Loading...
UFR2019-00003 UFR2O19 - 00003 IRMA DELL BUTTERFIELD PARK NOTICE OF TYPE I DECISION URBAN FORESTRY REVIEW UFR2019-00003 MODIFICATION OF URBAN FORESTRY PLAN FOR IRMA DELL BUTTERFIELD PARK T I GARD 120 DAYS =July 16, 2019 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: Irma Dell Butterfield Park CASE NO.: Urban Forestry Review(UFR) UFR2019-00003 PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to modify the Urban Forestry Plan approved under the Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision (Case No. SUB2016-00010). Specifically, the applicant proposes to remove three (3) trees that were originally proposed for preservation on Lot 13, in order to accommodate a larger building footprint for a new home. The applicant also proposes to modify the location of tree protection fencing,and to plant three (3) new Oregon White Oaks. APPLICANT: LWD,LLC Dba Solstice Custom Homes 5740 SW Arrow Wood Lane Portland, OR 97225 OWNER: Same as applicant LOCATION: 8909 SW Inez Street;WCTM 2S111AA,Tax Lot 13500 BASE ZONE: R-4.5: Low Density Residential Zone APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code (CDC) Chapter 18.420.060.F SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request.The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. UFR2019-00003 Irma Dell Butterfield Park—Urban Forestry Plan Modification I SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Information: The subject site (8909 SW Inez Street; WCTM 2S111AA, Tax Lot 13500) is Lot 13 of the Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision (Case No. SUB2016-00010), which was approved by the City of Tigard Planning Division in January 2017. This approval was for 13-lot subdivision, located south of SW Greensward Lane,east of SW 90t''Avenue,and west of SW Hall Boulevard.The site is zoned R-4.5 (Low- Density Residential),as are adjacent properties. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS 18.420.060.F. Urban forestry plan modification. Except as exempted in Paragraph 18.420.060.F.1, an application to modify the urban forestry plan component of a land use approval is processed through a Type I procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.050, using the approval criteria in Paragraph 18.420.060.F.2. The applicant proposes to modify the Urban Forestry Plan approved under the Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision (Case No. SUB2016-00010). Specifically, the applicant proposes to remove three (3) trees that were originally proposed for preservation on Lot 13,in order to accommodate a larger building footprint for a new home.The removal of these trees is not exempt from the Type I Urban Forestry Plan Modification.Therefore,this application subject to the approval criteria outlined below.Additionally,the applicant proposes to modify the location of tree protection fencing, and to plant three (3) new Oregon White Oaks. 2. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions the modification to the urban forestry plan component of a land use approval when all of the following are met: a. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that the previously approved urban forestry plan did not account for the circumstances that led to the proposed modification; The project arborist has provided a revised report and statement certifying that the previously approved Urban Forestry Plan did not account for the circumstances that led to the proposed modification.During land use review, the applicant provided an estimated building footprint for the proposed new home on Lot 13.The applicant has now completed the final building plans for the proposed home,and the building footprint is larger than the one proposed during land use review. Accordingly,the applicant proposes to remove three (3) trees that were originally proposed for preservation,in order to accommodate this larger building footprint.Additionally,the applicant proposes to modify the location of tree protection fencing, and to plant three (3) new Oregon White Oaks. This criterion is met. b. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification; and The project arborist has provided a revised report and statement certifying that there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification. This criterion is met. c. The project arborist or landscape architect demonstrates compliance with Subsection 18.420.060.8 through a modified urban forestry plan. (Ord. 18-28 §1) The project arborist submitted a revised Urban Forestry Plan and supplemental report that demonstrate compliance with CDC 18.420.060.B,including tree preservation,protection, and canopy standards. This UFR2019-00003 Irma Dell Butterfield Park—Urban Forestry Plan Modification 2 criterion is met. CONCLUSION: As demonstrated in the analysis above, the proposed modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of the approved Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision meets all applicable approval criteria. SECTION V. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was provided to: X The applicant and owner Final Decision: A Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of a Land Use Approval is a Type I Procedure. As such, this decision is final for purposes of appeal on the date it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant, whichever occurs first. This decision is not appealable locally, and is the final decision of the City. THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON MARCH 18, 2019, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 19, 2019. Questions: If you have any questions,please contact Lina Smith at (503) 718-2438 or LinaCS@tigard-or.gov. 111.1110-L • March 18.2019 APPROVED BY: Lina Smith,Assistant Planner Community Development Director's Designee UFR2019-00003 Irma Dell Butterfield Park—Urban Forestry Plan Modification 3 10080 W. -site /r `\ 6' 0" Douglas-fir �/��a, \ #1008 S 89°51'15" Wme #i#+ +++4.F##+ice .- �� •• •• m. .s ',,� \ 130.07' / ���' \ 04,..• + #10079 ♦ I #40 + I -+ 1 232.. 1 ....i.444441-1- �..--................... I 1 \\ /'#10061 r•./ .' i ,r,.. #19067 _ . -P 1111m ilLi ,, vimiatar 15 + 13 00 I . o� Off-site + ———— b r_ +J Douglas-fir + + 1 Off-site ',J1-0., t. GARAGE.. , I P' 0 maple o l c-� EL._2;4.0'`'.. EL.. .83' ``, .ii. MAIN FL00' L.•234.33' J ='r #10071 ♦ • 1 + LU I l,- #10072 & * I/ "' `D (V O O \tea + \-J O e A • — z --4 _ i I ----� mow l� ,, !Ci: Cj :' . I /10073 \ fl 1 / \ I \ 1 I \1 \ r\ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I #39 26 I 4;38 r _ 2 1 S, I / ii?� S 89°36'33" E S 89 49'48",W // 9'48" W /1 1 � 93.35' \ 4.54 I / h � ' � L _z/ (.u� ARBORIST LEGEND(MARCH 2,2019) i / ##EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED WITH 3/2/2019 MODIFICATION I S:;)- --1-___-- 1 , ##EXISITING TREE TO BE PROTECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH 3/2/2019 UFP MODIFICATION 1 zI ## NEW MIN.1.5"CALIPER OREGON WHITE OAK TREE TO BE PLANTED IN ACCORDANCE r WITH 3/2/2019 MODIFICATION I )1 S °39'58" E (LnY). ' W I L +++TREE PROTECTION FENCING 28.00' T O iN M cv REFER TO THE MARCH 2,2019 TREE PRESERVATION AND REMOVAL SITE PLAN FOR TREE o I I PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS AND TO THE TREE CANOPY SITE PLAN FOR TREE PLANTING cn1 I 1... • I _j Ca.;11 I<,,�.K~j" �; 1ARD pprov . by la ning (. I i W _wi 0 APPROVAL FOR UFR2019-00003 ONLY. COMPLIANCE itia I k..-9 . WITH SETBACKS AND OTHER STANDARDS IN CDC II glIF .b 89.3 18.290 WILL BE CONFIRMED DURING BUILDING 76. PERMIT SUBMITTAL. 26 FEB 2019 I MRR �■ ALAN MASCORD DESIGN ASSOCIATES.INC IS NOT CITY OF TIGARD miiLfAOLE FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE TDPOGRAPHY 2396 INFDRMATION IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE IRMA DELL BUTTERFIELD PARK BUILDER TO YERFY ALL SITE CONDITIONS,INCLUDING ANY FILL PLACED ON THE SITE AND NOTIFY THE LOT 13 ...., // OWNERS OF ANY POTENTIAL FIELD MODIFICATIONS. COLLECTIONALANw�soorown� A FOR LARRY/8, MARGARET BLAKE 1305 NW Min AVE. PORTLAND OR 91209: 503!225-9151 F. 5D3,225-0933 htt°,/wwwmespor°.corn )--J 1--1 i•d tri r,_44 l' lJ -,1 F4 cp )...4 IlCUbIVb , MAR 0 7 2019 CITY OF C IUAHL) Case #: City ofTigard PLANNING/ENGINEERING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TIGARD Master Land Use Application LAND USE APPLICATION TYPE ❑ Accessory Dwelling Unit D Modification: ❑ Type I ❑ Type II ❑ Adjustment ❑ Planned Development: ❑ Annexation ❑ Consolidated Plan ❑ Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment ❑ Concept Plan D Conditional Use ❑ Detailed Plan ❑ Downtown Design Review: ❑ Sensitive Lands Review: ❑ Track 1 ❑ Track 2 ❑ Track 3 ❑ Type I ❑ Type II ❑ Type III ❑ Home Occupation—Type II D Site Development Review: ❑ Type I ❑ Type II ❑ Land Partition D Subdivision D Lot Line Adjustment/Lot Consolidation ❑ Temporary Use Permit D Marijuana Facility Permit ® Urban Forestry Plan: ❑ Miscellaneous: Q Modification ❑ Discretionary Review ❑ Type II ❑ Type III ❑ Zoning Map Amendment PROJECT INFORMATION Project name: Lot 13 Irma Dell Butterfield Park Brief description of project: Type 1 modification to urban forestry management plan SITE INFORMATION Location (address if available): 8909 SW Inez Street Tax map and tax lot number(s): 2S111AA13500 Site size: 14,560sf Zone: R4.5 APPLICANT INFORMATION Name: LWD LLC dba Solstice Custom Homes Mailing address: 5740 SW Arrow Wood Lane City/State: Portland,OR Zip: 97225 Phone: 503-709-2277 Email: adeharpport@gmail.com Applicant's representative: Phone: Email: City ofTigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • wwwtigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 1 of2 PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION 0 Same as applicant (Attach list for additional owners) Name: Same as applicant Mailing address: City/State: Zip: Phone: Email: I certify that I am the property owner or I am eligible to initiate this application,as provided in the Tigard Community Development Code. To the best of my knowledge,all the information provided within this application package is complete and accurate. r , App ant's signature* Print name r Date a7.4„.