Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDR1993-00002 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions please contact City of Tigard Records Department. .. K I• . .. .Sl , •i •4 11:1' 1 N• 1 ,.W,s.Y,_ 1' r1 ,l':Gn:t.Y,f.Y v.... ',1.11# f(.In: .. Y.IN':"l:r'.1.,•...5 14 Il- .:1i 1T 1 � I is .y _� , Y 1 ', e ^l.1 1° o; D'Ir`tTouth & 72nd . ' �:. �" • `,# 1'if'yj 3 1 ^:,-'600 2500 S 4.501 - t•l 1 �,,,„ V , 1 r'•1 tl 1 I �+ '�j� y Ri'4 0 - p �+.M.m•...•d„-..u5.,..rY.A t 1 o , .obi,,' �G",, A.,-,-J r, '' 1' , �y', I n a»r,.,, ^. ,� ' ,port on ,of . E^i1 • } , i 00 ,', �. t._4 r .4�4 „a.r PP '� x.Y 11 l,:l{H W1`:Jbt.f✓.a: y I t I�, a4 y-�I •J C ,, 1 'T r , Y ,;w ,.,, ,K',`IEAS7,,60,,,..,.7.'b`m,+ ,,,.rN".te,'4ceAr+%la'N ` �, ,•4ij HH } I I 1 I I • 1 I . I ■ i. 4 1 IJA a r t , } • i 1 e n • t • I I I ' it I �,^ Vii• F I I ' q{ f ., •• f O ,.1 1 ... .., ..... ..A ♦r. ..4r ln.« .....rr .u.Ir.a+F•w-+t 1^ {..vin..n. n \r '. iii r ^ 1 ., v ... r.., n •Vu. w r-...1 .. _n,n. r r. a..n._t ,.»-.nr......r...4....,.........r»... , n.....<.....»........n.rv. nn•-.,•!..t ...r ....»,.r.. ..Fn ...1.... F,.rr... t-r.., r-.....-..rn n , !r � + C-', ( \ ' ` :, ,, fi PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION a' A V FILE NO: MDR 93--0002/PDR 93-0001/SLR 93-0002/SCE 93-0001 ) a I I I 1 , ',PILE TITLE: Cub Foods/SuperValu APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: SuperValu Holdings, Inc. 4 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 11848 Valley View Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 w• (503) 9 63 --4'1 1 y• 25, 1993 rPlannin REQUEST: To amend condition of approval #11 in the March ,� Planning Commission Final Order, thereby allowing the westbound lane of SW 1 Dartmouth Street froze 72nd to the site entrance to be constructed by . ' the developer. l° LOCATION: 7500 SW Dartmouth Street (WCTM 151 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; portion of WCTM 151 36CD, tax 'lot 2000; portion of WCTM 251 18A, tax lots 100 and • 10.1) /. 1 1 + . APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters '1' ZONE: C-G and C-G (PD) (t`4eneral Commercial, Planned Development) The C-0 zoning ¢ designation allows public agency and administrative services, public Support '' facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and ` ,/ „ real estate services, business support services, eating and drinking '- 4 ` establishments, general retail sales, and single-family residential units among other uses. CIT: East `'' CIT FACILITATOR: Joel Stevens • 1 CHECK ALL WHICH APPLY: ' STAFF DECISION X PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARINGS 11/..1.6.122 TIME:, 7;30•.p.m. HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME: CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: TIME: .4 '-— I t , "' THE FO r] O ATTACHMENTS ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEW/NO IN PLANNING NG DIVISION: . �� i X vldlNxY NAP LANDSCAPING PLAN AN I I S , •'. NARRATIVE � ARCHITECTURAL CTURAL PLAN — It , SITE II PLAN X OTHER: Dartmouth Street ` constrdt n ings I 1 STA 'F CONTACT: N.d Nurr,hly 638...41'/x: I •a P I' bhsmm/SDik93 O2,2 I , ,k' • • 0 ..,.,..,... ...«,.w....•��.,.......�t.,.._.............. .._.,•...,..ice._..,.. ...,...,.«..,..'.��tK .,1.�...,.<a�,...•,....,. ,,..,,«....__. a.,._».-s„,..,,_-.�.,•,..i�. ..,...-•.....,:... ».............i.... .-,�r7 , +.r.-c7u_.,,.:w..c.c:.'..,,�,.n�� _..,..r��:... L 4 ,'..\ y TM�z. ti,,,,,r y f r .., PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION cri T�s .'''' 4 FILE NO. c ?�, C. `.FILE TITLE: ..: L 1,-,4.'r t �` '/" up APPLICANT: Q►h OWNER:.' . 5 ) 44i `,4 44,,,,,t( evi • 1 , , , re/`a. i 0 i cif REQUEST: �( .� C(JV\ .� � j , ,: t ,A.f (2 . . . ( ' c. !,(-2 liA4 CIVIeteAl ..:11.0-' .1.;v wv,1-4,4 Vivi w-e4 tAitAi ,. calf/. : r, 1 1 , try f .y• ( -r, ilk (.(;t1,,, ajo.6 s4ks ' LOCATION: " �r1 (,T�/,,. wh C �, i t try '.L , Sio-i'.- P° APPLIC 13LE REVIEW CRITERIA: 1Q ��*, CA '- +V:t- 'i� C s 6, i • • ZONE: CSC `.o) " 6 PO i . . . h '• CIT: I CIT FACILATATOR: ,'' I , CHECK ALL WHICH APPLY: 1 . x �O STAFF DECISION � ••, ..4 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: ._, TIME:,... ' j 1 .:._.._ HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF MARxNG: TIME:. ,_.. I f`'; I CxT ` COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: � TIME:, . THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENTS NTS ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION.: '. -: VICINITY LANDSCAPING PLAN � T NARRATIVE ARCHITECTURAL PLAN I 6'ITE PLAN OTHER. � �� ,' t--- +.` 41 I I • STA,E�` CONTACT:. � I.. I � ' r.. I ;s i , I it i, i I L ,dry• 1�y( , 1..S136DC-00200 15136' 30300 .R R• PY. • •.••.. .• .• ,Y TT OMAS 0 'ALFRED E JUNE R WOZNIAK, JOHN G '' ,; ' 7135 SW BAYLOR 11550 SW 72ND AVE ' 1 ' ' ' \:,',:::- 1 ,' . . • TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 f, . y �y r� 1 G+ �y 1S136L C—00301 . .... • •. . .. .4 4•. •P•• i 1S136DC-00400 b• . . .. . ...•i..•!r...,•' 1. ' f.:,..%;,, BUEHLER, JAMES D CHASE, WILLIAM'L ,VIOLET , ' V,'...— , : , 7175 SW' BAYLOR ST 11580 ,SW 72ND AVE ' \ ' ''TIOARD OR '97223 TIGARD OR ' 97223 , ' , ' , 1S136DC-02900 , .••i,. 1S136DC-.03000 ' ... ,„.., e • .'.. . f:. , ' , .: '',.': , .''PETERSON,c.''PETERSON, DAVID MICHAEL AND THORNE, WILLIAM I/ROBBIE L r. ': .. H MELANIE K. 7160 SW' BAYLOR , �:•�. ' 1 7130 SW 'BA LOR ST TIGARD OR 97223 H. . TIGARD OR 97223 , . ' 1S136DC-03100 ... ..ern P. 4 . . . . .R.. .. 1S136DC-03200 .. . •. . • ..Y ...i'.. . .9'•• ' , H AMA(H) R, JUANITA' FEGLES, MARX A. '11680 SW' 72ND., 11720 SW 72ND ,, TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 ' ' . ' ,I 15136DC-03300 .. R•. • 1. . ' 15136DG-,-03400 •.e ... ...i.i, •.• , b. NOBLE, THOMAS L LARRIE P MAHON, HUGH S ANNA'BELLE ,' , 11750 SW 72ND 11780 SW 72ND ' TIGARD OR 97223 PORTLAND OR 97223 ' ,..' H 15136Dc-0O5O0 .. e i. . • . . Y• . .i . P P. • • • 18136DC-03501 . .• .. • . ... .•.. a.Y e... ' . • TOM MOYER THEATRES CONNET, JANE AND JOHN R ', R. ,. 70.3.' BROADWAY SUITE 605 8416 SW 57TH AVE ' ' VANCOUVER WA 98660 PORTLAND OR 91219 /� 15136M�r} �w /y J � i C, ^1 /y p D0-^0. 508 - 1S136DC-040001 b e. •r,.r.•r .•e. i.e••,e.. A PETERS', 'ARDEN L PHILPOTT, PHYLLIS L 7135 SW CLINTON 8T 7140' SW'''CLINTON ST , ' TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 ti, . 1S1 , i 15136D0�-04100 reie.... . . . .. . ee• . cbe 36Dd�04200 ��Y LEWIs', LYNN C MARY C LEWIS, LYNN G MARY C ' 11860 SW 720 AVE , 11860 SW 72ND'A TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD O 97223 " + ' ' 1r 1h86DC 0430 0 ..i r ° • . il�» � �• Ye. s� • e 15136DC-04400 . r.., .e . r4e b r ",o.•er. ' A ANDERSON' RD 6s MARYLx N G NORTHLAND HO ES .INC ' ' ICRO0, SEVEN 184 'SW 53T ' ' 11930 SW 72ND ,IlVE , PORTLAND OR, 97201 'TIGARD OR 9/222.: • . 18136Dc-+04402, .n 14 e e i i lip P r: b 1 r'i i : 6 i :28104$Ag002'00 1 i •,i b e o ii i 6'i L 4',e;o i''e 6 i,i Y i , ; HE5GE 'ETH� LOLxS E AG NES W1LLIAM8, ,MERt ILL M II AND s 11990: 8W 72ND AVENUE' ' GINA IIA SE t T1G� OR :97228 12108, SW 135TH AVE TI ARD OR , 97228 ' . . 1^4 V • • i ' i, 1. l •, ii .i, • i I t• a..,. .u.-.....wa M._N.. ,a .......,, ,a.._,.�+,..u. .a..... ........,. u....,..,., s........... _.,m...aJG .i::.».. 1«.,..,.,.««. .,•,.. .au u•..,..,..,......H i.,...w.,..N,..,u.d,a..' ,,.,.,...,....I ......n.....,, ..,..,....:.,-.,:.;,....:,a.l•2S1048A-00300 0000• • 1S13+ ,.01400 e•• •p•• ee•o • • ••e•.•.• '• •,, DELUCIA, LINDA R QAYUM, ABDUL AND ISMAT 12010 SW W WESTBURY TERRACE 1824 5 RIVER R EDGE GI CT ,o a • TXGARi,D OR 97223 ! LAME OSWEGO OR '97034 ' . 1513 CD-01500 ••♦•ro o o r •• • • • s s o• •e •• 1 5 136C D-0 150 1 ew• ww•••ee•4 ••••• •era , SCHUL Z, DAVID TR QAYUM, ABDUL'AND I SMA9 KcERR, GLORIA TR 18245 RIVER EDGE CT ' 14550 SW HAZELTREE TERR '' ' ' LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 ' TIGARD OR 97224 1tS1316CD-01600 I ,1S136CD-01601 .•b•••.••• e • .w ••op•p. DOUGHTY, J PAUL LILLI DOUGHTY, J PAUL AND LILLI ,1.10150 SW CANYON RD 1 ' ' 1 ' ' 1 10150 SW CANYON RD ' ' ' ' ',?1,,,, . . BEAVERTON OR 970051' `1 ' ' BEAVERTON OR 97005 ' ' • r 1$1360D-,01700 i a + 'i 1S136CD-01800 ••..b . .