ri�x�rrs�� +�.ar.A�i•.-`►:a.. .w��vi_isv�..�.,�' :� /''_ / '_ . ♦""' ��\!��'►'.� •[%t-� !•r■�,�.4 ••I-�I.C�II ♦�� .'!� �.�•[•�'� :(•)'J ��+� �'�:.9. .alal.a..�w.�. .•1a,.••,e .�i ....s•r S� .MK/''�iOfll .' ••' • 1D11, . �62f�Gi�_ \`WA*►.*1:1��.�_� ..� !.11.t.0.4'...�� J�+��La� .1 � A.��ti•r��\\\��....LiA• ear.,_.• '� f" j�� r'_ �.�- � r , `A• '.:' �• •.ti' yr / fA / � ..- .��I ........_-._.... _._ .._..—.. �\��\\�.V��....{��•/ '�+}� y � v s •'I. •a mss ^ ' ,;; . f, �f J. B" f° r J� . �� ., ,'`�. ,r/ ��.\� - +. ice, •'1� •..... •• - - .,• ��"A �•.j• •dr d£ r t,17.l 91t I` i a'• / I f ./ 6 Of. O. 'I• it.,, .�� f LOT 26 00 ' li,,, ..-_ -*..--; _ . ... . . . . . . . . . , 4 SLACK VINYL '� �� ! � — — — - — CI-IAINLINK FENCE y :r- +► . .v+ ,f �' ,d, •✓vf % � ti 'r111� , ii' , ► �. � :. ...�a. � ', ►► ( M i , . .tit i Aga a 0 40/A.„.;]:;,...°,-; Pr :--'' . , if:io.luip 'Mk $'.i' /W 0141* / ,. / r' . 41,--. lilt IRACAPAR f : *i I I$Øb.,, • __( r mi 0 , < . _ f . ! J 1 1 I I I + I _ , rr LOT 27 . _ r . : .*,--WO Wry- -----------/ '' e IIII 0 , . LOT 24 ` _ _ • .i }t ;' -^T r z , ` r + i i LOT 21 LOT 20 LOT 19 LOT 18 LOT 17 LOT 16 loll" '�" OT 23 LOT 22 Ik E r I Ea ,.: it I, f r, r f �, f r ` ,*/ , s r s r y d ✓ 3 ,r J � $ • ,. ` .+ �+' r'r r", r° d+°'r J ter+ ,/A AK r r„, :/. glINIF :'j. I I I I I 3 _ r” •r" . r` O /' rI• .. [\/^'\j\ .r : f f r f. T � d LEGEND �,.. LOT 25 .f • r ,,1` r �; � Y,.` {" i r' �, dTr r.r �f �,y' rf` tJ i 6•- I _ - .. - • .. 1 .,+' J' f f• ! r' '` r ° f rr•+>i" � • r t .°• Yr r,i . ar'". • ,.' i` r r !•I f^ +r/ `r� ^'' l' rf s •t" .' r >A J y ,• r.' +`" �,o° s .r'' �• / f J r° e`" r" STREET TREE 'polio ►' . J � ,di d� �� / r r , / Cr f, d. x'd'f /. ` ..'` s ;t'' ft r r,. d•,'y t,>' "'r"'� r>r /: d' Fd rF d .'"'+ p 0 0 —LACEISARK ELM � _._ I f �' J_ `� ••-••- .� -.... ._.. �. ,Iv i .. ,:^ / ,,' !✓"e f A.+'r fry d p'' ,J�r .''� d p �df r°.r+ �,d. e ' � r 1I�IIgt<sII� •r�is� y /' f r .. fi, dr % i d'P• dr� Jt .r� rf •Or ' .+✓• -HAWTHORN I - + . 0 CD d • — _ ..— Tr. ,,✓ ,, r, >`+" ,: r ,! rd Ord !M � r =r ./r . ,/rd ✓f+ -HONEYLOCUST I -GALLERY PEAR . 0 ,. I SUNMARK SEEDS I I I Z I PRAIRIE MIX NATIVE DECIDUOUS TREE '°. I I I I 1 I `� -ALDER .~ I TREE PROTECTION I j► FENCE. SEE PAGE 4+ + + + -DOGWOOD 01110� � � OF HALSTEAD S TREE-�ERVICE 'E `~� LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 11 LOT 12 LOT 13 LOT 14 LOT 15 REPORT. -WINE MAPLE NATIVE EVERGREEN TREE I • -DOUGLAS FIR i I I 1 ! I I 1.-.; I -HOGAN CEDAR _>"_ I \gra Ara-INCENSE CEDAR TRACT E , �► -WESTERN RED CEDAR , • I/ ., ORNAMENTAL TREE I .. _e*\c ( 410 -DOGWOOD -FLOWERING IN G CHERRY Y -FLOWERING CRABAPPLE • I::''.' `'.