„,z. �� E/-74/+2 Pe o 4-T 3 — 6 --1 Property owner's signature* Print name Date Property owner's signature* Print name Date *The owner must sign this application or submit a separate written authorization when the owner and applicant are different people. (/t.f,/2STAFF USE ONLY n Case No.: O1q — a)$plication fee: s- Received by: a c.. Date: <.1 Related Case(s): Determined complete by: r Date: ,....-3//e),/,/ City ofTigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • wwwtigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 2 of RECEIVED CF T:CAPD MAR 0 7 2019 Approved y Planning Date: _ CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING initials! 971.409.93 4 Morgan �" "� —„" 3” Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 o l en M_-� Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 A JOCIATEu.c Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net DATE: March 2, 2019 TO: Alan DeHarpport (LWD LLC) & Gary Pagenstecher(City of Tigard) FROM: Morgan Holen, Consulting Arborist RE: Irma Dell Butterfield Park—Urban Forestry Plan Modification MHA16079 Morgan Holen &Associates (MHA)was contracted by LWD LLC to modify the previously approved Urban Forestry Plan for Irma Dell Butterfield Park based on the proposed plot plan for lot 13.Three trees previously planned for preservation are now proposed for removal,three new trees are proposed to be planted to maintain the effective tree canopy cover for lot 13, and tree protection fencing has been adjusted and supplemental tree protection specifications are provided for the protection of off-site trees during homebuilding adjacent to lot 13. In addition, in reviewing the recorded plat I recognized minor changes in the square footage of each lot/tract and adjusted the Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary accordingly.This resulted in slight changes to the canopy cover percentages for 11 lots and tract A, although the minimum effective tree canopy cover requirements continue to be satisfied. This memorandum addresses the criteria regarding modifications to the Urban Forestry Plan component of an approved Land Use Permit contained in Section 18.420.060 of the City's Community Development Code. A plot plan mark-up and the recorded plat are attached for additional information.The complete revised Urban Forestry Plan is also enclosed. Section 18.420.060.F.2 provides the approval criteria for modifications to the Urban Forestry Plan components of an approved land use permit. Each of the pertinent criteria are addressed below. a. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that the previously approved urban forestry plan did not account for the circumstances that lead to the proposed modification; The previously approved Urban Forestry Plan did not account for the circumstances that led to the proposed modifications because a smaller building footprint was assumed.The attach lot 13 plot plan shows that tree#10061 is directly north of the house within the area of foundation excavation,tree #10067 is within the garage and tree#10073 is within the driveway turnaround. These three trees cannot be protected. With their removal,three new trees are proposed to be planted to off-set the change in effective tree canopy cover. In addition,the previously approved tree protection fencing is adjusted to continue to provide protection during homebuilding for off-site trees adjacent to the lot. The tree protection specifications were also amended to provide additional arborist recommendations. The enclosed revised Urban Forestry Plan provides complete documentation of the proposed modifications based on the actual plot plan for lot 13. I want to point out that the three trees proposed for removal are located in stand 3 which previously received a stand preservation rating of 1. However,the preservation rating of these three particular trees within the stand was 2 and effective tree canopy cover was accounted for.This was not explained in the previously approved plan. Note that the condition and preservation ratings have not changed, but removal is necessary for the proposed homebuilding. While revising the arborist report in regard to lot 13, I recognized that the recorded plat listed square footages that were slightly different from the previously approved effective tree canopy cover summary. Irma Dell Butterfield Park—Urban Forestry Plan Modification March 2, 2019 Page 2 of 2 Along with the modifications for lot 13, I updated lots sizes to reflect the recorded plat (attached)which resulted in minor changes to the canopy percentages of 11 lots and tract A. The minimum canopy cover requirements continue to be satisfied. The previously approved plan was prepared prior to recording the final plat and these changes could not have been accounted for. b. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification;and There is no practicable alternative to the proposed modifications because the three trees now proposed for removal are within the allowable building envelop and the property owner is entitled to utilize the entire space. I did coordinate with LWD LLC to make minor adjustments in order to ensure sufficient protection for during homebuilding for off-site trees adjacent to lot 13. c. The project arborist or landscape architect demonstrates compliance with Section 18.420.060.6 through a modified urban forestry plan. This memo and the enclosed modified Urban Forestry Plan, including the supplemental arborist report and Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan and Tree Canopy Site Plan drawings, demonstrate compliance with Section 18.420.060.B. The proposed planting of three native Oregon white oaks on lot 13 provides more effective tree canopy cover for this lot than preservation of the three existing Douglas-firs. Modifying the square footage of each lot and tract A for consistency with the recorded plat resulted in increased effective tree canopy cover for lots 2, 3, 9 and 13 and tract A, and for decreased canopy cover for lots 1,4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 11 although each lot continues to exceed the minimum 15%canopy cover required.The effective tree canopy cover for the overall development site increased from 44.7%to 45.0%. No payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of planting or preservation is proposed. The proposed modifications are not exempt from the Type 1 process because the condition and preservation ratings of the three trees now proposed for removal have not changed and effective canopy cover decreased on seven lots solely due to changes in lot sizes based on the recorded plat; a $764 application fee will be required to process the Urban Forestry Plan modification. The client may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations contained herein, or seek additional advice. Neither this author nor Morgan Holen &Associates have assumed any responsibility for liability associated with the trees on or adjacent to this site. Please contact us if you have questions or need any additional information or further assistance. Thank you, Morgan Nolen &Associates, LLC -Noyoot Morgan E. Nolen, Member ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, PN-6145B ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Forest Biologist Enclosures: Lot 13 Plot Plan Mark-up Recorded Plat for Irma Dell Butterfield Park MHA16079 Irma Dell Butterfield Park—Urban Forestry Plan 10-27-16 Rev. 3-2-19 IRMA DELL BUTTERFIELD PARK RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. A013 A REPLAT OF A PORTION OF TRACT"D", GREENSWARD PARK NO. 2 AND OTHER LAND LOCATED IN THE LEGEND N.E. 1/4 OF SEC. 11, T.25., R.1W., W.M. O SET 5/8"%30"IR MATH YPC MARKED"EMERIO DESIGN' CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY. OREGON ♦SET 5/B"%30"IR WITH YPC MARKED"EMERIO DESIGN"IN MONUMENT BOX JANUARY 30, 2018 ■ FOUND 5/8"IR MTH WC MARKED"EMERIO DESIGN"SET IN R1 • FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED IN MONUMENT REFERENCE TABLE IR IRON ROD IP IRON PIPE i YPC YELLOW PLASTIC CAP AC ALUMINUM CAP SF SQUARE FEET 55 p PARK HO Z 56 I SN FD.SURVEY NUMBER,WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS GREENSWARI R2 REFERENCE NUNMBER POSITIONT 03 MONUMENT REFERENCE NUMBER (H)O N 89`8'09" E 130.07' •©(H) W []MONUMENT FALLING(CARDINAL) Jr 4413' 58 Z 38 PUE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT 14(H) 'Q. W I DBC MONUMENTEl PRIVATE SEMENT FOR DESTROYED BRIGHT OF WAY Y CONSTRUCTION.REPLACED AS.SHOWN NO.201 2-031 892 INITIAL POINT 'Q NE CORNER LOT 15 8 n . a REFERENCES .