•• • •O • •••O e.•• . PROBSTFIELD, JUDITH M ' ' ' ' ` ' ALEXANDER,' JOHN D % O'CALLAGHAN, T NZ $ N'' ' ' ' ' 11700 SW PACIFIC HWY 3510 SW CEDAR 'HILLS BLVD 1 1 ¶1 IGARD OR 972'23 ' BEAVERTON OR 97005 ' , ' , 1S1316CD-01801. 1S136CD-01900. .•4 6y • NEW WEST FEDE RAVINGS &'LOAN ALEXA DER, JOHN D • .. 343 EAST MA3: ""'SST 'SUITE 805 ', 11688 SW PACIFIC HWY . M, PO BOX '3a TIGARD OR ' 97223 ' STIDCKTOa• CA 951202 1 0 r VO • 4 O o p e b 0• • • w 1 } • h 1 � 1 Wkd�STERN—DtTx'F TIGARD 'k�ARTNDB,I., 10080.N WOLFE RD STE 310 ' ' ' 1 ' ' ' ' ' CUPERTINO 'CA 95014 1 I 1 M1 i • + . a .. _ v''I. V, „ ail i'- a ■ 1- '1 ,'J I' .1 1„1 r ∎• ,. - 72nd AVENUE SIGN 1 2-6' PANAFIM FACES,Vil-frE COPY 2-6" - „...„:„..„..:,.,...„,„;:„.„2.,,,,,„,,,,:._.,...:"."1,,,..,:ct,..:z...,,,, ,,,,,,,....,:._:,„0,..„:„....„,,,...,-,:„•:_:„.......--.::•,.„-„,:„,-,-,-f-,:-,-,•-•;_,-:...„:_,..:.-i-:=:.-----,-—,--:,-,-_-.7_:-_:---:-:.-L-4,--f:...F.----,-_--.:=-._=-2-L-Ii _. ; -.-____ __,.._a:our_ saT s __ „,„,„„.,„,,..,__,.....„,,,„:.,_,,:„...,,,,_,_,„.„,„:„._,_„,,,....,......,_,„.40„,.,_,:,, :„..„.:„±„...„:„.t.„.:1u4, ,„:„.„,..,...„3.,:__,vitif,_,I,,,,,j,,.. ... _..,..„_______.24,. 1. • -.. i I:;q;ZI:::::3).!;:qii-,._.i er) ,,fit•ifi:•::;.::',:.:: I 1 i it: •,-,...,..,,,,••-•,- . ROUND SHEET IVIETAL SUPPORT Ct.DVERS ..- I ..1 i > -41 ril i11:16iiiiiii:* 4 I *.14:01::::'::'-:'•-;:,:;. E illi:::'::!:::::!;''••••i:::=: li WITH MMUM GREY -:;::. „., -:...... . i[ii.ispx::::::::::ij 1 -----:!,--t.:!,::::!:::::: ..,,, i . . ••_•••• .. i.!:p:s.,,i2.2:2:::.2!2:2::.. -.1:::I.::: :::::;:::::::::::.. • Eillii•Miiiili-.: 1 ---q;ii-q:-:::,iiir,,,,!:::: I it - - -- - stir......3....,:::.::::::::: ! ..''' ! ••• .... •.............., . . ,. ........ 1 , . -'Tri 7:-.'..*:**:".....:. ,, • .. - SIDE VIE. DOUBLE-FACE MONUMENT SIGN . • Eij DISTINCTIVE ELECTRICAL ADVERTIWN,2 ,.:i. .' , lam! .., °r , Y. •r'y U i ' • M ' 17 411110 r _.,_'. ,.l:•,. '..,..i,.. ,..,.:..'.. 1,.',..'.,.,..._..t..r, ..'.a d:..,rr,..- .,.r...._ .. .,.._...+ .,. ..r_..r,.. ....a.-.1.. ,..,......._4.n .r,...,..._ .....,. ,...,..._,... _,.,.r..._.,.,.......«. ..................... .. .. ,,,r.t CITY OF ' I ' may, i /// SITE DEVE, QEMENTIIEV.IEW.,AP?L,1I ATI SC 13- ° t CITY OP TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall; PO Box 23397 ' : ,. Tigard ,, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 FOR STAFF USE ONLY � ' CASE NO. SD R t 3 -<:s e: ._ OTHER CASE NOS: Y � . RECEIPT NO. '. APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: to DATE: / N. , i le GENERAL .INPORMATION ;� t�%1447'744-x1444 (-; do Application elements aubmitte'd: ' w • , ,��. PROPERTY ADDRESS/1OCATION_; � �1�1 .,f,r' .,+. .,s„I. ,.---0-i.)A� ) Applicatio® form (1) „ . , • I ii ( u Z13!, 1 . ,-'' O er°a asig aature/wr°it:te a. TAX MAP AND TAX LOT Prot I L; .vim O ss 0 authorization ' 113,s, rt,IMO /il , : U .�.1 C) T tie transfer instrument (1) .. SITE?, ;i'.ZE Pi/1k., • -(D) Assessor's map (1) , _ PROIEiTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* �� 1l\le� , �E? Plot Ilan' (pre app checklist) ADf)REcrS 0I it1°/, of , PHONE Applicant's statement __ CttrY itq AN ZIP J (pre-app checklist ) e At►Pi,tCANT* O Q r..: a J/ 4� 4(G) L.'A.,. 01,ge3. " .,ty-e - v�.,: ,, . , it4'ps n�� 2,3,13 I /0 • Milk 1;41 fl F"+o r. n's< 6z7 . PHONE a °"' d'reos '--trttnLn ►i r4 ��r�r�r ZIP ( a2ag6 S'o) *When they owner mod the 7ppttcant are different I) Construction 'Cost: Estimate people, the opp 1 f can G must be the purchaser of record ` . or ei 1►'', ;See i h posy as i on with written authorization DATA; DETEa iINLD TO BE COMPLETE: 1 t 1 rom Lite owner or an agent of the owner with written _w1'�I'q,—i try. , c,, ii:n 4f c �t he) /I ii rho Iu►►ri;�rit°ion, T1w nwnor'(n) muse sign this ,, r; �,:' � a f)is1.�i.c'�t 9�,rt In the space provided on page two or � FINAL DECISION DEADLINE: �� � I ��►� q submit. ,t wri t°t'on 1ntithor1zat1on with this application, , I ' COMP, L4 /zONE cD .IGN ION: 2, PROPOSAL SUMMARY ► r e P '1h owner; ,of' .record of the Subject property approval I , • �cc Ngat �� a� development review t� . td.P O. I Number: ,, . 14 L 1.ow A •.a ko v =�r1, 1 4r, LS., Appt',ova1 Date: , 1 i.nal Approval gate I Planning , r , I Engineering ► t I kev'c.1 5/87 -- � I I 1 i I ' 111 ,•n Y,l I r, �� a Ir ; r 1 ' �1'+Y`-h� r. n .., ''i . . " �, I 1 , j!' � M ...� 'r � .9 16111 n ',_ \\1:' ' r , I I 14 3. List any variance, conditional use, sensitive lands, or other Aland use actions to be considered as part of, this application: , ,Jp li t � ef . ",• 4. Applicants: To have a complete application you will need to submit attachments { described in the attached information sheet at the time you submit this f'„ application. 3' 5. THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: A. The above request' does not violate an deed restrictions that ma be ,. attached to or_122.2!!!1_22ori,1 the b•ect afro e u, y B. If the l application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and sttbject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. : C. All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plans r ' '� attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the i - , applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be l' revoked if it Is found that any such statements ate false. D. The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving F. , or denying the application. I I '�0 ' g DATED this Y l9 + 1 y. SIGNATURES of each owner (egt husband ond pe) of the : 'hjec•i roperty. r -0411.112,74.4 . et . ' -.^mow -� tFF Y a I I ' (KSL:pm/0524t?) �, r • Ir r I I fl, l�." 1 . r � � `f , '. 0 991 I •I ko,; . a _ -I ,. y 11,..'..4,1_,.,n ..'..4,1.. ..•,.4,,,,...u..ai..n.....u.,.....,...«—,..n.._.... ..,r,..,.•4_'..!,.....,,,..,u.,,,,,,.—,.....,,,L,,,,..,..,..---,' y DA^r� •1 1 . 15.0, Box 12909 • ;gal em, OR 97309 503 581 6100 , i 1 • oct oLrc.r� 28 � 199 ' � � i • CT`$'v,. OF '1'l(1rd) , 'y i II , 6' J Q('� act on r� 1 11 V`, • Davis authorized x ca x � yr�y �y of /� X17 �+�r �y ♦SI�P1r.R'. .l l) on J , fl d u6o, m�}y *i �. "yam K1 n the Tigard 4%r Itl��r Wrq.iM in Md0�r7'. � lJ»� 6R�.1 G� Y le, plc: l„M 1 1, 1 r you have anT oiozioert'tt•`'~it: quest$olita. 1: Paul A. Simmon o SLiPE11VALti Store Li Salem Division I I 4i i ■. f rl rp{ ' ,h h :4' ■ ' il � 1 • n " q.• tr t'. • • µ „.9....4, ,,I,...,4.�., .a r ..,7.'-...,..w,..+n�.. L,...w.....-..,,e,,.,.,,..,,..�, - :i.�f...,M.,..u,iwl-A e. .,. ........-,.rt............ .....l...S 7a....,.'...,.,. N„w.t..nLc«lu,a.w.+.ry w,..,...._, ■ GORI)ON R, A �r f 'N'1"1,:R1'1ISES 11,0. 130Y 740 Glenee4::each, Oregon .97388 • • c .1i,zf dreary 26, 1993 City of Tigard 'art P.0,Box 23397r Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE; Site Development Review Application- SITPERVUU Holdings, Inc, l ' To Whom it May Concern: rr • w,, ,��� r • I I am the owner of certain real property located in the area of the City of Tigard r• commonly known as the Tigard Triangle, more particularity described in Exhibit A, attached to this letter, and shown on the sketches attached as exhibit B. I have entered into a purchase agreement with SUPERV,4ILU Holdings, Inc. for conveyance of this property. I understand SUPERVALU.J Holdings, Inc. k submitting an :' application for Site Development Review which includes this property, and I hereby I give my consent to such applicatiortr Sincerely � ,r�r v I .4Siazdeo?, , Gordon R. Martin cc: Gordon Davis • • • r 11 ' l tcrj�r;rt n)etn iO3,004-M7,7 OrOttlgort 50,7-639,1408 JlaavitrtIle 3/ . • rl 1 rE f,)Ar?i)i) M ,s r I I Ik ? � i rt i r b h r t I � r � �� I r . I • • • i . ,. ', '_... 5...... ...,.... .L.,d...•• ..I.«.,.ter. ....».... .. ,.1.....'.».., ,-u J............».......r ..4T.