-'''''-':**'''''-litairAllnallingrAMINEWMEIMEWINSMOMEWRININ&MWANISMIS -STEU4RT I A ,j- i ? r•, ,A'w,, EVERGREEN SCREEN TREES _ . . l s • s -CANADIAN HEMLOCK — — - : 111 X41 4∎tii i.♦11`,.. .Q:.. .,. • r.�) 1 -IRISH YEW - c!; _ ,..�a �r`/;•:�':..'' I REV. DATE BY -ARBORVITAE ►� ��..:.: 11, ,Ee _(� N,4T I VE SHRUB I ___j I I I I �a r .$i11$' \��\\��,...' . ;- ED FLOWEI NG CUANT & MASONRY WALL I A A ROSE ¢ . -SNOW3ERi�'Y ___.__4 r 20'y LOT 7 LOT 6 LOT 5 LOT 4 LOT 3 LOT 2 LOT 1 ! 20' /0 0 20 -SP I RASA 1 I I I I I I I TRACT D--PARK •I e I ORNAMENTAL SHRUB I I I I I ( SCALE: " = 20'• 1 -F T �.•IRE I-PORN j -HESS I 0\\\11ti�, \\�1 ili//�✓/ \,,,,,,,./ \ 1111/,! �.\ ✓� ' �•��+" -JAPANESE HOLLY = t�w �r,, ,�� ,rL,sl , , -RHODOUENRON _'' _/,�„11��` \ir %� ��• -- �•rr�,�� -�� — — �Ir.�, — — PROJECT lrll� �1 1l41�\ \ l NUMBER DAL007 -SP IRAEA ` PROPOSED ENTRY .; ' ORNAMENTAL GRASS MONUMENTATION i .: I Date: -FOUNTAIN GRASS , �o' SOLID WOOD FENCE I •, .: Scale: -TUFTED HAIR GRASS I OU V ( I Drawn By: ____ ____�__._..__ • R ��►�� NDCO ER - -CREEPING MAHON!A ,• Designed By 7 4TH A VE LAWN :::''.';--.4'...:,:•-.,,,-:. ::;,: - ' Checked By: I L ` � `. : . //// GRASS MIX .__._,"_i -SUNMARK SEEDS NATIVE WATER QUALITY MIX (WET AREA OVERSEE)) j I SUNMARK SEEDS MEADOW MIX (DRY AREA OVERSEE)) -SUNMARK SEEDS PRAIRIE MIX (UNDER OAK) , ,, _ ........._. ... DL DESIGN GROUP INC. 9045 SW Barbur Blvd. Suite 101 "0 ..... _ 57,\ ....... ___ . ....... ___ ___ ...... ....... ___ . ...... ..... ...._ ...... , _ _ ___ ........ __. ....... ___ ..._ ...._. ...... - - - Portland, OR 97219 k.:24 (503) 225-1679 '‘ <\ -., /N .g.-,.:...:-%:°. . C. ' --- .-: :-i----• --vj:-'4.:-:-,;-.-A-„:,,,-.:::.--..-.:;- s.,:_::::...:,..:—...-,;:..,-*= -..:-.-,.:.-..,...----:.--.1. --:....: :.....".--. ...-. 7.: '.,: :.,',..--.:.:..........-—.I.- ;--......-.;..,-..-;,..,,,....•-:-,,,.-,: ......!,.........•:.:".. .....":..,.;:,,...: .....:•%:*.'.....:'..;....:4..'..4."::.' 4" :::',.7..••••t"....••':C",.•■.....•;;:•,........,r•;:%:...%...'•js.! ,••*:•••t:,.... 4, , ,•,..^,e•+,••■•.• ., ..: ..,''-,::t.•••••,* ••i• ••.. ...... ......,-....,..1, ....,,, •,r :•,......^.: ..• , •-.,...‘,...,..:4•••"•'''• ••• '.- • ',• * • ••••••.".. •• ".• • •'...•,••••• :.• -:• ..• v ••ie•,••• t ••••• 4, ....•••••••:•'.•••(:: ••* •••, .:".::,...,./•'• • *.% ..••'J.. J.' '''''..•••'... *** N. •`•`'''•.'"■•••'."•• .%, •••..•••••••:,••1... •••t' ''•'' ••...•••4• •"•.•'......".'•'•''' '...•••4••••":' : .k: .•i , )•••■•^r'... • .•.•' •‘ ....."•-•k.4', ...• .•••• ••• •••••,••••`••• .••• ••.•• +••;•■•.•.•:, "••••■■•• •' :-:"•.:I' - • -- •...,"••'e' •"—•• '• •": %,..-,'" ' ''— ''' ;I' :-•• $', ...... -.... 1■••*1 G1,/,,./4> ..())'.RE 15 G'0 1:1°'1\ 'c2 EXPIRES 1:11-0: j'411111MMMMIIIIIINIMNMIIIMMIMIIMHrj' I- I i• NI , ••■•• OMNI* ■•■••• AININIM ••••■ ...MOM .MMIO ••••■•■ 41••■■ 40.1.0.0* • ••■• .....