^� O NQ_2 R1 SN 33199 ®.0 a0 WARP PARK 21 R2 SN 31785 3 R3 SN 32413 GREEDS R4 PLAT OF"GREENSWARD SOUTH" = VS R4 PLAT OF"GREENSWARD PARK NO.2" LOT 13 R6 PLAT OF"GREENSWARD PARK" 14,560 SF R7 PLAT OF"PINEBROOK TERRACE" 15 o 59 22' 22' 37 GREE'SWARO PARK R8 USBT BOOK 9,PAGE 540 MONUMENT REFERENCE TABLE J'l� (") N N 89"49'48" E DBC 291.20' (H)N/S 9.12' 1 FD.5/8"IR MN YPC MARKED"NORTHWEST SURVEYING,INC- DOWN 0.1',SET IN R2 O © ❑4 "®(H)SEE NARRATIVE 5 22.00:422.00'.`,.�1 FD.5/8'IR MN AC MARKED"WAKER ASSOCIATES,INC",FLUSH,SET IN R5 - S 89'36'33"E 93.35' Qv �- 3 FD.5/g"IR MN AC MARKED"WAKER ASSOCIATES,INC',FLUSH,SET IN R6 P9 11166' I 23.00 123.00 I 129.00' NL 645.938.427 S1 �4 FD.5/8"IR MN AC MARKED"WAKER ASSOCIATES,INC",FLUSH.SET IN R6 r15 _ .16'09'26"E 4.54' I E 7,620,028.752 05 FD.5/B"IR,NO CAP,FLUSH,SET IN R6 GEL�'� 01 31'54 n 8 ©FD.5/8"IR WITH AC MARKED"WAKER ASSOCIATES,INC",FLUSH.SET IN R6 N LOT 7 0 22 07 FD.2"BRASS DISK IN MONUMENT BOX MARKED'DLC 44 T2S R1W 1996" 0O \ 2900' 8"E LOT 12 3 LOT 8 n W I ' co WASHINGTON COUNTY GEODETIC CONTROL MONUMENT GC-22-013 SET IN R8 28 00' 7046 SF H 7546 SF O 7754 SF W o Z I �FD.5/8"IR,NO CAP,FLUSH,SET IN R7 m g 1,Y 09 FD.5/8"IR WIN YPC MARKED"NORTHWEST SURVEYING,INC.".DOWN 0.3',SET IN R2 NSET MONUMENT 1.00' z 5 5 89'43'48"W 129.01' 10 FD.5/8"IR WIN NC MARKED'NORTHWEST SURVEYING,INC.',DOWN 0.2',SET IN R2 O 8 EAST ON LINE i 0 I O . 4.20' m FD.5/8"IR WITH YPC MARKED'NORTHWEST SURVEYING.INC DOWN 0.3'.SET IN R2 O S 89'36'33"E 107.08' 5 89'36'33"E 61000' 72.78' 56.23' ist ®FD.5/8"IR MN YPC MARKED"EMERIO DESIGN",FLUSH,SET IN R4 n 76.08' O 66 00' 0 76.00' O I ®FD.5/9"IR MATH AC MARKED"WAKER ASSOCIATES,INC",FLUSH,SET IN R5 0 W k' 10 1 n �. k-8.00'PUE (H) 14 FD.5/6"IR'MTH YPC MARKED"WAXER ASSOCIATES.INC".FLUSH,SET IN 95 0 j= m 15 FD.5/B"IR,NO CAP,SET IN R7 aw 6.00'PUE�I # I '^ 16 FD.5/8"IR WITH YPC MARKED"WAKER ASSOCIATES,INC",DOWN 0.4'.SET IN R5 Z Y w r m I w 17 PD.5/8'IR WITH AC MARKED"RAKER ASSOCIATES.INC",FLUSH,SET IN R6 ^CO 2 ' w H m FD.5/8"IR,NO CAP,UP 0.2',SET IN R7 14 t2 r JI o • g o $ n r l LOT 6 w TRACT A m U �]FD.5/6"IR MN YPC MARKED"WAKER ASSOCIATES,INC",FLUSH,SET IN R5 a N F'n LOT 11 w LOT 10 w LOT 9 ^� I s•+ mi 8237 5F N 6387 5F + M 23 8 0 8120 SF N 6997 SF N 7931 SF z m SEE NOTE 2 - < _ P N 8 8 23' 23' I z M co NARTHEE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY IS TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2017-035840,WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS AS APPROVED IN CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING SHEET z SEE DETAIL z uj FILE NO.5UB2016-00010. all 00'2POE O 1 L. PUE ` I THE BASIS OF BEARINGS AND BOUNDARY DETERMINA11ON ARE PER SN 33199,WASHINGTON COUNTY 2.00'E1 La28.16' L-28.40' L /J 55.16' 55.76' SURVEY RECORDS.NE MOST NORTHERLY PLAT LINE WAS ADJUSTED AFTER MONUMENTS 1,2,AND /(H)I2 28.00' 49.5F-1=-26.89' gg.Op' b 57.65' C2 C3 O O 14 WERE RETIED AND HELD FOR NE BOUNDARY. .-N 89'59'26"E 77.55'}- - f 5 8957'53"E 150.54' - + N 90'0000"E 110.92' o 6 o MONUMENT 17,AN ORIGINAL ADJOINING PLAT MONUMENT WAS FOUND AT NE NORTHEAST PLAT In 6 in N iN CORNER,AND NE MONUMENT SET IN SN 33199 BY EMERIO DESIGN WAS FOUND TO BE OUT OF N N N N 90'00'00"E 152.05' _ _ POSITION BY ABOUT 0.3'.THE EMERIO MONUMENT WAS REMOVED TO AVOID CONFUSION.MONUMENT (H)11 N N 1�(")- N S 89'57'53"E 191.26' - _ -� 17 IS HELD AT THE NORTHEAST PLAT CORNER,AND NE BOUNDARY LINES RUNNING WESTERLY AND DBC ODBC - - 147.05' __-,4 o , S.W. INEZ STREET 33199. NS 89"59'26 W 77.89' N S.W. INEZ STREET n _ SOUTHERLY FROM THAT MONUMENT ARE IDENTICAL TO THE BOUNDARY LINES SHOWN ON SN S.W. INEZ STREET _ N i N A N 5 09'57'53'E 150.22' N 90'00'00"E 151.89' N 'L \ .Cr.--10 54.29' 0 62.00' 0 33.93''28.07'-O 62.00' O 61.82' 0 a U7 W L225.15' r O voi CURVE TABLE N O `-8.00'PUE N CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD _ Cl 25.15 16.00 90'04'18" 94459'66'W 22.64 Z 8.00'PUE n N C2 28.16 18.00 89'38'40' N4572'47'E 25.36 i 2.00'E7 g $ c c C3 29.40 18.00 90"23'27' 544'48'16"E 25.54 S ml qT) m LOT 1 w LOT 2 LOT 3 N LOT 4 N LOT 5 0 24 SCALE: 1"= 40' 1 P�� TRACT A Q ;I I 7004 SF 6230 SF 6222 SF 6215 SF 6171 SF O, �, 810' t0 0 Po O 8 FL� Z N I I Z z z A I" REGISTERED . . M 0 I PROFESSIONAL 25' 25'z I .85'35'25"E LAND SURVEYOR ® cit®D�, 30.17' 31.83' 62.00' 62.00' 61,x' ©(") "�' 25.00'Cf 70.00' O 0 O F- (")oa S 89'ST14" W 125.17" ®H() 124.91'(125.00')R7 30.92' \\S o W (125.13')R2 S 89'54"34" 217.25' PLAT CORNER 6c9 �EG.�� 7 N 645,514.266 .9.,N,:1;9,. = 500'05'26"E 0.30' E 7,620,018.923 .001JANUARY 15,1‘87 6445 SW FALLBROOK PLACE, STE. 100 28 6 27 �f JON T.FEIGION BEAVERTON, OREGON 97008 RACE 25 I25 9114E13ROOK TERRACE 18 17 'o\x OREGON ADNORTH 83/912�E EXPIRES 12-31-19 .1 FAX: (503)639-9592 PINEBROOK TEL: (503) 746-8812 TER 173 19 16 \ 6 \ E 7,620,698.18 4 www.emeriodesign.com n.com \ ® (GRID) JOB NO.236-014 COMBINED SCALE FACTOR-0.9998994 ti GC22-013 SHEET 1 OF 2 vi / I IRMA DELL BUTTERFIELD PARK RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. A012 oil 41'1 A REPLAT OF A PORTION OF TRACT"D", GREENSWARD PARK NO. 2 AND OTHER LAND LOCATED IN THE N.E. 1/4 OF SEC. 11, T.2S., R.1W., W.M. CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON JANUARY 30, 2018 CITY OF TIGARD APPROVALS APPROVED THIS 1 DAY OF FCJDrtin,Pq ,2OII1 CITY OF TIGARD,CITY ENGINEER DECLARATION SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT LWD.LLC,AN OREGON UNITED LIABILITY I,JON T.FEIGION,CERTIFY THAT I HAVE CORRECTLY SURVEYED AND MARKED WITH PROPER MONUMENTS,THE LANDS BY: ,.-6(1E111�'l'�YVI�{.r AND FOUR 0 CONSTRUCTION CSMPANY,AN OREGON CORPORATION,ARE THE OWNERS OF COMPANYTHE REPRESENTED ON THE ANNEXED MAP OF"IRMA DELL BUTTERFIELD PARK",SITUATED IN THE N.E.1/4 OF SECTION 11 TOWNSHIP LANDOUR 0I COS THE ACCOMPANYING SURVEYORS RPORATION,AND HAVE CAUSED THE 2 SOUTH.RANGE I WEST,WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN,CITY OF TIGARD.WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON,BEING MORE PARTICULARLY y SAME TO BE SUBDIVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ORS CHAPTER 92,ALL LOTS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: APPROVED THIS X51`DAY OF PI=62uACY 201X AND TRACTS BEING THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN AND DO HEREBY GRANT ALL EASEMENTS AS SHOWN BEGINNING AT THE INITIAL POINT WHERE I FOUND A 5/8"IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP MARKED"NORTHWEST CITY OF TI ARD,COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR NOTED,AND DO HEREBY DEDICATE THE RIGHTS OF WAY TO THE PUBLIC. SURVEYING.INC."AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 15,"GREENSWARD SOUTH".ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO LWD,LLC AND FOUR D CONSTRUCTION CO.BY DEED RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. BY: LYS,LLC FOUR D CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 2017-035840,WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS; / J /_ THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY UNES OF SAID LAO TRACT,NORTH 89'48'09"EAST,130.07 FEET AND SOUTH 0073'43"WEST, �` 105,12 FEET TO THE SOUTH UNE OF THE PLAT OF"GREENSWARD PARK NO.2";THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE AND ITS BY: '- .. � - ., •�=� BY:,/ �-/ o Y �_ EASTERLY EXTENSION,NORTH 89'49'48"EAST,291.20 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LAD TRACT ON THE WEST WASHINGTON COUNTY APPROVALS ALAN RAY•.' ARPPORT,W" AGER DAVI DEHARP T,PRESIDENT UNE OF THE PLAT OF"GREENSWARD PARK";THENCE ALONG SAID WEST UNE SOUTH 0072'21"WEST,324.31 FEET TO THE ''//�� NORTH UNE OF THE PLAT OF"PINEBROOK TERRACE";THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH UNE,SOUTH 89'54'34"WEST,217.25 FEET; THIS DAY OF �E'ltaRVAR�{ 20 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE,SOUTH 8APPROVED 9'57'14"WEST,125.17 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PLAT PPRCOUNTY SURVEYOR J) OF"GREENSWARD SOUTH";THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY UNE OF SAID"GREENSWARD SOUTH",NORTH 00'02'11"WEST,125.66 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREON;THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY UNE.SOUTH 895926"WEST,77.69 FEET AND NORTH 0020'02"EAST,302.91 FEET TO THE INITIAL POINT. BY: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CONTAINING 140,250 SQUARE FEET(3.22 ACRES),MORE OR LESS STATE OF OREGON ) ALL TAXES,FEES,ASSESSMENTS OR OTHER CHARGES AS PROVIDED S$ BY ORS 92.095 HAVE BEEN PAID AS OF THIS 'DAY OF COUNTY OF WASHINGTON; REGISTERED IL THIS INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME ON cA/1/0.//7 201 PROFESSIONAL BY ALAN RAY DEHARPPORT AS MANAGER OF LWT,LLC.AN OREGON YMI LIABIU LAND SURVEYOR DIRECTOR OF ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION COMPANY, ,. (WASHINGTON OMPANY, (WASHINGTON COUNTY ASSESSOR) BY: NOTARY SIGNATURE ..,21,-.4.......-- Ni'� 'n. DEPUTY /Llai/%e lo�l.-iiJAN OREGON 11.1s 7 NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON JON T..52GION STATE OF' OREGON y SS COMMISSION NO. 9 I 7.6.1.7.6.1. ` 2 / MY COMMISSION EXPIRES G2.4 U.5t.3/ 20.4tEXPIRES 12-31-19 COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) _ I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SUBDIVISION PLAT WAS RECEIVED ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR RECORD ON THIS I4.1 DAY OF �"I'11W'""'1 20 IS STATE OF OREGON ) PLAT NOTES AT��''S4I O'CLOCK p M,AND RECORDED IN THE COUNTY SS 1)THIS PLAT IS SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN PLANNING FILE NO.SUB2016-00010. CLERK RECORDS. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON 2)TRACT A IS A STORM WATER DUALITY AND DETENTION TRACT. -4.atAAICA- THIS INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME ON .,z4,1'1 /7/20_45BY DAVID J.DEHARPPORT AS PRESIDENT OF FOUR D CONSTRUCT10 COMNY,AN 3)TRACT B IS SUBJECT TO A PUBUC UIIUTY EASEMENT AND A PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOTS 12 AND 13 DEPUTY COUNTY CLERK OREGON CORP RATION. OVER ITS ENTIRETY.TRACT B IS ALSO SUBJECT TO A PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOT 15,"GREENSWARD SOUTH" OVER ITS ENTIRETY PER DOCUMENT NO.2017-099171. ,,//XC NOTARY SIGNATURE APPROVED THIS L.__DAY OF FESizu&lzj Z,Dr$ ...1//a.rB;fee_£1.,44 WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS NOTARY PUBUC-OREGON _ COMMISSION NO. � "2 I 2 BY '7'.. '; MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Gild,BX S/ 2017 , /I.- .."' ATTEST THIS I� DAY OF FG 4X4 IZD1$ ,'...".,, DIRECTOR OF ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION EX-OFFICIO COUNTY CLERK ,'.� CONSENT AFFIDAVITS BY _S....4 E ra✓ DEPUTY A SUBDIVISION CONSENT AFFIDAVIT FROM COMMUNITY FINANCIAL CORPORATION,AN OREGON m DETAIL LEGEND CORPORATION,HAS BEEN RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. A01B 0II6T1 P El PRIVATE EASEMENT FOR RIGHT OF WAY AND UTILITIES WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS. 8 DOCUMENT NO.2012-031892 LOT Ti Z LOT 10 M , 58959'26"E 0.08' _ S 89'59'26"E El r _ r ..c.-El .. - 2.00' NOO'O8'22"E 2.02'- f .02' �500'02'11'E 2.02' S 89'59'26"E R S 89'57'53"E ) 6445 SW FALLBROOK PLACE,STE. 100 N89'57'S3"A 0.09' BEAVERTON, OREGON 97008 TEL: (503) 746-8812 S.W. INEZ STREET FAX: (503)639-9592 \ J www.emeriodesign.com EJOB NO.236-014 NOTDETAIL NOT TO SCALE SHEET 2 OF 2 971.409.9354 Morgan Nolen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 8 Ali OC,IATELLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net 14Y CF ToGA D Approved y Planning Date: 0 Initials: _. Urban Forestry Plan Supplemental Report October 27, 2016 Modified: March 2, 2019 Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision 8770 SW Mountain View Lane Tigard, Oregon 971.409.9354 Morgan Holen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 —&—AfJOCIATLi'LLc Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net Table of Contents— Purpose 1 General Description 1 Effective Tree Canopy Cover 2 Specifications 3 A.Tree Protection Specifications 3 B. Soil Characteristics and Specifications for Improvement 4 C. Tree Planting Specifications 5 Signature of Approval 5 Enclosures— Attachment A: Existing Tree Inventory Data Attachment B: Existing Stand Inventory Data Attachment C: Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Attachment D: Planted Tree Inventory Attachment E:Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Attachment F:Tree Canopy Site Plan Not Applicable— Planted Stand Inventory Stand Planting Specifications Tree Canopy Fee Calculation 971.409.9354 Morgan Holen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 8-,...._ Alf OC IATE,f'LLc Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net Urban Forestry Plan - Supplemental Report Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision, Tigard, OR October 27, 2016 Modified: March 2, 2019 MHA16079 Purpose This Urban Forestry Plan for the Irma Dell Butterfield Park 13-lot residential subdivision project located in an R-4.5 zoning district at 8770 SW Mountain View Lane in Tigard, Oregon, is provided pursuant to the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual.This report describes the existing trees located on the project site, provides arborist recommendations for tree removal, retention and protection, and describes the effective tree canopy cover needed to meet City requirements.This report is based on observations made by International Society of Arboriculture Board Certified Master Arborist and Qualified Tree Risk Assessor Morgan Nolen (PN-6145B) during a site visit conducted on September 16, 2016. This report was revised on March 2,2019 based on the plot plan for lot 13:three existing trees are proposed for removal, the location of protection fencing was modified, tree protection specifications were amended, and three new trees are proposed to be planted. In addition,in reviewing the recorded plat I recognized minor changes in the square footage of each lot/tract and adjusted the Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary(attachment C) accordingly. This resulted in slight changes to the canopy cover percentages for 11 lots and tract A, although the minimum effective tree canopy cover requirements continue to be satisfied. Changes are identified in bold, italicized type. General Description The existing site is largely an undeveloped field with an unimproved driveway off of SW 88th Avenue leading west to a single-family home.The existing trees individual trees are scattered east and south of the home and in the field near the southern property boundary and existing stands of trees are located north of the driveway, north of the existing home, and along the eastern property boundary.The project proposes to create 13 lots for the construction of single-family homes, a water quality tract, and new streets and sidewalks. In all, 207 trees measuring six inches and larger in diameter were surveyed, including 11 trees located off-site within 25-feet of the project boundaries.Tree inventory data was collected for 26 open grown trees assessed individually and for four groups of stand grown trees with contiguous tree canopy. A complete description of individual trees located on and adjacent to the project site is included in the enclosed existing tree inventory data (attachment A). The existing stand inventory data provided as attachment B presents a summary of species, condition and size of trees inventoried in stands 1-4. Two trees are suitable for preservation with the proposed site development, including a 68-inch diameter giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) in excellent condition accounted for in the existing tree inventory data and one 32-inch diameter western redcedar(Thuja plicata) in excellent condition accounted for in the stand 4 inventory data. Three 28-inch diameter Douglas firs(Pseudotsuga menziesii)in good condition, accounted for in the stand 3 inventory data, were previously planned for retention but are now planned for removal based on the proposed plot plan for lot 13. These trees are within the allowable building envelope and protection is not possible. The Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan(attachment E)has been revised to identify trees#10061,#10067 and#10073 for Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision,Tigard,Oregon October 27,2016 I Modified: March 2,2019 Page 2 removal and to adjust protection fencing for off-site trees adjacent to lot 13 during homebuilding. In addition, a stump removal specification was added for tree#10073 and a surfacing specification for driveway construction adjacent to off-site trees along the western boundary of lot 13. Effective Tree Canopy Cover A summary of the effective tree canopy cover by lot/tract and across the overall development site is included as attachment C. Attachment D,the planted tree inventory, describes 40 individual trees proposed for planting and the planted stand proposed in tract A,the water quality facility,to satisfy CWS planting requirements. The required number of street trees is based on the linear right-of-way frontage divided by 40.The total frontage is 1,232-linear feet.Therefore 31 street trees are required. Of the 37 individual trees proposed for planting, 31 are street trees.The proposed street trees comply with the street tree planting standards in Section 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual and with the soil volume standards in Section 12. The spacing between trees is variable due to the location of driveways and proposed utilities. Each tree will have adequate soil volume and sufficient growing space to become long-term amenities. The proposed street trees provide the closest and best spacing possible. Nine additional trees are proposed for planting with one non-native trees on each of lots 2, 3,4, 5 10 and 12 and three native species trees on lot 13 in order to satisfy the minimum 15%effective tree canopy cover requirement for individual lots. The Tree Canopy Site Plan (attachment F)has been revised to account for the three trees now proposed on lot 13. In addition, 26 native trees are proposed as a planted stand in tract A to satisfy CWS planting requirements for the water quality facility. Note that canopy cover credit is doubled for preservation of the two existing on-site trees with both a condition rating and suitability for preservation rating of 2 or greater,for a total of 2,512-square feet of canopy cover credit. Also,trees proposed for planting in tract A receive canopy cover credit at 1.25 times the mature canopy area because they are native species and in a planted stand,for a total of 17,330-square feet of canopy cover credit.The 31 proposed street trees are flowering dogwoods (Cornus florida)that provide 491-square feet of effective tree canopy cover each.The six trees proposed on lots 2,3,4, 510 and 12 provide 707-square feet of effective tree canopy cover each and may be either hedge maple (Acer campestre) or raywood ash (Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood') depending on nursery availability at the time of planting. The three trees now proposed on lot 13 are native Oregon white oaks which receive 1.25 times the mature canopy area for a total of 7,361-square feet. The table below provides a summary of the effective tree canopy cover by lot/tract and demonstrates that the 15% minimum effective tree canopy cover per lot/tract requirement is satisfied. Lot Lot Size Effective Tree Effective Canopy Number (ft2) Canopy Area (ft2) Cover(%) 1 7,004 2,455 35.1% 2 6,230 1,198 19.2% 3 6,222 1,198 19.3% 4 6,215 1,198 19.3% 5 6,171 1,198 19.4% Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision,Tigard,Oregon October 27,2016 I Modified: March 2,2019 Page 3 Lot Lot Size Effective Tree Effective Canopy Number (ft2) Canopy Area (ft2) Cover(%) 6 8,237 2,455 29.8% 7 7,754 1,721 22.2% 8 7,546 3,494 46.3% 9 7,931 1,964 24.8% 10 6,997 1,689 24.1% 11 8,120 2,946 36.3% 12 7,046 1,198 17.0% 13 14,560 7,361 50.6% Tract A 6,387 17,821 279.0% TOTAL 106,420 47,896 45.0% The overall development site is 106,420-square feet and has 47,896-square feet of effective tree canopy cover, or 45%.The minimum required effective tree canopy for the overall development site is 40%; therefore,the effective tree canopy cover requirement for the overall development site is also met. The Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan and Tree Canopy Site Plan are enclosed as attachments E and F as required by Section 10 of the Urban Forestry Manual, which illustrate how the Urban Forestry Plan requirements are met. Specifications A. Tree Protection Specifications 1. Tree Protection Zone.The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ)shall be established at the dripline of protected trees as a minimum. If infrastructure must be installed closer to protected trees, the TPZ may be established within the dripline area if the project arborist determines that the trees will not be unduly damaged. The contractor is responsible for coordinating with the project arborist prior to working beneath protected tree driplines. 2. Protection Fencing.All trees to be retained shall be protected by 5-foot tall metal fencing unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee. Protection fencing shall be secured to steel posts placed no further than 8-feet apart and shall be installed at the edge of the TPZ. 3. Preconstruction Conference.The project arborist shall be on site to discuss methods of tree removal and tree protection prior to any construction. 4. Pruning.The project arborist can help identify if and where pruning is necessary once trees planned for removal have been removed and the site is staked and prepared for construction. Pruning shall be performed by a Qualified Tree Service. 5. Tree Protection Zone Maintenance.The protection fencing shall not be moved, removed, or entered by equipment except under direction of the project arborist. 6. Storage of Material or Equipment.The contractor shall not store materials or equipment within the TPZ. Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision,Tigard, Oregon October 27, 2016 I Modified: March 2,2019 Page 4 7. Stump Removal. The stump of tree#10073 on lot 13 shall remain in the ground if feasible. Otherwise, the stump may be removed by stump grinding to approximately six inches below the ground surface or else extracted from the ground under the on-site supervision of the project arborist. 8. Excavation. Excavation beneath protected tree driplines shall be avoided if alternatives are available. If excavation is unavoidable,the project arborist shall evaluate the proposed excavation to determine methods to minimize impacts to trees. All construction beneath the dripline of protected trees shall be under the on-site technical supervision of the project arborist. 9. Surfacing. Where driveway construction is proposed along the western boundary of lot 13, protection fencing is specified a minimum of six feet from the property boundary, approximately X the dripline radius or less of off-site trees to the west. Beneath tree driplines, build up from existing grade with no excavation (figure 1). The profile includes removal of the uppermost organic matter only, a layer of permeable geotextile fabric on the ground surface and clean crushed rock to raise the grade as needed.Surfacing may include asphalt, concrete, or other materials. ling 1111111 surfacin• NM I a 'Ili a clean crushed rock 2"+ no fines •eotextile fabric- •ermeable to air and water native soil-remove litter la er;no excavation within root area Figure 1.Sample profile for areas within Critical Root Zones.Depth of rock is dependent on grading.Technique based on best management practices. 10. Landscaping. Following construction and where landscaping is desired, apply approximately 3-inches of mulch beneath the dripline of protected trees, but not directly against tree trunks. Shrubs and ground covers may be planted within tree protection areas. If irrigation is used, use drip irrigation installed at native grade (no trenching) only beneath the driplines of protected trees. 11. Tree Protection Inspection.The project arborist shall inspect and verify the location of protection measures prior to construction, monitor tree protection measures regularly, and provide biweekly written reports to the City during periods of active construction. 12. Final Report.After the project has been completed,the project arborist shall provide a final report that describes the measures needed to maintain and protect the remaining trees. B. Soil Characteristics and Specifications for Improvement Native soils at the project site are primarily deep and well-drained Hillsboro loam (-88%)with moderately well-drained Quatama loam (-12%) in the southeast portion of the site. Both soils are capable of supporting healthy tree growth. However, prior to the installation of new trees, the landscape contractor should excavate to a depth of 36-inches and replace the planting substrate with amended topsoil.Topsoil amendments should be determined by the landscape contractor. If soil compaction occurs during construction,the project arborist should provide additional recommendations as needed. Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Irma Dell Butterfield Park Subdivision,Tigard, Oregon October 27,2016 I Modified: March 2,2019 Page 5 C. Tree Planting Specifications New trees that are planted to meet the effective canopy requirements shall conform to the applicable standards in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual.They shall be planted in accordance with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for tree planting(A300, Part 6) and additional standards adopted by the Oregon Landscape Contractors Board. Nursery stock shall meet the requirements of the American Association of Nurserymen for nursery stock (ANSI Z60.1)for Grade No.1 or better. Double stake trees if needed for stability. Signature of Approval We hereby attest that,to the best of our knowledge: ✓ The attached Tree Preservation and Removal site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; ✓ The attached Tree Canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual; and ✓ This Supplemental Report meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Thank you for choosing Morgan Nolen &Associates, LLC,to provide consulting arborist services for the Irma Dell Butterfield Park subdivision project in Tigard. Please contact us if you have questions or need any additional information. Thank you, Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC: Morga E. Nolen, Member ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, PN-6145B ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Forest Biologist Enclosures: Attachment A: Existing Tree Inventory Data Attachment B:Existing Stand Inventory Data Attachment C:Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Attachment D:Planted Tree Inventory Attachment E: Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Attachment F:Tree Canopy Site Plan Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan Holen MHA16079 Butterfield Park-Tree Data 9-16-16.xlsx —6,—A/JOCIAT�/'��� Page 1 of 2 Lot No. No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Canopy3 0/S4 HT5 Cond6 Pres' Comments Treatment 10262 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 10 8 - S N 2 1 very dense cluster of firs remove 10263 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 22 12 - S N 2 2 very dense cluster of firs remove 10264 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 8 7 - S N 2 1 very dense cluster of firs remove 10265 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 10 8 - S N 2 1 very dense cluster of firs remove 10266 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 6 6 - S N 2 1 very dense cluster of firs remove 10267 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 8 7 - S N 2 1 very dense cluster of firs remove 10268 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 18 11 - S N 2 2 very dense cluster of firs remove 10269 scots pine Pinus sylvestris 30 24 - 0 N 2 2 multiple leaders remove invasive species,top dieback, dead and broken branches, 10270 European white birch Betula pendula 20 16 - 0 N 1 1 branch decay remove codominant stems,highly 10270.1 Port-Orford-cedar Chamaecyparis lawsoniana 2x20 14 - 0 N 2 2 