••„1:.. .,,-..,, .... ».. .,,.1♦ 5E'aN f 8Y 9Xer,oxc Te I ecop i:er 702'1 X 2 °- 3 'I l .boA I Liucl & Gor'caon°� P tE$T • PNG , ► :CNC 10 :503-642-51,79 DEC 07 '92 18 : 17 No ,003 P ,Q$ 4 EXHIBIT "At” ` FOR IDENTI `ICPTXQN PURPOSES A, TRACT C)E' L ,inn '1400 T]+ XN T1.1E SOUTHEAST oNE QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TQS'N8HI ' 1 SouTH RA 1 E 1 WEST WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, O/T' g * 7 1' q MORE �,ARL� , • ��' T���R�, �A,�►�INOTON �t3UE�T�', ORE�"ON�' B�XNQ � �, ��ARTI�� � • IEBCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: tEE/NN I N ' AT THE SO JTMWEST CORNER OF THAT CE1tTAIN TRACT OP° LAND CO'N'VEX'ED To A, L T 'MR,N BY 1)fE17 RECORDED IN BOOS 1 $ AT tAOE $if! r WASH I NGTO COUN,3 DEED RECORDS, THENCE SOUTH 89° 16y 2 EAST ALONG THE BOOT H LINE Off` SAID L I PMAN TRACT TO THE INTERSECTION ' TMl SOtJ'1 Z LINE o"' Shxp LX AN TRACT AND THE NORTHERLY RZ' HT WA? or ql,im pxc ?c atb D T1 OJTH S °1EsT EXTENSION, THENCE SOt7T 740 00 ' 53" EAB ' 2.34 .'47 1'EET ALONG THE NORTHERLY RIGHT O,'!' WA' ' ' ' OF SAID Opo$E ARTHQQTh ST ET EXTENSON TO THE INTE1RsEcTloN ,.., �J NI 0.?" THE NoRTHERLY NORTHERLY RIGHT OF 'SAY OF SAID rtQ'OSED DARTMOUTH STREET' EXTENSION AND THE WEST LIFE op Tr,1AT OE. I' i/N !WRAC ' Off" LAND CO NV'.yED Ti e eORDC`)w R, MARTIN AT WASHINGTON COUNTY RECORDERS PEE NUMBER 85040410, WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED' RECORDS, SAID / INTERSECTION POINT BE/NO THE TRUE poI 1T OF BEO1NNINO e THENCE OONT I NUING AtIoNa d THE NORTHERLY RIGHT T Off' WAY OF SARI E 1 O?OSE�1 • bA1.TMouTH STREET EX ENS xt N SOUTH 74 OO 53 EAST 136 5 C FEET TO A POINT OP CURVATURE IN THE RIGHT Off° WAY OF SAID PROPOSED D. ,ATHOCi`x'H STREET EXTE ISIoN; THENCE RL0NO THE M C OVA A 465 ,00 �• t , � TO r �. � n Ana c ' '"Qo`� cuRv e, ,1 O "�RE LEFT ,1 1 , 9 9 'EEC" ` HAOU�aH R CEN.c RAID ,ANGLE OP 146 32 ' 16'x , THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 81° 17 ' 01" EAST 117 , 67 FEET, To A POINT Or TANGENCY /N THE UUO}T op WAS op SAID PROPOSED DARTMOUTH 8TRE T EXTENSION; T1 EN'+ ''E SOUTH $8 33' EAST 150 ,04 rEzT To THE TE ;SEcTI N OF TH4 NORTHERLY AI014T OF SAS' OF SAID PROPOSED DARTMOUTH STREET EQ'LENBXON AND THE e. WESTERLY /OHT W AVENUE; THENCE a 01° 43' r �,' 4' �'' W�Y' �N" b ► a �' ��L' A'��•� , NE � RT� �� { S 6'' EAST 65 . 96 FEET ALONG THE r EsTERL ' AWE' OF WAY' Off" SAID • ' e 7N � AVENUE. To THE INmERSO' xdN or T 'WESTERLY RIGH or • WAY o F SAID B ,W e 1 2ND A V E N1E AND THE N Q�T LINE�� OP THAT AT C E RTA I N TRACT Op LAND CONVEYED BY 'D ;ED To GORDON R. MAR 1 AT WAsHINOT N OoUNTy R ECORDERS PEE NUMBER 850404100 WASHINGTON COUNTS )221 RECORDS; TH2NC2 NORTH 890 16' 25 r WEST 3 I 1 C FEEL O E'� � O 'IW3T DLO T N� �'�� N �`�� �x�' OF S�I�? MARTIN TRACT TO , �iE � CORNER o? SAID HART/N TRACT THENCE SOUTH 01° 41 ' 44" WEST " �RAoT ' O T R . f• • ���,t��d�' T�� "���'� LANE OF ���� ���'��� r E '� UE POINT , OP IJ E G/.1t NI:►'s Ow • CON`"GINS 200514 , 19 SQUARE VE'T HoRE OR 'LESS, • • •S .;,.. ... h.. ...1,..:.....,.'.. „u:.............,,M, ..,.....,''i eS,. .-, �., .ti.l;r.......J� ». . ,.....:aw..vS..»,..,.........�.,,..,.......,.....,.It �....,:n;.-. .._...w..».....,.w....l., - ..c ,»,..,...,n�-. r/p 1 ; 1 •`28- ;"11 ;59AM ; suc & �a don-' aos 227 7221 ;# 3 ` r. p PRIEST, tNG , , INC , ID :SUS-.642-B 1? DEC V '92 92 i R l9 No ,003 15 .13 . 4„,„, EXHIBIT T " fi , • FOR IDEN IVICA Ic N PURPOSES • ♦ r I' : A r1AcT OF LAND LOCA.T ,D IN THE SOUTHEAST ONE OUI ''ER OF SEC' /ON e, 36, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANCE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY • OF T I GARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY ORrt ON. Et I Nei MORE PARTICULARLY , ' DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS p • BEGINNING AT.THE SOUTHWEST CORNEA OF THAT CERTAIN T! AQT QE LAUD OONVEYED TO A. LIP ,N BY DEED RECORDED IN toOX 153 AT PAS E .$13, ` WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS, THENCE SOUTH a9° 16' 25 LAST ,; '168 . 22 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF SAID L I "MAN TRACT TO, THE INTERSECTION 0/P THE SOUTH 'LINE OF SAID LIP MAN TRACT AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF THE VRQ1 QS1 0 DARTMOUTH STREET r, ExTgNsIQN AND THE 'TRUE PO/NT Off" EEOINNINc; THENCE gloUT 74° 00 53 v+ EAST 234. 47 FEET AL 7N3 THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY ov SAID . PROPOSED DARTMOUTH S' REgT EXTENSION TO THE INTERSECT'TON OF THE NORTH LINE OF SA,XD PROPOSED DARTMO 7TH STREET EXTENSION AND THE EAST LINE OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO GORDON RICHARD RIcHARD MARTIN BY Gc N RAi` AM X'EcORDEn hT ' 'AsHX ETON COUNTY FEE NUMBER 79007107 , W ,$1 I t°i4TO OUNT"' DEED RECORDS„ THENC'E 01041' 44" EAST ALONE THE EAST L/Ng OF SAID MARTIN 'TRACT TO AN • 1S IN topNPA1 O SAID MAP 1A " 'FEE. dr ANGLE POINT THE �`'Z'IN' �' �', ��E oLLOWIN THE bOtND .RY, OF SAID MARTIN TRACT N'OJ TH 09 5' 25 i WEST . 13010 rEra TO AN ANGLE POINT IN Tt E BOUNDARY OF SAID MARTIN B'RAC'T; THENCE CONTINUING itUING ALONC THE BOUNDARY OF SAID « ''^ MARTIN TRACT NORTH 01° 49' 5 6'` EAST 49 . 98 FEET TO THE q ' OS NORTHEASTERLY CORNEA OF SAID MARTIN ',T'RACT, THENCE a NORTH $ 1$' • 25" PEST 214.27 `'EE' AL0N'c THE 'NORTH LINE OP SAID MARTIN TRACT, SAID NORTH LINE or SA/D MARTIN TRACT ALSO )EI dO THE NORTH LXN QE" SAID LIPM A.N TRACT, TO "SHE' TRUE POINT O ' BEGINNING, CONTAINS' 6 ,359 .89 S VARE rr E,T MORE QR LE5q M41$ OF BEAR/NOS: SVRVEY 24 ,389 (S • • • • c#9 u i+ • I •n .. . .+{��{:if�Air.• Y1Iy,Mw•••. MwA 4w b... • ' +ref �I�E p i ' i ,, , • , , i .., . 44 , $ ,4 Ct) ' '. ' , , ., .. , , , , . , , , , . , . , . , , , nwf lW% • . .. , 4., '4' , . .. .: " ,, , , pp , , . 1 , . . . , , , , T• . , q• ^4, t,,,,,,: ,,'ts,.'.,— '4 ' �» �f. of � I' , . , , , �.0 °"' ,.' f' ,, (yam i Y,' 1 .. D 1 v 0 ,ti . ' ' r'3,.1 Wat 11 R.S y �� eA'',' ; , ' ' ' '"' n „ ' , ' ''E WNl Ei&ii � . , .. 11 ,„ i ��/ , , ,, 1 `o! 1 , 1 , , Mwp�� f i., , , 1 . . ,...: , ,,..•...:,• . (,,le 1 , ' , . • ,,• .L: • . , . , 2 i • , . ,.., • 1 , . , , . , . .. :. , , . . 1 . • • b , 1 , , . , 1 , i, 4 , 'RI ' , 1 i. C iy.7j! , I, r ^ 4,,.. • i • . • �I r f . , , • 1 � i. i. Ib° N' „I, i i I i im , , , ' ' oiele /, Ill,1 ' '' ' , • ,r , tyt 4464 p, I w •1 ' a.�1 ,—...,.i wLL...,..w ,�.u..4 K+,.,,...r....-,-�.•.e...,.,_... ....n�..... .,.,...• ,.i rti. ..._.,. .4...-Wik'rls:.4 ..Y , • , , • • . '�; i. • t• r l � er.� v ..a.o�+�t.0 ""r,� *•MM. , .wa 9 h. w I C1 • I 47civ i 4•41 ' ' 8. 1+ kiqlI , ,N, 1 .. . i,,.,,l ' °• t i' .. ,., . / , ' , i, ' rtr 1 l w• t . n' t C • r 4 ' • s • I l ' hdlvllaAf furl , 1 v , , , i • . i t e 1 t N � � Y � r ' # G /, 1, eo ;4.•uo ,,100 1 l np ! tmA in, l." o`p—o' -i, ! L7,f / „lrrel+ o l p l :hnd i' i to C111,1 i • .,... ...,,•., ,4, .�. . � . b. P .1. .., • ,•d I 1 , 1•. M '' C'` V ' . %, •\G . If , r I 1 j • 7,, ,, ., q. 1 ai ...,w.t. ',..0 f' ', ,+., is OF rA7} r�p�r«�;�t •yy .4`�PT "��.I Fa,1p1,,r y�,A7 f( ¢ rl{L itr p�ro�."a�.�yw tY1 y d,[tku Fd'utn F�,4 S"y y,pJ�p,'11 ,,`.. , E,.A r.p� ''F" R.F 0 «^ti.)IC'"„!f„,F) .t .�,r},I f'� 1".y J 4.G:1'il vc1^il i''F.kr 1«„^riu 1 T" R 7X1Ch(d1 11 ”)4,'ri'1 u.JwM °R. r 1 - , K;1'.°' w.4,rf"�'' t'"Ti, ¢>.aitiit, r �: / 1Z4#::?.rJ M "i adtI°) 1' {rtA�, t , ti�ra"4.' , v" M trl {«w .-r � � � � � +4 Lkt f m ” F7, �, � .t µ�n y,.• r t.. I tt 1•�1' , i 1 itt%1'lli R w�1 "1" k :&f 1 1 (:,:,',1,4,1:3t,:,,11:::::1;4,'/f. 1,,.P ;?' tj 1k;1t 11"' .r ,4.� r r . �1 tiA � y .M✓i' i4 l a4"M;` 4a1«a 4 w i l t tl 1p �t r' t a'c;)"""` t ;.,1'.;;,Ik.,.� p i;,t�1.,1; 11 ���, E �': ,,. g.� ,1»I�!tv $°.r . �rw.,i'& s'C': d+�.W�" ^Itr,1" „k �4 : it d' x.., � :t i . r, r. 1..1^1 q xY�y" 4 ',t',,':„,;i 1 �`,r1"t 1.0 �� QR.it pp, yy.)��,,.,i3)19 tl1,tr,"-::mj l4i'tt'rf i ti',i#c�fli>t'H^4 T T ' '7a.fl'^P. 1, „` p�j y p 1 {{ly.igJ� i �J „ t° (y�e� gps / ({,p{1� d ,ti a D , y1y[}.,WN1` fi,"� cw" 1 1 r ppt i"4"„1.1" ".'{ i1:.«�qi1F1'°' I"'lllc"'i u�B,��' Ir . 5-„ 1:y'AUf1 4Ct•I 0..�tt.`i, lj. 11 ( 1 ,"lliiarl.Q!M" #1��r:.',A l„iT �r,fi«•� ,� /;.,'I.,)�tlM ,.;Mlt .r -.1,,1'l�'l/.+. . p ir1"i 1,1„1„q a.rV,l�.i.y"".?r i N`r1'1'Ii.4n,Y�4--F s y,) 1 S 6 rrn..n l t”}.1. tiqrv.....G 4y�A �t 1 C«1 �+.t'«1 i+ryy‘q) Li'.