■ ■ VW... 4.1.1.1. 01010... •••■01. ■••■■ ......... ........ ...... NOM.. •••■■■ . ■ ....... ...... , ••■• M■•■.■0 0...... •••••••■ PA 1, , ....... — --"0111*--- — ......... , -.... — -.... _ — — , --. ....... ....... .—. ......., , ...... ....... . , :,- •-•.,..•'.i.i...:.•Z:*,III''....'" l''';''....J.;.,::":...*:."%.**..:..• ...........-•••■-:-..- -4 ••.:,...-••■*. .. . .. . ...,. . Alig 0 '.' * — •— • -. • • ,... •-,..3. —a-• ....."" •,.-.-. -,. ...- ..- - •• ---' .. .-•"- . •• iv N) I ....„- :. . -..-.-.... •-.- ;.•-, „ . ,......,- ... : , -;.., 0 (z -•-• ‘'=.' ''' • ". I IV . ... • -..- - , , .• i- ... 1 :::--.:.;.-1.7..'11 0 I I _ - - ...... __ ..._ __ TRACT A o NI 1..---,---1 ... . .,. .../' LOT 26 1 - PI '---- o 1 . ..„,,,. •-,,....-:- -8,1 _...., / 7 , .......,..,...2 • . ... ...„ . . , •-:. 4 .1.: • .e. --.....2.--, "?.--.:.,..•--' 1 :,:. :.%.*: .....,-.,,,', ‘.-. -i-''. :.." t% ---...: ...•':,...I Z....r.••,,,.. t.••:'•.4:•.., -4,,•,*:•••;;. .",;:•.,..;:• :....../:.,• 1. ••,*•.V::..• "... I...."..... '...'",,,...s.:•.: :'•...J•:,.• :.••.•• ". ••••'.•.,...•t .... •1.-.', ... ,*. --... ....*. .4,,,..•...I.::..., .,...... .,. . .. 0.. ___ ........ "-• C.) 24.00' u,1 o . ...., ..., A n E) -.. ,* irr.-..„,.....! i (.7, 1 --.4 1.- 15.00' 15.00' i o ,. - I.. . i 11! ........*/ ....-.,--.. I :......1-..."":.: :...;.".' . i.t- 1 I — --- ....... ( :..:.'" ••,'" . ..."..,; .:::.;-. ... : ............—. —.. --- _ __ —I — ___ __ ___ ...,; -.-,• ,;.,:I .:-. , . •... ..,.. .. , :....::. :-.?':.-:*-,-- •--: •'• -.....,._,-•:,.:..— LOT 27 1::.;;-.......:: II 1 1------1.1"--.... _______ _ 7 _ _____] 1 1 ___L- 1 I I H la 0' 1 1 i 1 1 ....- .. . .. )0.oo' '.....':::..*::. ,...,,...........:•",:-.-.f.--.....,..:•. ....:-..- - - — I . . TH LOT 24 '...:.- , ,.. CD 15.00' roll li..." — 15. 0 ,__ . 1 1 I I I ;- ..4. : 1 . I ....... ..- --.... .-- ..,... . - -,... i •• . LOT 21 LOT 20 LOT 19 LOT 18 LOT 17 LOT 16 .... 1 . : -. — .. I ..■....I 1 LOT 23 LOT 22 ' -,.,:i. I •-• __I -----F ...... — _ ,.....: I .... s. ' f ....- ...: . 1 1 1 1 --- , p --. , . -- ....,::: -..... _ .. _ _.......... - TRACT C (A 1 1 .: i.... f, I.......1 ...:,,, 0 > 0 < ...t (,I --- 46. 0' I.. , ,..•-..: I i____ _ _ i 1____ --t--- -- +-i .._ ...... ., ..i 1 . 1 „___........____,... .. _. t._ , ....:1_1 ' ........ _ ....... ...... ....... ....... . 1 ....... I LOT 25 .- , _____ — L__ –__J 2_ ....,`::........:.:.;-.........:,........::. I -..- 3.00 - D._• -.). \<;:c C2)12.(ic 1 _ --..-- 2J 50' -- ..•- : . .... ... -1 -,... ...._ _ ....... - _ ........ - - _ _...... ......._ ....... ........ . ....... _ III•■ 20.100' .....:,i • I .. , .- • / - ...,i , . _. ....... - - I .i''• 1 (.f) 1 •- :-.. ,.