susceptible to root disease remove invasive species,poor 10271 English holly Ilex aquifolium 3x10 14 - 0 N 2 1 structure remove 10272 laurel Laurus spp. 28 22 - 0 N 1 1 very poor structure remove 10273 8 giant sequoia Sequoiadendron giganteum 68 20 1,256 0 N 3 3 remove ivy from trunk retain 10274 arborvitae Thuja spp. 12 8 - 0 N 2 1 shrub species remove self-correcting but excessive 10275 Port-Orford-cedar Chamaecyparis lawsoniana 12 8 - S N 2 2 lean remove self-correcting lean, 10276 Port-Orford-cedar Chamaecyparis lawsoniana 10,16 8 - S N 2 2 codominant stems remove invasive species,codominant 10425 sweet cherry Prunus avium 20 15 - S N 2 1 leaders remove poor structure,one-sided with 10429 laurel Laurus spp. 6 12 - S N 2 1 lean remove invasive species,poor 10954 English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna clump 12 - 0 N 1 1 structure remove Continued... Morgan Molen&Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management _ 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan Holen MHA16079 Butterfield Park-Tree Data 9-16-16.xlsx —Gr—AJJOCIATEJ'LLC Page 2 of 2 Lot No. No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Canopy3 0/S4 HT5 Cond6 Pres' Comments Treatment invasive species,poor 10957 English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna clump 12 - 0 N 1 1 structure remove invasive species,poor 10964 English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna clump 15 - 0 N 1 1 structure remove 10970 serviceberry Amelanchier alnifolia clump 10 - S N 1 1 large shrub remove codominant stems,visual assessment limited to 10976 off-site Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia 10 10 - 0 N 2 2 observations made from protect forked leaders,one-sided 10978 Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia 6 6 - 0 N 2 2 crown remove 10982 Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia 6 6 - 0 N 2 2 lower trunk wound remove 1DBH is tree diameter measured at 4.5-feet above the ground level in inches;trees with multiple trunks splitting below DBH are measured separately and individual trunk measurements are separated by a comma,except multiple trunks of the same size are indicated as quantity x size. 2C-Rad is the average crown radius measured in feet. 3Canopy is the average tree canopy area(ft2)for on-site trees to be retained with Condition and Preservation ratings>2,calculated as:Canopy=(C-Rad)2 x it. 40/S identifies the trees as either Open Grown or Stand Grown. 5HT identifies whether or not the tree is a Heritage Tree(either Y for yes or N for no). 6Cond is the numerical condition rating(0-3)for on-site trees as defined in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual: RATING VIGOR CANOPY DENSITY DEADWOOD FAILURE HISTORY PESTS DECAY 0 dead to severe decline <30% major scaffold branches >1 scaffold Infested major conks and cavities 1 declining 30-60% twig and branch dieback scaffold branches Infested one to a few conks;small cavities 2 average 60-90% small twigs small branches Minor present only at pruning wounds 3 good to excellent 90-100% little or none none None absent to present only at pruning wounds 'Pres is the numerical suitability for preservation rating(0-3)for on-site trees as defined in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual: RATING CONSIDERATIONS The tree is a"hazard tree"as defined in chapter 18.120 of the Tigard Development Code and"hazard tree abatement"as defined in Chapter 18.120 in the Tigard Development Code cannot be 0 completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. The tree is dead,in severe decline,or declining but may still be retained if desirable for wildlife or other benefits because it is not considered a"hazard tree"or"hazard tree abatement"could be 1 performed. The tree has average health and/or structural stability that could be alleviated with treatment;the tree will be less resilient to development impacts and will require more frequent management 2 and monitoring after development than a tree rated as a"3". The tree has good to excellent health and structural stability;the tree will be more resilient to development impacts,and will require less frequent management and monitoring after development 3 than a tree rated as a"2". Morgan rloien&Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 .iiP Attachment B: Existing Stand Inventory Data Morgan Nolen MHA16079 Butterfield Park-Tree Data 9-16-16 Rev.3-2-19.xlsx —6,--A,JJOCIATEJ'«< Page 1 of 2 Dominant Tree Species Avg DBH 1 Avg Cond 1 Overall Stand Total Canopy Tree Species Common of 2nd Avg DBH 2 Avg Cond 2 Preservation Total Canopy Preserved Stand No. Tree Species Common of 3rd Avg DBH 3 Avg Cond 3 Rating (sq ft) (sq ft) Comments cherry(Prunus spp.) 9 1 Eleven cherry trees with poor structure,overgrown with blackberries,some positively identified as invasive sweet cherry;stand includes one partially 1 sweet cherry(Prunus avium) 8 1 1 1,631 0 off-site bigleaf maple with poor structure,decay, and the property line fence compartmentalized in bigleaf maple(Acer macrophyllum) 2x20 1 tree trunk at the juncture of codominant stems. Very dense row of 27 western redcedars;overall, live crowns with good vigor and generally good 2 western redcedar(Thuja plicata) 15 2 2 2,272 0 condition as intact group, but individual trees with moderate to poor structure,old topping cuts, multiple leaders, lower and interior dead branches. Relatively natural stand, unmanaged,extensive ivy bigleaf maple(Acer macrophyllum) 14 1 on forest floor and up some tree trunks. Mature bigleaf maple accounts for 29 of 41 on-site trees in stand 3, most of which are in moderate to poor condition with poor structure and decay.Also 3 Douglas-fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii) 23 2 1 14,491 3,529 includes four red alders,one invasive sweet cherry, one western redcedar,and six Douglas-firs in generally good condition,which are the best existing trees in stand 3.Three on site Douglas firs red alder(Alnus rubra) 12 1 ore suitable for retention and five off-site Douglas- firs contiguous with the stand shall be protected. Continued... Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment B:Existing Stand Inventory Data Morgan lHolen MHA16079 Butterfield Park-Tree Data 9-16-16 Rev.3-2-19.xlsx —8-.—AJJOCIATElac Page 2 of 2 Dominant Tree Species Avg DBH 1 Avg Cond 1 Overall Stand Total Canopy Tree Species Common of 2nd Avg DBH 2 Avg Cond 2 Preservation Total Canopy Preserved Stand No. Tree Species Common of 3rd Avg DBH 3 Avg Cond 3 Rating (sq ft) (sq ft) Comments Relatively natural stand, unmanaged, extensive ivy, blackberry,and some English holly,generally Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) 12 1 declining trees in poor condition with poor structure. Mature Oregon ash accounts for 23 of 54 on-site trees in stand 4.Also includes 12 bigleaf maples,seven invasive sweet cherry,five invasive tree-of-heaven,four Oregon white oaks within the proposed street alignment,two plums, and one 4 bigleaf maple(Acer macrophyllum) 15 2 1 11,497 615 western redcedar with no major defects which is the best existing tree in stand 4.The western redcedar is suitable for retention and one off-site bigleaf maple contiguous with the stand shall be protected.Three partially on-site trees are sweet cherry(Prunus avium) 12 1 recommended for removal which requires authorization from the neighboring property owner. 3/2/2019 Modification:Red type identifies reduction/decrease from the previously approved Urban Forestry Plan based on removal of existing trees from lot 13. DBH is tree diameter measured at 4.5-feet above the ground level,in inches. Cond is the numerical condition rating(0-3)as defined in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual: CANOPY RATING VIGOR DENSITY DEADWOOD FAILURE HISTORY PESTS DECAY 0 dead to severe decline <30% major scaffold branches >1 scaffold Infested major conks and cavities 1 declining 30-60% twig and branch dieback scaffold branch Infested one to a few conks;small cavities 2 average 60-90% small twigs small branches Minor present only at pruning wounds 3 good to excellent 90-100% little or none none None absent to present only at pruning wounds Pres is the numerical suitability for preservation rating(0-3)as defined in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual: RATING CONSIDERATIONS 0 Nuisance trees are the dominant species in the stand and/or continued viability of the stand is unlikely due to pests,competition from nuisance tree or plant species,hydrologic changes or other factors. 1 The stand requires a currently cost prohibitive level of investment and management of pests,diseases,nuisance tree or plant species,hydrology or other factors to become viable. 2 The stand is viable but requires more frequent management and monitoring of pests,diseases,nuisance tree or plant species,hydrology or other factors for continued viability than a stand rated as a"3". 3 The stand is viable but requires less frequent management and monitoring of pests,diseases,nuisance tree or plant species,hydrology or other factors for continued viability than a stand rated as a"2". Total Canopy is the average tree canopy area(in square feet)calculated using Tigard Maps. Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment C: Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Morgan Holen MHA16079 Butterfield Park-Tree Data 9-16-16 Rev.3-2-19.xlsx -6,-AJJOCIATr.'