^i,1,,',';`,: Y r�"F f.:�I 1 p 1,. I«'!"lnri r i;r-.19:11,i 4P y r.1r run r' b�n�i1kt�An.R tir',..:;I:11 '1 t„ I 4. *.1t R m if',„+•wr I t k:w.'�'Qi,n • t.IiRR�c I�Ww,I 4MIk t�0„n.�u yr� i t,,1 t�,IW��SR'l f'! �n„i'`d s�g ta q *,c �,r t^{3'!�:S�xllw t.�>"n t1� Y I Y M'n 1 «p�.�1��! ;'5�.4 i;t4 1a�','n i v+Y11't . i r , ,i�5}k qy y, ” .."`t I -It 11',.1i... t'J7,.1"v4'3w1,"9 ,lNl it'"IT T.P" '.. ,... ..> w. I,:i.(fJd'F�l{i, W .i.R7"4' r. A I pt t RI. I i , r i i u { I.' . r..5 I � , r s ,� I , • I . I I I , " • . ''NELL, RAMIS, CREW & C • ATTORNEYS AT LAW JEFF H. BACHRACH BALLOW&WRIGHT BUILDI t CLACKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE MARK L,BUSCH 1727 N.W.Hoyt.Street � ��� 181 N.Grant, Suite 202 CHARLES E. CORRIGAN* Portland, Oregon 97209 Canby, Oregon 97013 STEPHEN F.CREW (503) 266-1149 KAREN E.JONES*** TELEPHONE: (503') 222-4402 DEC �. WILLIAM A.MONAHAN FAX: (S03) 243 4944 I NANCY B.MURRAY MARK P.O'DONNELL JAMES M.COLEMAN PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE � TIMOTHY V. RAMIS KENNETH M.ELLIOTT SHEILA C. RIDGWAY* Special Counsel MICHAEL C.ROBINSON** { WILLIAM J', STALNAKER ,r December 8, 1992 'AiSO ADMmITED TO PRACTICE IN STATE OP WASHINGTON **ALSO unDNITITED TO PRACTICE IN WISCONSIN "'ALSO ADMITTED TO PRACTICE.IN TEXAS Ms. A b ., r in a �. b i+� � h Buck & G. don Waterfront Plaza 1011 W..stern Ave. , Suite 902 Seattle, WA. 98104 Re: City of Tigard Dear Abbie: Thank 'you for your telephone call on November 25. As promised, I ' have enclosed several documents which you' might find of interest. a' The first is the Transportation Planning Rule. The rule is an . administrative rule adopted by the Oregon Department of ' Transportation. In general, I do not think it will have an impact; , on your application for site development review approval. The ti second document is from the 1991 Oregon Highway Plan. It , is the level of se rvice staxard,s for the State e ktighwa.y system. This may �. be relevant, to you because Dartmouth intersects with Pacific Highway, a state highway., The third document is entitled, "Transportation Analysis Required for Plan Amendments, " Again, the ' majority of this would not be relerelevant toyour request.g _st.'` However, page 3 describes a scenario involving development of property already zoned for the proposed use. On t p e ODOT states that it has the M that glo read the authorit to restrict access r y .ghway Ito protect necessary. Pardon m . authority of he � cal street to the sate ha ct' the facility, if � y scribbled notes on this document, but this is the only copy that have In addition, as I recommended to you in our phone conversation, I suggest est` that you talk to the City directly about the requirements for your traffic study. , • • i ,.....A,„.u.n.a_..,..,:+.r...,_a«IwM.nf..,,,,',C..,,.«..,»,NA AJU,»Iu..d._..,nlMl..,,»,,_,,.,.,,w»r.4 4.,«..a.,....HM.1....,1,- _L_rlk:u..L. ,!d.:., ,...,+-.a,1_,.nM .,....».,,M.d,.+rd"k:{d w;.k..J,..,... .-,s � .�` a,,::��..i.«..u. w.,:n,.«..•.-,...,aau..�..,.M.t,.,,�,�.,:�,;....l�l...�.U,T:..,.v„y..,a a.iu»..:.aw.t.M.,-,•.w»«+;i.,.i:1.,, O'DON'NLLL, RAMIS, CRI W & .RIG,AN Ms. Abbie Birmingham December 8, 1992 Page 2 I1 , • I hope this information is helpful to you Please feel free to call me if I can provide additional background information. ' 4 Very truly yours, O'DONNELL, RAMIS, CREW & C©RRIGAN 11 , '7 (1 , 16,,,IktLX,J ", 'k ,k/)/14,/(„1, Michael C. Robinson MCR:dd ,,,' '' ' Enclosures cc: Dick Bewersdorff, Sr. Planner (w/o encls) Randall R. Woo7_ey, City Engineer (w/o encls) , mci\iSgdrd\90024-4\birminf flr • y yr; t I' • G , u S' • 1 I • v II ..,..1' .,,..•.Ir......n 11 ...+r.,. ..,..11,....r«r..i r....» ... .n_ .,.....M-..., .,•«.....w.,...... ...nµ.......i...,....d...«...S.w.,. -..M 14.;....,v...,..... ..,.....a... ' -..«m..». k ..i. .+.. .ai....wr.. ) \ , •\ .._...,.,J.W... ,1.a .-1e....w >✓.1...1H .. .n4...1.A... ..,.. ..,«..r«.lµ.4w__... i , \ . YI M , GORDON E. DAVIS s; 1020 TAYLOR BUILDING,SUITE 555 k POST OFFICE BOX 8774 PORTLAND,OREGON 97207 . 503-248-1185 r o' tiVilfillittg PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTING January 28, 1993 , STRATEGIC PLANNING City of Tigard . Planning Department' 13125SV14Hall Blvd ..a Tigard, Oregon 97'223 RE: CUB Foods Development Permit ‘` • Greetings: • - SuperValu Stores is pleased to submit this application for Site Development Review fore 19.9 . 4 acre commercial center in the Tigard Triangle: As you know,this project has taken considerable - time to pian because of the complex assembly of many parcels of land and the physical difficulties of the site. For these reasons,we are particularly pleased to be able to present this project to the City at this time. Accompanying this letter are the following materials. e Completed application form ❑Application Fee u Preliminary plans including: • Development site plan s Preliminary grading plan • Preliminary utilities plan (water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer • Building elevation and perspective • / ® Preliminary landscape plan c iraffic report* riWetland delineation and mitigation plan* Narrative `rticludin sign lens description of the project (including g 9 plans) *To be submitted within tWo weeks of this application We look forward ward to discussing this with staff in more r.e detail and to making g a formal presentation to the Planning Commission. If there are any qu- n5, or nee ds for additional information, p lea se do riot hesitate to cal '+ Na incerel , Gordon• ? ....,---' .#;. 51 "N.:!:11/1/1#44;• -7.-- . E Davis, for SuperValu Stores • i t. • + M I 9 - . 'c , . IIIIIIIII1L1111111111111.1.1111111111131111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII. , , -- _ , ) ,. .• ,.. ',. , • „-- „ , , . ,,, ,•' ,.., . ' 1. .. . NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION a. PROPOSED COMMERCIAL CENTER ' ? ' Tigard Triangle • SuperValui/CUB Stores•„, , . , THE APPLICATION , This application is for the following actions: • a Site Development Approval L , ' 1. . , a Sensitive Lands Permit , a Sign Code Exceptions • . The site is zoned CG/PD, The proposed retail center is consistent with the requirements of the CG zone and except for the PD overlay, would otherwise be evaluated through the City's administrative review process. The PD overlay establishes ' the requirement that this application be reviewed by the Planning Commission. ' 'Ir , ' THE SITE ,. , , . This is a 19.9 acre site bordered by SW 72nd Avenue on the east, the proposed , Dartmouth Street on the south, the Tigard Cinemas complex on the north and Red Rock . Creek on the west (northwest). , , Included with this property are portions of Tax Lots 100 and 101 which are generally in . ' the northwest corner of the intersection of 72nd Avenue and the proposed Dartmouth , . , Street. At the time of this application, these parcels are owned by Gordon R. Martin, SuperValu has entered into a purchase agreement with Mr. Martin to acquire these , , . ., - parcels to include with this development Final closing on that transaction is expected to „ occur in mid-March. Mr. Martin has authorized SuperValu to include these parcels with • this application (see attached letter dated January 26, 1993), •. The site originally included 21 parcels, including 18 single family homes. Many of those homes were located on SW Duvall Street. Presently there is a vacant single family home on Tax Lot 101, This home will be removed during construction of the project To the north of the property is the Tigard Cinemas complex with the rear of that building • directly abutting the property line. To the west and south is vacant land. To the east is ' SW 72nd Avenue with several single family homes on the east side of the road, : SuPerVakt Stotts NarratiVe Description - 1 - , .. ,. r 7 'I • r 4 . , • . • I • t . A • . '''' I N ' '\. c , l'} . 