•. :. Iii •*:. .-- I __. 1.----1-1 i — _} I— 4- 1 n I .:-..:: , . - - - I ... ..... --Ft---- - I I F- .,. 1-....:.... .::.....1 1 I 1 1 i "C" ....c' I i c J, I I I 1 1 I - .- ... I . -.., -:.-...- .. . , ._. LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 11 LOT 12 LOT 13 LOT 14 LOT 15 ,... .....i 1 ,..,... 1 1 1 I 1 I I .,.:: ......:. ...?:. , .......:. 1 .,.:.: ,. . 1•e 7..1 P I -,... ... ; 1 1 1 1 1 o 1-;:-•;:: EE ...,....i. I 1 ____ ___ _ _ — ,-..-'.1- I I I TRACT E 777"r' -...-,. . .. .\ - ...... ‘ \ -_.-.i.... \ ______ ____ __ N.) FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY 35.50'1 ---___._ __J I _ _1 I _i I c--) . • ......, _ _. ___. _ 1 -,,.\ _ cz) :-...1., : ...: , AU c:::, .... \ .:.,-,N ',BA, ...... - .....„ IZV ........ 1 ..- I I \ \\N. :::.....,.... ...e..'' j ..:'°*".. .''' . .;•..'..4 ;'• ••1'.:.•''..•...••'... . ; n--- •* '...., .,.. "*" ■.": ..'• ..' •':-‘. .":". • .. . '•":•• '"" -•*- ' t, e'...•... :..'•:■.. ...P'.'`..<:•••••.*....V :.`:-.."1 : •'.... ..* ••'', 1...J:.7: .• ,...., •..... ,.• 4 ••1. •.. ' N) • :•: "i..:•Z .'"Xl •, ........ • ..... ■ r:▪ , , I \ N) P1 TRACTS .Y1 --.............._ ol N ____ __-_ _ _ .) ko C) ,. •.'s ** '' 1 . it .°■."r ill■-' l '.--. 5.00' - ...... -.... - , % . I-••.:. . ,, • . . , •i.. I I I I_ N I t t ..„..„*.\\..__ ........, 1 , f\.),— ....._ co 1 c".c) .. •• , ..,, -: ..... „...„ :.,:r I I I • , , ...; .. I REV. DATE BY -•....--o'-- --0E— 3.00' .,,81, , ..,i . ,.. ....*--. i , -r. -■ : II I - - - - - 1 .,, . , g, , i. • .• , • ... ..:,. .„, .....____ 1.-- I I , , , i . ... .,. .....: Adopor.._..... 1 1 I 1 1 A ,: :- i.z,.--,.. .-..-:;......:. __.) I 1 I I _ I I I 1 I 1 ... .. I 1 1 I . I 20' /0' 0 20' 1 LOT 7 LOT 6 LOT 5 1 I LOT 4 LOT 3 1LOT 2 LOT 1 I ) I I I ........... !"1161.0m.111 I I I TRACT D .. SCALE: I u = 20' i i L _ _ 1 I f __. ___. ___ i 1 ...... ....... ....... / .., •:-:-./.' _:.::: .......: ._._ ••••■•• \ ..... ..... r al■ amp.. ... ''".* OIMINS 1 ..... ........ ....... ...... ...... 1■01040 •••■■ ■•••• ...I L. _______ _ ....... _. ....... _ _ _ _ Mai ARNIM& 110.1.1* . 00/1■■ OMMINIM NI.... ...... • e• PNUMBERT DAL007 ....”, -...;,-,- _ ......1 01 ul . I Date: o o -; •:. o o ..- ... . --■,_____:__________1 1 \ ..,.:,.. Scale: ___ 4?)1 ___________ .----. . :- ____ ___ ______ • ... ,...•f- o ., .„ . I -*.:1-1:-.... Drawn By: I \ •., -, r- ..,•:• 4... :., ...•-..-.. .7 -. - .c .. ' --- - SW 74TH AVE sm o Designed By: A vE__ ,z._ ... .., . I \ .. ...:. ...... „.. „....... ,:::..-i....„......_......: :..._. .,. .,::„.......4.,..--..., : , Checked By: I ',..:". i. '-: ...... "--.-- ,.• !,'":'.. I ..... .._. ...... ...... ..... ..... - - - 11 - --- ----- - --------1 1 1 • ./ C2 <, • •