«c Page 1 of 1 2x Canopy Area(sq.ft.) 2x Canopy Area(sq.ft.) 1.25 x Mature Mature Canopy 1.25x Mature Effective% of Preserved Trees of Preserved Stands Canopy Area Area(sq.ft.)of Canopy Area Tree Canopy Canopy Lot Area (w/condition and (w/condition and (sq.ft.)of Native Non-Native (sq.ft.)of Area(sq.ft.) (Canopy Area Lot No. (sq.ft.) preservation rating>2) preservation rating>2) Planted Trees Planted Trees Planted Stands per Lot /Lot Area) Lot 1 7,004 0 0 0 2,455 0 2,455 35.1% Lot 2 6,230 0 0 0 1,198 0 1,198 19.2% Lot 3 6,222 0 0 0 1,198 0 1,198 19.3% Lot 4 6,215 i 0 0 0 1,198 0 1,198 19.3% Lot 5 6,171 0 0 0 1,198 0 1,198 19.4% Lot 6 8,237 0 0 0 2,455 0 2,455 29.8% Lot 7 7,754 0 1,230 0 491 0 1,721 22.2% Lot 8 7,546 2,512 0 0 982 0 3,494 46.3% Lot 9 7,931 0 0 0 1,964 0 1,964 24.8% Lot 10 6,997 0 0 0 1,689 0 1,689 24.1% Lot 11 8,120 0 0 0 2,946 0 2,946 36.3% Lot 12 7,046 0 0 0 1,198 0 1,198 17.0% Lot 13 14,560 0 7,058 7,361 0 0 7,361 50.6% Tract A 6,387 0 0 0 491 17,330 17,821 279.0% Total Development Site 106,420 2,512 1,230 7,361 19,463 17,330 47,896 45.0% 3/2/2019 Modification:Numbers in red type are a reduction/decrease and numbers in blue type are additions/increases from the previously approved Urban Forestry Plan. Notes:Effective tree canopy cover is required to be calculated on a lot/tract by lot/tract basis only in the R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for each lot or tract in the R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts shall be at least 15 percent. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for the overall development site shall be at least: i.40%for R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts,except for schools(18.130.050(J)); ii.33%for R-12,R-25,R-40,C-N,C-C,C-G,C-P,MUE,MUE-1,MUE-2,MUC,MUR and I-P districts,except for schools(18.130.050(J));and iii.25%for MU-CBD,MUC-1,I-L and I-H districts,and for schools(18.130.050(J))in all districts. Morgan Nolen &Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 it° Attachment D: Planted Tree Inventory Morgan Nolen MHA16079 Butterfield Park-Tree Data 9-16-16 Rev. 3-2-19.xlsx —6--A.J,J'OCIATLf Lc Page 1 of 3 Mature Mature Available Structured Caliper Canopy Spread Canopy Area Soil Volume Soil Volume Lot Tree No. Species Name/Common Name (in.) (ft.) (sq.ft.) (cu.ft.) (cu.ft.) Location No. 1 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 1 2 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 1 3 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 1 4 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 1 5 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 1 6 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 2 7 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 3 8 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 4 9 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 5 10 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street Tract A 11 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 6 12 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 6 13 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 6 14 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 6 15 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 6 16 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 7 17 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 8 18 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 8 19 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 9 20 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 9 21 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 9 Morgan Iolen & Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway, Suite P220, Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 itIP Attachment D: Planted Tree Inventory Morgan Nolen MHA16079 Butterfield Park-Tree Data 9-16-16 Rev. 3-2-19.xlsx —,F,—Alf OCIATCIL- Page 2 of 3 Mature Mature Available Structured Caliper Canopy Spread Canopy Area Soil Volume Soil Volume Lot Tree No. Species Name/Common Name (in.) (ft.) (sq.ft.) (cu.ft.) (cu.ft.) Location No. 22 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 9 23 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 10 24 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 10 25 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 11 26 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 11 27 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 11 28 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 11 29 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 11 30 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 11 31 Cornus florida / flowering dogwood 1.5 25 491 500+ n/a street 12 Acer campestre /hedge maple OR 32 Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'/raywood ash 1.5 30 707 500+ n/a yard 12 Acer campestre /hedge maple OR 33 Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'/raywood ash 1.5 30 707 500+ n/a yard 10 Acer campestre /hedge maple OR 34 Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'/raywood ash 1.5 30 707 500+ n/a yard 2 Acer campestre /hedge maple OR 35 Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'/raywood ash 1.5 30 707 500+ n/a yard 3 Acer campestre /hedge maple OR 36 Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'/raywood ash 1.5 30 707 500+ n/a yard 4 Acer campestre / hedge maple OR 37 Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'/raywood ash 1.5 30 707 500+ n/a yard 5 38 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5 50 1,963 500+ n/a yard 13 Morgan Molen &, ssociate5, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1 971.409.9354 3tIP Attachment D: Planted Tree Inventory Morgan Il MHA16079 Butterfield Park-Tree Data 9-16-16 Rev.3-2-19.xlsx —8--AffOCIATLJic Page3of3 Mature Mature Available Structured Caliper Canopy Spread Canopy Area Soil Volume Soil Volume Lot Tree No. Species Name/Common Name (in.) (ft.) (sq.ft.) (cu.ft.) (cu.ft.) Location No. 39 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5 50 1,963 500+ n/a yard 13 40 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5 50 1,963 500+ n/a yard 13 Stand *mixed native species per CWS requirements n/a n/a 13,864 n/a n/a Tract A Tract A 3/2/2019 Modification:Trees in blue type are additions to the previously approved Urban Forestry Plan. Note:Thirty-one (31)street trees are required based on 1,232 linear feet of right of way frontage. *Tract A planted stand:Twenty-six (26)trees required to meet CWS planting requirements based on the total size of the water quality pond minus the treatment area; mature canopy area includes ten (10) cascara,ten (10) Oregon ash, and six(6) bitter cherry;total multiplied by 1.25 in the Effective Canopy Cover Summary table. Morgan Nolen & Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway, Suite P220, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment E: Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Y BUTTERFIELD PARK,URBAN FORESTRY PLAN MODIFICATION FOR LOT 13,302/2019 a CC aZa O LT wo I ±i I1 i LEGEND of O Q w E ii TL 7100 I 11 Ii 1L 5700 G ERA S CEC/Otlpl/s IRF:ID BE xcruaco/aaurcc>Fo E dt :xrsnNc cawrrnous rat:10 R:R:TAXED/PROIMED W..M5,..4.0 O 6Fi. n 6900 n 7000 L I 1 I N Ml X („EX rRa ro et Rturnm 03 N j-CC g I I I I I -•-•-•-•-•- rix:PRor:cnoN micr. (-M N Q Q II: i' J - - _.. mc�a�C7 i` pp Off-site Dougla-fir not previously surveyed; 7R L�, •-,-, protection fent gat property boundary _ I rRt:STAND BOUNDARY m 0 Q 1,,, X x-x-� ` 1 TO' 0 Is M OP J Q'2 u_17- 0 it S - J x_-_-_• .A _ _ �r I I I I SCALE t'=30' r F- �� _X 1 n 7200 I Ie 0 11 5200 r-- TREE PROTECTION NOTES: a U 1 Off-site Douglaslir not previously surveyed; r protection fencing 5'oN property boundary - { r dti t. TREE PROTECTION ZONE,7HE TREE PROTECTION ZONE(TPZ)SHALL Ill Te 4x50->40-z5D-x50-x50- BE ESTABLISHED AT THE DRIPUNE OF PROTECTED TREES AS A w r' • -IF, r MINIMUM.IF INFRASTRUCTURE MUST BE INSTALLED CLOSER TO _� -� sols OHiite maple no[prevausly wrveyed; I PROTECTED TREES,THE TPZ MAY BE ESTABASHED WITHIN THE STAND 3 .awe k protection fencing 5'off property boundary I / I & n 1700 DRIPUNE AREA IF THE PROJECT ARBORIST DETERMINES THAT THE t 1 �s.n • TREES WILL NOT BE UNDULY DAMAGED. THE CONTRACTOR IS w w""'-. .X ... / El I I 1 I RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING WITH THE PROJECT ARBORIST PRIOR Z G TO WORKING BENEATH PROTECTED TREE DRIPUNES. ' .,.pn t n 7300 I I I n 5100 O z Mr. �.+,.,,h7r`Nt 2. PROTECTION FENCING.ALL TREES TO BE RETAINED SHALL BE none RJCL ,HS'L--7nl �` I PROTECTED BY 5-FOOT TALL METAL FENCING UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE CITY I I APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE.PROTECTION ~ < 1112100 •oH OF TIGARD TREE GROVE OVERLAY I % FENCING SHALL BE SECURED TO STEEL POSTS PLACED NO FURTHER Q J -,ms7 THAN 8-FEET APART AND SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE OF > a . ' 'b 5/_/ .raa STAND 1-115 �f (1 I I / THE TPz. W ;rot 44,:fig ry -- 10'ry 3. PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE.THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL BE Q } .. � t} /,\ S ,.Q/ It. R si ON SITE TO DISCUSS METHODS OF TREE REMOVAL AND TREE 1 /� 1674 os �{ r/ \ �\ J/ / / •' 13 / PROTECTION PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. W O I sTA�= b •s _ 1 \ .! \ dr,/Nil 1 \ A !r / / / / it" n 1600 4. PRUNING.THE PROJECT ARBORIST CAN HELP IDENTIFY IF AND WHERE re{# II•,�W?