1 . A t .4 • After purchasing the properties, SuperValu moved or demolished the homes, removed ., utilities, underground tanks, accessory buildings and fences, and with a tree removal , , ' permit issued by the City of Tigard, removed the vegetation from the site. . . - • At the request of SuperValu, Washington County has consolidated many of the parcels. The Tigard City Council acted on January 26, 1993 to vacate Duvall Street. , The site is relatively uniformly sloped from northeast to southwest with the high point ‘ (elevation 232 feet) at the northeast corner of the property at 72nd Avenue. The low • , . A point is along Red Rock Creek at an elevation of 165 feet. Red Rock Creek forms the western (northwestern) property line. SuperValu retained . . IES Associates to conduct a wetland delineation along Red Rock Creek. Two wetland areas were identified in the IES work; one directly associated with the creek generally adjacent to and parallel with the creek; the second, an isolated 6,900 square foot .. wetland area, unconnected with the creek hydrology. The surveyed wetland lines are , . plotted on the plan maps. Other site features are also shown on the plan maps. . , :. THE SITE PLAN ' , . , The site development plan includes approximately 150,250 square feet of retail , commercial space along with two separate retail development sites of 27,190 square feet and 35,871 square feet. These parcels will accommodate two individual retail uses . t % with a maximum of 20,000 square feet of retail space. % A , The major anchor use for the center is a 79,455 square foot CUB Food Store, The CUB 4". store is a full line, full service grocery with in-store meat and seafood departments, , „ bakery, deli, and many personal services including video rental and prescription drug• 1 , .• center, The store will be open 24 hours a day. , A small 50)00 square foot retail space is included adjacent to the CUB store, This space•_.1%, ' I el be used for one or more small retail businesses such as a cleaners, hair cutter or other similar stores. This 50 foot store frontage is designed to be available for a possible future expansion of the CU 13 More if needed. Such an expansion would add as 1 . much as 11,600 square feet to the store, An expanded CUB store with a total of 91,055 , .. square feet has been used as the basis for the traffic analysis and utility capacity requirements, At this time, there are no specific plans or timing for that expansion, ,.. , TwO additional retail stores, identified as "Retail 6" and "Retail C are planned for the , center. At this time, agreements have not been finalized with specifie retail users. The .. • i.' businesses will be complementary to the CUB store and will most likely be a national q , SuperValu Stores , Narrative DesOritytiOn ' - 2- ,.. , . ' ( '• . . ) ' 1 _ , • • I I • • • clothing retailer, a national sporting goods retailer, a national pet supply retailer or similar use. • Lots 4 and 5 are designed for two individual retail users. The area of the two lots is 1.45 acres. Retail stores on these lots will have their own parking within the lot area but will take their primary access from the east/west internal roadway on the project. An additional, limited "right turn, in only" access is planned for the main Dartmouth entrance driveway. • - • . Uses for Lots 4 and 5 will most likely be a restaurant, bank or similar use. SITE DEVELOPMENT Because of the significant difference in elevation across the site, the need to place the • very large retail stores on flat surfaces, and the need to maintain relatively flat parking areas so that customer shopping carts don't run away and hit parked cars, excavation from the existing grade will be done in the northeastern portion of the site and fill will occur in the west/southwest portion of the site. , The finish floor elevation of Retail "C" will be at 208 feet, approximately 28 feet lower , than the elevation of 72nd Avenue in the northeast corner of the site. Retail "B" is • approximately 4 feet lower than Retail "D", and the CUB store is another approximately 4 feet lower yet. . Because of this grade difference between 72nd and the project elevation, the two , access driveways--the service drive on the north side of the main buildings and the main . 72nd entrance--will both ramp down into the site, The southern access will ramp down approximately 19 feet in elevation at an average grade of approximately 7 percent while the northern, service only, one way in driveway will ramp down approximately 28 feet at an average grade of approximately 9 percent The Dartmouth entrance will rise from Dartmouth approximately 12 feet to the internal intersection with the east-west access road. The entry grade from Dartmouth is approximately 7 percent, Along the western portion of the project, the parking lot will be an average of 10 feet above the natural grade, This filled area will be structured with a single, approximately 10 foot high retaining wall. As that retaining wall approaches the Dartmouth Street frontage, it is divided into two, "stepped" retaining walls, each approximately 5 feet high, The walls will be separated by 15 feet of landscaped area to minimize the visual impact of the fill height and retaining walls from drivers on Dartmouth. • SuperVailu Stores , Narrative Description • • • d • • }R .,, ..,......- _... .i...,,+. ,,.....,,.A....._,..+..,, .__.......m ......r, ..._iA..., ...,i,,,..,._4 ..,,..r ................ ... a ..s.,.r.,-Y.,.....,t..n,....a....,...».M..r4.._...,,.....,.........A ,.,.a l-..i...,.,...-..e.,... ....»..a..n,.W........,....„-..k..,✓,,...,..w.-,.,,.,........... .....,:J........,.«.,J.........,, , PARKING • The parking lot in front of the CUB store includes 9.0 foot wide parking stalls to ensure customer ease of unloading shopping carts. Handicap stalls (including Van stalls) are provided in all parking bays and meet ADA standards for single stalls (14 feet wide) and i' double stalls (24 feet). Handicap stalls have been provided in the parking area west of the CUB store so that users of these spaces do not have to cross a traffic roadway to reach the stores. In all, the total project (not including the parking that will be developed with the retail uses in Lots 4 and 5) includes 790 parking spaces. For the main retail stores, this represents a ratio of 5.2 spaces per 1 000 square feet of retail space. Development of Lots 4 and 5 will include dedicated parking for those uses at a ratio ,,.� consistent with City of Tigard Development Code requirements. VEHICULAR ACCESS The primary customer access is from either the driveway on 72nd Avenue or the driveway on Dartmouth. 72nd Access The driveway on 72nd Avenue is 36 feet wide with dedicated left and right turn exit lanes. A single entry lane is provided at this entrance. Because of site grading; this entrance will ramp down into the project at an average grade of approximately 7 percent. The first access into the parking lot occurs 165 feet into the property. There is no traffic signal planned for this access. Dartmouth Access projected main entrance to the project The The access on Dartmouth is ro'ected��tt,� be the m, driveway has a single 18 foot entry,. lane that widens to 22 feet with two, 1� foo t lanes where the driveway intersects the main eastawes:t:internal roadway. i F , includes two 12 lanes for i, 0 foot The exit portion of the driveway i 1�� foot �the entire ���9 foul � • driveway. The two exit lanes are designed to be,dedicated left and right turn lanes. sca ed media study ! , The entrance driveway includes a 10 feet raised, landscaped r��, � The traffic stud ( � i n dicates that no traffic signal is warranted for the Dartmouth rtnoath driveway access. • SUperVaiti Stores Narrative Descirip do ...a.P..1....ai.P._ i".........,_.L.............. ..., .a...,,r_,. .... .... ..J......... .:.. .. .....,. ..AI..... .. JI....., «... ... .....,..,_,. _.. ................u...,......x....L_._.._....,,....a...».F�.0 n.J..,.i is.x wfv........ ` �h . }r✓' �c x14 • • A 175 foot right turn lane is provided on Dartmouth to allow vehicles travelling west on Dartmouth to leave the main travel lane as they approach the entrance to make a right turn into the site. r Service Access Service access for the main retail stores is provided by a one way, service driveway j, with access from 72nd Avenue. This 30 foot driveway ramps down into the site almost 360 feet before trucks begin to maneuver into loading docks for the three primary retail stores. This service access is designed as a one way-in movement. Signs prohibiting public access will be posted at the driveway on 72nd Avenue. In addition, at the bottom of the entry ramp from 72nd, signs will also be posted prohibiting entrance. Service trucks leaving the stores will travel to the western portion of the site and drive • south through the western most parking aisle which has been widened to accommodate these movements. Service trucks would then turn east and proceed either to the 72nd or Dartmouth exits/ ; PEDESTRIAN ACCIESS / Sidewalks will be constructed along the frontage of 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street. Sidewalks will enter the site on both sides of the Dartmouth entrance. At the intersection of the Dartmouth entrance with the main internal east/west roadway; crosswalks will,allow pedestrians to cross over onto the main internal island where they will then be able to walk directly to the stores on a 15 foot wide landscaped median. Pedestrians coming from 72nd Avenue will be able to use a sidewalk on the south side of the 72nd Avenue driveway to enter the project ' r , The design of the main store frontage includes a 15 foot wide walkway which is covered by a 10 foot overhead extension of the store facade. is prohibited in the rear o fth Pedestrian access s; p' the stores , I , e • • • LANDSCAPING . ►; Landscaping in the parking g lot is provided at a ratio of 1 tree per 7 parking stalls. Tree 1 parking ` principal � selection is designed to achieve a "canopy" effect in the c.�re'�.�: The rencr l parking lot landscaping occurs in the medians at the ends and in the center of the uperVa1te Stores Narrative lDescrAptspn •• 4. r t 14 f•' i . • parking bays. In addition, the long, north/south median, in the center of the parking' } area, provides a strong landscape corridor, accenting the pedestrian walkway and the • principal movement of vehicles toward the stores. Both entrance drives are also lined with trees and ground cover. In addition to this internal landscaping, the perimeter areas of the site are also ' landscaped. Landscaping along the Dartmouth street frontage is consistent with jl • recently developed Dartmouth landscape standards. North of the Dartmouth rights-of-way, between the sidewalk and the edge of the parking lot, a landscaped area approximately 30 wide is provided. In the area west of the Dartmouth entry drive, the parking lot is approximately 12 higher than the elevation of • • Dartmouth and the sidewalk. The ground is sloped from the sidewalk to the parking lot edge and planted with ground cover, shrubs and mixed trees. In the area east of the , Dartmouth entry drive, the elevation difference between Dartmouth and the retail area of Lot 4 is approximately 14 feet A series of two, "stepped" retailing walls approximately 5 feet high will be used to accommodate this vertical difference. However, as one moves on Dartmouth toward its intersection with 72nd Avenue, the difference between Dartmouth and the elevation of Lot 5 reduces to zero. The landscape plan for this entry area includes low ground cover, shrubs and selected trees. A row of street trees, low shrubs and ground cover are planned along the 72nd Avenue frontage. In the area immediately east of the Retail "C" building, in addition to the street trees, a dense area of sight obscuring shrubs are planned to provide more effective visual screening of the buildings from 72nd Avenue. Also along this 72nd Avenue frontage, ground covers and shrubs will be planted to maintain bank stabilization since much of this area will be relatively steeply sloped from 72nd into the parking lot. d Landscaping along the western portion of the parking lot has two distinct objectives. In is I . this area, the parking lot s elevated approximately 1 0 feet abo ve the natural grade. In the more visible areas, the fill is structured with two, 5 foot - . visible fill of 'high retailing walls, separated by 15 feet of landscape area. The u pp er retainin g wall is approximately 10 feet west of the edge of the parking lot. the landscape adjacent to the parking lot, a In n th andscape area ad ac steel post/steel cable barrier fence , • • ensure that � � , � � parking lot be stopped I I • will be installed to ens an out of control vehicle in the p g • , g wall: In addition, a relatively�nz before reaching the first retaining � ativeJ dense; barrier type, I used to discourage any pedestrian entry into this area. landscape material will be edestrian ent intcatl"�i • In the intermediate landscape area between th e stepped retaining wpils and in the • sloped areas at the based of the retaining walls, landscaping will be placed to establish } Super SuperValu Stores Nar!ative Descraptidti • n♦ _ A / $1 • • ' I a transition between the natural wetland areas along Red Rock Creek and the upland areas of the parking lot. p The 5 foot retaining walls will be made of interlocking, precast concrete blocks that are • specially designed for this type of retaining wall installation. At the natural g rade at the base of the retaining walls, the landscaping objective is to " develop a large, enhanced natural wetland area. This. enhanced wetland area is • designed to significantly increase the overall wetland quality of the Red Rock Creek corridor and in certain areas, to accommodate the City's requirement for water quality treatment and detention of stormwater runoff from the developed areas (also see ' Wetland discussion). At its narrowest in the northwestern portion of the site, the Red Rock Creek corridor will be 40 feet wide. At its widest, the corridor will be almost 350 feet wide: ' Altogether, the enhanced wetland and landscaped Red Rock Creek corridor will • encompass an area of approximately 2.6 acres. ,,; Erosion control measures will be used during construction and in the placement of landscaping that are consistent with Washington County and City of Tigard standards. WETLANDS/ ENSITNVE LANDS/WATER QUALITY TREATMENT The site plan shows the delineated wetland boundaries. There are two jurisdictional wetlands. The main wetland area is a corridor adjacent to and generally parallel with Red Rock Creek. A second, 6,900 square foot isolated wetland was identified slightly east of the Red Rock Creek wetland area The proposed development plan requires filling the isolated 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland: In addition, in one approximately 110 foot area, the retaining wall will intrude an average of approximately 7 feet into the 25 foot buffer to the main wetland area (City of Tigard Development Code 16.64•�026.4 This buffer intrusion oceurs where the west side of the parking lot comes closest to the main Red Rock west parking lot itself is 30 feet from the wetland boundary, the Creek wetland line, While the - g w s into the buffer area in this one section, alu retained IES Associates delineation and develop per�/r � so • So t the wetland nd a ", to conduct b Y cwelo" mitigation program for the filling of the isolated wetlands and for the intrusion into a portion Y Y. area, The mitigation program was developed in consultation small po n of the buffer a � f i with officials of the Division of State Lands and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. • SuperVaid Narrative Description • • A wetland fill permit is being prepared and will be submitted within a week of the ' • submittal of this application. A copy of that fill permit application will be submitted to the • City and included with the materials of this application. r Part of the w etland enha n ce m ent program w orks i n combination with the p r o posed • stormwater quality treatment and detention plan. In the large triangular upland area between Dartmouth, the parking lot and the wetland boundary, the grading and utility plans show an area which will be shaped into a basin and developed as a wetland • marsh. All stormwater from the project will be discharged into this basin which is , designed to meet City of Tigard (Washington County RO 91-47) standards for stormwater quality treatment. The facility has been designed with sufficient capacity to ,: also accommodate the required stormwater detention requirements. . . . , I Three additional areas will i be excavated within the meadow 9 rass wetland area s of the Red Rock Creek corridor and planted with various diverse wetland plants. In southern most of these excavated areas (south of the "area of rushes") two ponds will be created to receive stormwaters that are discharged from the water quality treatment and detention basing •y • ■ A single pond will be excavated in the area north of the surveyed "area of rushes". Soil borings on the site show a high water table under the site. Because of the amount of excavation required to construct the site, soils engineers have recommended installation • • of an extensive under drain system to keep the groundwater surface well below the ' building floor and parking lot levels, That ,underdrain system will discharge into this northernmost excavated area providing a continuous source of water to the pond, which Y is then connected to the other newly excavated ponds via a channel that flows to the • • immediate east of the "area of rushes". In addition, becuase of the high water table, :. : regulatory agencies are confident that the excavated areas will develop into highly diverse wetland areas. The total area of wetland enhancement equals approximately 24,000 square feet (not ' including the water quality treatment basin) or 3.4 times the filled wetland area and • buffer area disturbed: • Sensitive Lands Permit Criteria Since the proposed fill of the square isolated wetlands require a � and p osed � I e 5;9Oa uare foot i dated Corps Division i ands Permit, no u required action �iv�s�or� of State Lands . Sensitive Lands Permit is re aired 9Ur that � ,' , • (Tigard Code, Section 18,84.015,C)� ra Super Vaalu Stores Narrative Descplptit n • !fi \ . • .....,n..__...,r..r...n...r ....'r...,, ,i :1.,.,._,.+-...:.1_x.....- Y� _.... _�:.�._...:....1._,r_..rrA • • However, Section 18.84.040.D outlines the approval criteria'necessary to obtain a Sensitive Lands Permit for a wetland area alteration (in this case a buffer alteration) that does not meet the jurisdictional definition of other state and federal regulatory agencies. 1. The proposed landform alteration or development is neither on wetland in an I I � p p area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor is within 25 feet of such a wetland. Comment: The Red Rock Creek wetland in this area is not .. identified as a significant nificant wetlard or otherwise identified ed in the City's Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland map. • 2. The extent and nature of the proposed landform alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use. Comment: Because of the meandering nature of the wetland line, the wetland and its buffer extend eastward toward the development area in only one spot While the parking lot itself is 30 feet away from the actual wetland line, the severe , grading requirements of the site force the parking lot to be elevated at the western edge almost 10 feet. In order to • minimize intrusion into the wetland and/or buffer areas, retaining walls will be used. However, construction of that wall will intrude an average of approximately � feet'into the buffer area for this approximately 1 1 0 foot area. Of the approximately 800 lineal feet of wetland edge, only approximately 110 feet will be impacted by the retaining wall ' • within the buffer area. The intrusion area is approximately 770 square feet. However, in an approximately 200 lineal foot area immediately north of the intrustion l area, the wetland boundary and parking diverge so that the average buffer is approximately 40 feet„ equalling approximately 3,000 square feet more buffer than is required. 3, Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage which would adversely impact wetlan d characteristics h ave been mitigated, Commen t: The proposed stormwater quality treat ment and detention basin and the , .proposed we tland etland enhancene nt/miti ati�n p lan are desi g ned to manage on I , and off site drainage. • . , L I 4 Where natural .: vegetation has been r emov ed due to o lae ndform alteration lteration cr • development, erosio n control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met' and areas not covered by SuperValti Stores Narrative Description iot , I , I I r i I ij n I 1 • • • • • • (1, . „ .41 structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.100. • Comment: The proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention assn and the proposed wetland mitigation/enhancement program will replace and substantially enhance the level of both upland, transitional and wetland vegetation within the Red Rock Creek corridor. 5, All other sensitive lands requirements have been met. • Comment: No other substantive requirements are applicable to this proposal. • 6. The provisions of Chapter 18.150, Tree Removal shall be met. . Comment: No trees are to be removed within this area. 7. Other Comprehensive Plan policies are met. Comment:The proposal is consistent with Physical•, Limitations and natural Hazards (the area is not within a 100 year floodplain nor contains other physical hazards), Parks, . Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan (the area is not a designated park or recreation area and the proposed mitigation plan meets the general open space policies of the plan). • . . • SIGNS A wall sign will be installed for each of the three major tenants on the building front. These signs will not be larger than 15 percent of the building face for any of these three buildings. An additional wall sign will located on one of the retaining walls in the southwest corner of the site, facing Dartmouth. This wall sign is identified on the site plan. .■ Two Freestanding Signs are proposed; one on the east side of the Dartmouth entrance • and one on the north side of the 72nd Avenue entrance. The maximum available • increase in sign copy area and sign height are sought for these freestanding signs through sign exemptions provided in Section 18,114.130,G:1,c,11. and Section 18114.145A3. Section 114.130.G.1.c,ii provides for a 50 percent increase in sign copy area when a site contains more than a single tenant and the additional sign area is • needed to adequately identify the separate tenants, Section 114.145.A.C., provides for • a 25 percent increase in sign area and height if the increase will not deter from the purpose of the sign code, • SuperVaiti Stores • Narrative Description 1; - - I • • I ..I.a ..«.......•...-.r., .__ ...... ...m.......,. ...._. x_•.d w......xt+.«A!ww ..,.rL6i at....n.,•..x...i,.-+.., n � • ■ • . Attached with this application are drawings of the two proposed freestanding signs. The signs have been dimensioned to meet the sign code requirements with the requested exceptions. The dimensions on these ,drawings are accurate (dimensions indicated on the site plan - Sheet 1 - are incorrect). The two sign exceptions are requested to more adequately identify the multiple tenants in this development. Unlike many comparable retail centers with many tenants, this • center is designed to accommodate three major tenants. While there will be additional retail users in Retail Space A and on Lots 4 and 5, those uses will be identified with wall signs only. Since the retail complex is designed to focus on the three major tenants, each needs • sufficient identification from the adjacent roads to ensure customer recognition. In addition, since the elevation of Dartmouth at the entry drive is 12 to 1 4'feet below the • parking lot surface, little if any of the major retail buildings will be able to be seen from Dartmouth. Given this difference in elevation, it is essential that each of the three major retail users be identified at the street. The proposed freestanding sign on 72nd Avenue is necessary since there will be no other building identification visible from that street I ° ' The proposed freestanding signs are consistent with a development of this size. The p combined sign area for the two proposed freestanding signs is less than the combined sign area that would be allowed if this development had eight businesses and was classified as a shopping center. In addition, even with the requested sign exceptions, the proposed signs will be smaller than the standard CUB food signs used throughout the northwest. • • • • SLIV'al�a V •. a ti-' Description � Narrative - 72nd AVENUE SIGN :- _ :1 / x 2'- °� 9,-_8. PANG FACES,W1-WFE COPY 2'-6 f _. JEb{{` /1 `T ;— #8/220--443 RED BACKGROUND / / ' r E 3, ' '_'c - b4'".i. �' `iR•.