° ti - / fI `I I / /1 / / / PRUNING IS NECESSARY ONCE TREES PLANNED FCR REMOVAL HAVE i l -. .. ,7 '—,-1—,,,,—*11 -' A 8r".171„ I 1 1 / 1 / , BEEN REMOVED AND THE SITE IS STAKED AND PREPARED FOR a_ W '4114' \ I Ill 1 1 7 / CONSTRUCTION.PRUNING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED •/ 1/ ! r/ .,...,.�� I- / J I / !�l �lifi / I I I _ JX ' TREE SERVICE. W (Y I :1,-- I I I r\ I I 1 /` 7 Il / 1 /7 1:1, 'I \ 1■ l / r 1 -1- 5. TREE PROTECTION ZONE MAINTENANCE.THE PROTECTION FENCING NW -r , L'- ��� I 1 �T/ / / / / 1 J 1 I I , / I r SHALL NOT BE MOVED,REMOVED,OR ENTERED BY EQUIPMENT Cr- / N -Y''ll 4r-7 /V / Fes, f-'1-I l I:\-\ 1J 1 / l1 / / / • EXCEPT UNDER DIRECTION OF THE PROJECT ARBORIST. 1 �r,.,,�1)11 I I1 / I \`al/ �'I I I I / `r Ii T / / / / 1 ` 7-- �`T 'r, 6. STORAGE OF MATERIAL OR EQUIPMENT.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT I ", I / I/Jr1Irk I / ! 5 / /II/ / / / I I I SEE NOIE 4 ON THISSTORE MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE TPZ. \ I r y�l I /I-/�� \1 //� I / 1 II • • '', SHEET FCR REMOVAL7. EXCAVATION.EXCAVATION BENEATH PROTECTED TREE DRIPUNES B /! AI It � C ! / 1 / / / A / I OF 11iESE TREES SHALL BE AVOIDED IF ALTERNATIVES ARE AVAILABLE.IF EXCAVATION- / I 7/ 1I _\ I I I I / I l I I// 1 1 7 I l l / 1 ,^rrt IS UNAVOIDABLE,THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL EVALUATE THE 1 ,�y V �I 11 1 I y- . 1.1 fl l II I 1 / 1 I 1 I I • • PROPOSED EXCAVATION TO DETERMINE METHODS TO MINIMIZE 3dl FiI 1 aT� I/n\ / I 1 I I , 7 / 1 11 J\// 1 1 IMPACTS TO TREES.ALL CONSTRUCTION BENEATH THE DRIPUNE OF G in 11900 n 12W0 _ i 1v ,r I / 11I' @/ / , I fIII II /I/ / I1 6\ \ ♦' PROTECTED TREEST SHALL BE UNDER THE ON-SITE TECHNICAL - I I 11 1 !I I\ f I I �9 f 1 / f I \ 1 / STAND 4 ISUPERVISION OF THE PROJECT ARBORIST. 3+I 71l 17 \ , \\ /I11fIfl11 ,I / //l I / ,I I - x n 1500 1 6 5 DESIRED.APPG. LYLAPPROXIMATELYOWING CTION 3-INCHES OF ERE MULCHNDSCAPINGBENEATH Q`1 I I / ��3ddd 'T•, I I 7 y ` I I , / I I / \� I 1 I 1/IJf /1 /7 , / / / I� J 0'I I � I THE DRIPLINE OF PROTECTED TREES.BUT NOT DIRECTLY AGAINST N S I v 1* TREE TRUNKS.SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS MAY BE PLANTED // - / / T -/_ 1 1 //T/ 1LH/' I/ "`/,, I \��\ 1 / 1 WITHIN TREE PROTECTION AREAS.IF IRRIGATION IS USED.USE DRIP Lee' 'x / �' Y / /� `!`-l`--r T� �l / / %' 1 \ -\-T-J / � /�. ,,,,,t.,�a I IRRIGATION INSTALLED AT NATIVE GRADE(NO TRENCHING)ONLY / / / / / // /; \ \ BENEATH THE DRIPUNES OF PROTECTED TREES. V ____----[-__ 1.1_ J/a T \ I 1 T 1 -.4- ,/ / / L 7 / / //fj ,I } , r 1 �, T \,' �� �, , \ 9. TREE PROTECTION INSPECTION.THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL ,0 / `/ / ! , r' T ' 1 \11 \ M I 1 T INSPECT AND VERIFY THE LOCATION OF PROTECTION MEASURES PRIOR r I I I I I I I1 r I / Df q / 7 7!1 I ,� / r / r I -- I I ` ' • - '., \ TO CONSTRUCTION,MONITOR TREE PROTECTION MEASURES _ _ ( / //r ! _ _ \I1 1 \ 1 REGULARLY,AND PROVIDE BIWEEKLY NRITTEN REPORTS TO THE CITY 1 y , / // / I I r 1 I I 1 \ \ \ I I DURING PERIODS OF ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION. -xw-se-xW zw-xw�-xw-x , / / / , / / I I I / I I I / _, / / / — _1 —+—I ice, l _� - /Tr l , /-, r T .---� 1 t- ». / / I-' r I �7 10.FINAL REPORT.AFTER THE PROJECT HAS BEEN COMPLETED,THE -x50-zso-zSD-zsp-xsD �z5p_. - --`�Cr= / / / / / f lout TIZiG $T I / l• 1 I r / PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL PROVIDE A FINAL REPORT THAT DESCRIBES :55-%55-x55-N55-x55-x55 x -z55s-)zis- -a��TI� / /1 /1 �I•1 , , 1 I l / Y,(r / `'••'T--'�' , ! 1 , I I / THE MEASURES NEEDED TO MAINTAIN AND PROTECT THE REMAINING ql IT...... 11 11 -T.1 - 14s/.. ./. 'V. /` •1� �i1•I���1���g�rMMIMM=M I�ltet,!sZ �_ n- ' -- TREES. J 0 b r I / O I I I I ! / / r I I I 2 1 - " T"__"-- .via y . I IJ: Tr T , - 7_ I ARBORIST STATEMENT: /�} 5-84,F,,4, I. / / I/ 1 / 1 1 / l f I I I / / ''''''Off' X' I I.MORGAN NOLEN,ATTEST THAT THIS TREE gn0$$ I_/ / / y l / r 1 1/ / / l I I 1 I /I / 7 /II F. X�'JJ�000C Sa I PRESERVATION AND REMOVAL PLAN MEETS THE m / / / �AI' ./ I I I t I I / 10 r^ REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 10,PART 1,OF THE i v3,R 1 ''' - / /I)////////// / /1 /I I I 1 I/ ` ! / } I / J I`I iJ CITY OF TIGARD URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL e 11 1OB00 n 10700 R 12200 / 1 1 11 / p/ ! 3 1 1 �J �, 1L 5000 n 1900 g1021" I�[Q�i: ///I I1 I / I / i I V'."w"in og 1Yi�n f 2g a . / ,a 1' , / / , 1 ' ,/ I I I 1 ! I I I/ / , .m.u� wrr U •I // //�/` /` / 7 / / / -/I--�I 1 / /!I �-- / / '� nous a-« 1 ORGAN NOLERRFIED MASTER ARBORIST PN-61458 ri EN / -l- / / I- IL�1 -„may 1 ISA TREE RISK ASSESSMENT QUALIFIED / ; / / /\ 1 //1_ / I I �A� I V�/'w" DATE:October 77,Pm 9 f� �7r i 1 ! r T .--7-; x A * -4 x S '• "gid K ,,r1_T. n C s LOT 13 MODIFIED:Meeh 2,2019 tI ' Ems"'" F a""' Q/- % 11 251 1140 n 251 111D n TREE PROTECTION NOTES SPECIFIC TO LOT 13 ADDED 3/2/19: � k 1• I I 7000 2100 Stump Removal.The stump of tree$110073 on lot 13 shall remain in the ground if feasible.Otherwise,the stump may be removed by stump kv> I - grinding to approximately six inches below the ground surface or else extracted from the ground under the on-site supervision of the project q' g I II I arborist. SHEET z/71 i Surfacing.Where driveway construction is proposed along the western boundary of lot 13,protection fencing is specified a minimum of six feet from the property boundary,approximately>I the dripline radius or less of off-site trees to the west.Beneath tree driplines,build up from 08 or existing grade with no excavation.The profile includes removal of the uppermost organic matter only,a layer of permeable geotextile fabric on / ,�3 a the ground surface and clean crushed rock to raise the grade as needed.Surfacing may include asphalt,concrete,or other materials. // Attachment F: Tree Canopy Site Plan BUTTERFIELD PARK,URBAN FORESTRY PLAN MODIFICATION FOR LOT 13,3/2/2019 Id Y g cr a O z I 1L 7100 I I I I '�� ;3 a O , ;I n5100 N Wp�OC g 1 n EiEE10 I TL 6900 11 7000 R t N J� I I 1 1 ��2a~a II Off-Ate Dougla;-fir not previously surveyed; H - ' J V 9 I0 30 60 CO co 4 O p • I protectionfencjng at property boundary I I I I 1 IN • 0 I . . I 9 2 i_u. I , • 12 ° I SCALE:1"=30' UJ 1 O i— -K—X—x--R— zr'Y�'� /•� I 17 940 G Cr") n T2oD I I I I n 5200 r LEGEND V IOR-site Douglas-fir not previously surveyed; • )a t I I I ® EXISTMG DECIDUOUS TREE TO 6E RETAINED/PROTFCIFO protection fencing 5'off property boundary 1 I 'N e (x50—XSD—X56—ASM—X50- ---I _ — EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE TO BE RETAwED/P�,oTECTm 1f 13� •ON-site maple not previously surveyed; I C` g r i\ X X EXIST..TREE TO BE REYOKD Z < protection fencing 5'off property boundary I I k I _.� TREE PRo1ECTX)R moon' wav SEE LOT 13 PLOT PLAN FOR DETAILED SITE LAYOUT En I I I I T 1 PROPOSED STREET TREE a w�a� `R ` 1L 7300 I n 5100 1 / (ELONEAWIG DCG%sX1DJ \ =/ 1.5''caliper minimum W 1 n 12100 1Ty 939 I I co . , PROPOSED CANOPY 17. -1 WT138 r , (HEDGE MVRE OR RAMC=ASN) /' \ — — — .. _ I I—I ——— \\ , 1.5"caliper minimum a I 32V I—— 1 L L— — /1-17.- , a 16 �, _ 0 �:� I\ 4''••/ i 'I I 1/16 • OREGONEWHTEOANNOPY REE 150'MATURE CROWN SPREAD) Z Q IH ( 1Z I / I 8 I '5- = I I ' I X 1.5"CALIPER MINIMUM V ,/)I 011")- \ I I JI W f 5; _ W 6 CCCC + T k� L � i ; F�; ; - — NOTES: —— J 1 1 "11 3 1 \v !r I 7., 1. PRIOR TO STREET TREE PLANTING,LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE I 7 _ 17-1---- T— — 1�I9. I' 1A \ I.. TO A DEPTH OF 36-INCHES AND BACKFlLL PATH AMENDED TOPSOIL.TOPSOIL Eill�/..- -I- 9r Y`- ;�1 (r;f� I I . AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. [�p`r!e[•t.:,,,,,I, • 2'I 1 I I I I\i I y..;.-..',----'„1' 2. IRRIGATION TO BE DESIGN/BUILD BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. U N (7' :1 7 / Iy IC ` 3. NEW TREES THAT ARE PLANTED TO MEET THE EFFECTIVE CANOPY G 11.11900 it 12000 L`c 20 .�. REQUIREMENTS SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS IN THE �I ��_�� I I I I 4( l'... 1 '� 3 6 I Q','. TIGARD URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL.THEY SHALL BE PLANTED IN ACCORDANCE I '�` / WITH THE AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE(ANSI)STANDARDS FOR 0 I ^ TREE PLANTING(A300,PART 6 AND ADDITIONAL STANDARDS ADOPTED BY - CtiJ '�ST ! L' \ 1115 THE OREGON LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS BOARD.NURSERY STOCK SHALL MEET O'e' -0 ..c.1,_ L/ I 1• I I(''12 THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN FOR N ' Y. / 1 I i.E / I NURSERY STOCK(ANSI Z60.1/FOR GRADE NO.1 OR BETTER.DOUBLE STAKE 4 ,11. ——J L— — —J L _ ç/7 -\ / I '\ -. - SURFACE,PAVING,OR UTILITY BOX. W R 0 —OW XX XW—xW—xW KW-9 - L - _i _ ARBORIST STATEMENT: $ r. —Xm=Xm Xm=xso— 1,s>z..:. - - - - - - SW INEZ STREET - o ss—X55zssx55—X55—Xss X• X55 —Xss + \ -�\ \ / \ I,MORGAN HOLEN,ATTEST THAT THIS TREE ! 1 ��.5..: _:a A A. utAD ET'�I�t"1 - L! CANOPYSTE PLAN 10, ART 2MEOF THE CITYOFREQUIREMENTS IN SECTIYYY,,, _ _ THE . - t ♦ /•.' %. .J.s _ .. 8� ,�__ URBANNFORESTRY MANUAL.E 47 <6`aID y MORGAN\) I I I I I I I I ISA DHCERLF-N ;g 0 o ISA BOARD CERTIFIED MASTER ARBORIST PN-61458 '. ISA TREE RISK ASSESSMENT QUALIFIED 9, �� I I III I I I I= DATE:°dobr77)tom N a E; R 10800 R 10700 R 12200 , -A_ J 2 3 4 s n S LOT 13 MODIFIED:March 2,2018 m - L\' ,, LJLJLLLJ,' / 4 Lr_ J -, 1 N /X % % A L A / ,. N N�/ ,S1 � 251 IlAp 11 251 IIAD TL 251 IIMn / h\ -\� S 1 3000 2100 2000 / !Y 1 , ,/ QQ II . SHEET /1 10 OF riri / 13 i •