� -d 4 ` ms,. _�` L .i -2. -X v-'v�-. "4- - �� . � -• T- "^ = . -��. A ,� j � -5- ' Z (. yi •- 's''.`J s r.;_ � � r , sx.} ' _-,- . - _.*< ` • .• -� �t- s•+ _ ♦ s t Q T $t'',-.3 ' _z�- 1, "?? ` - -ice c-*•s.' - _ k - ,-,..._..,-.;_;,....,-,=,4-...- - -.--..-,;-41'::=-1'. ,,41._ .7,, _.--,:,74",:lSse' _ ''' ;-=.i.:. _.:.'::::: :,:,-;-,:s .--`,', , 'W-3',,--.:,-,.--.4.:-.:;-=;',.---i- . �:' s< .'z'v 1•'F -4.-c3' 4 'e^rem 3_ i .- 2.�, .n L,�<,..-Y:....c r.:x <—.'`• .-� _ "'`tea„-;..�..r . �-:!•,- tea,.mss'- t -c` • _ •- i: L _ m 5:-::::::::::,i:::.-----:-.:::::::-,- — a —- ._ --. .- _ .- - - - _. - :,s ::::L»2�:-• is: 9 x 4::=4::::!:.• t =T{:'„��t .2::€:iT tjt I .LT'•t j{7 t; 9 •:'i:='•• » -.i,i::f ' Yi : ::: =2=-j.:i:1 IT=•', t :=t : 1 1" tt T':! t S i SHEET�pa�,g� METAL eq ///���CABINET !ji j173 27 2= •:=:.:a' i 7. 6- C j': Ell;t 7 - ,7• S ii S SHEE 7 METAL INET lilt!: 5 a ' 'j 1 : =7 a f ;N. :2S 2 , _: PANTED DARK BLUE i. f'.:;1'.:11111.11:1:11!"':q Ii .- icy t•2= i - I .S_• •i•S•.•ti ., {/�0 ■■�, INTERNAL t F•;i!:9: Q { :T: _ 8V*✓ t: •jl;-::ci;•, i s•t - t =i'-i�iii •j i t:_ :::::::i::-. •1::- FLUORESCENT 5, F t 2 :i�:i:t 's`, ci:i IV: '? •n ::jt Pfl��if�i it lldi c '''°::Fj:.. - �qip: t- :r: .`.zt 1 :: :ga " t`g6�i: : -f.:i_F:2'I=`•:::y3 =:i• :•2I IjS.2Ii•,.42,•i- ♦ ::• ,:. ••e•t:2:;;,7:= 7 ::- 11::::,.:.:„„4„.,:.::is ',,.2!j.j.:„ Tt;:- :Si 5 - - -'• :::1:l.�=- T ,:- - _ C ; : -7:7 i 2!IIi_2"•':7777 - :i - - _ ttit"t-t•I2. I n _ 111: }PO D SHEET`M 2} 3 �:: EDP GREY =€ __ '. g a :: :j: is :V:: ;:::t::it'• 1 yy IT 11:::.•:j.�j::• t i tLi: j:i�T:'��:t:;3...::' ' '._•= j,:: :: „ ; ._' UARE FEET :::: ,:':- :.a7i::==•=•:•.:.:: i SCE E;i'•;•:•,:g;F n is 2 2::;:. ` cj 3 i•:: B:T �::f.:..„ .., ...„,....„..., .,,,.i- 3._�:: :,i rat t4 F:4: :''' • •,•0... 1 • ... .... •.„ „„:„..„.........,„.. ,._ tii: iii::E:�°i.:: a - E I _..1...„k,i:=.,..,• i=:i:ii{c,¢i:i:i•s i •g g i sj::i_ii:iii i :,-.f;3 :: "^ r -2 i •::.?;:;sigis t s(} i 'r, :;i:::...:•iE?�°-:e ? - ._ • ! ij• _- ;:it:::..:r:i is t •_ii, ., ? - - - . SIDE VIEW DOUBLE-FACE MONUMENT SIGN 3/86 s T-0” 3/8° $1I V - IMAGE NATIONAL DISTINCTIVE ELECTRICAL ADVERTISING SIG:'ea^•STOREFRONTS•IN RIOR GRAPHICS CUB FOODS ° IGARt}, OREGON GEINERAL o S•444 a E. BOAD•BO -+o . #9 4-8 1/ 4/ z �ior� 208-345-4020 • DAT MOUTH ROAD S IGN - --_ ''V! __- - - _ - -- - F _ .I f 3'- T _ _- - - - - _ : rs y -: _ PANAFLEX FACES, WHIM COPY- , . 'SHEET M TAL,CABIN� _ � - : #I -43 RED BACKGROUND- PAINTED BLUE - P r` #820-59 BROWN DROPS ADE FLUORESCENT r ILLUMINATION 2 - " avin f li ii:t 'i 3 -• ft' q 5 = `i it:, i i [:ito�uflnnn;s.n.a:..... n.,..nn...•.r .,,52, : 'E - - .S: (F[(''TKRl• :i'! _ __ -- S. = - COPY-AND COLORS : _ _((( i 3 ' . ' AS PER TENANT CABINETS :;..St -� i.� •�_'_`" �- -- -- •_•__•.. __ _-__ _-• = - IS i I � GRAY #VVITH 800 MA INTERNAL 01 i : :: 1 _ _ : : ;411:1:-: FLUORESCENT ILLU IN4TIQN t i,= = 6 F.•_ - "= I F i= __' ATE PLEX BACKGROUND WITH 2 LIMES OF#0" REIN t ZIP-CHANGE LETTERS _ ��`-C� ` - __ ROUND 8 METAL _ _ 3 SUPPORT COVERS _ , ti ., .Wes MEDIUM GREY- : ';L �O TAL V wi T I3 FIS.- i _ I: AREA:::::... 1 11 iiiiiiiiiiiii ; :Si -.i i _: .Slit. I •� _: '3i'tee `f `' _::1 1 S SIDE_ VIEW DOUBLE FACE PYLON SIGN 3116'21 r'.01 3 _-IF-O' IMAGE NATIONAL .-r• - 41111 INSTINCTIVE CTIVE ELECTiRICAL ADVERTISING 8 FO T aARD, OREGON SAS•STOREFRONTS irvr oR BRA ICS _ IDAHO_ #9 1/14/ 208-345-4020 k ' 3 t • -' _ - - - •, i - - - .-. - - - .. - Jam_ ,- 0, 4 Rr 1VED PLANNING GORDON E. DAVIS 1020 TAYLOR BUILDING,SUITE 555 MAR 0 1 1993 - POST OFFICE BOX 8774 PORTLAND,OREGON 97207 503-248-1185 -.001101111111111 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTING STRATEGIC PLANNING March 1, 1993 Randy Wooley, Director, Public Works \' City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: CUB Foods Center Proposed Roadway Improvements Dear Randy: In our submittal of the CUB Foods Center project, we did not specify a level of improvement for either 72nd Avenue or Dartmouth. After reviewing the Kittelson Traffic Report and from our discussions with you and other city staff, we propose to construct the following road improvements. In addition to this letter, we have prepared revisions to our site and grading plans to reflect these improvements. SW 72ND AVENUE The current rights-of-way on SW 72nd Avenue 40 feet. Tho physical street section is • presently a two lane road approximately 20 feet wide. The Kittelson report indicates that at such time as the entire Tigard Triangle is fully developed, the projected traffic volume on SW 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site (particularly in the northbound movement) just exceeds the level requiring a five lane facility. In fact, their analysis shows that if a five lane facility is needed, the need is not likely to occur until well after 2015. The Kittelson analysis used the most conservative assumptions. A cornerstone of those assumptions is the land use plan for the area Their analysis used the existing land use plan for the 'Triangle even though that plan is being revised, While that revised plan has not yet • been adopted, if the present recommendation from the Planning Commission is ultimately adopted, many areas that are now"office commercial will be redesignated to medium density residential, If this plan is adopted, traffic volumes during the evening peak hour would reduce as much as • 80% from acreage developed for multi-family residential under the new plan as compared , • • . , v • .- , • . . • • • . . • • v. . • Randy Wooley March 1, 1993 Page 3 For approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd Ave driveway, the paving section will also be 51 feet wide and will include: a a 5 foot bike lane on the west side • Di a 22 foot southbound through travel/right turn (into the site) lane 0 a 12 foot center merge/left turn lane ol a 11 foot northbound travel lane „ This extra wide paving section is required in this location to accommodate the transition from the side-by-side left turn lanes to a single, continuous left turn lane. , ; Since there is only 20 feet of rights-of-way on the east side of SW 72nd Ave., it is not possible • " to accommodate the northbound travel and left turn lanes (along with a shoulder and drainage facility on the east side). For this reason, the entire paving section will be shifted to the west so that 39 feet of the paving will occur on the west side and 12 feet of paving will , occur on the east &de of the centerline of the road. The result is a paving section on the west side of the centerline equivalent to the ultimate required section for a five lane road (with the doUble left turn lanes). Again, because of the small rights-of-way on the east side of the road, to build even the equivalent of a three lane section on 72nd between the site driveway and the northern • property line requires that the paving section be shifted to the west side of the centerline. In addition, in order to provide the proper transition from the 39 foot section south of the driveway to a three lane section north of the driveway, most of an equivalent five lane paving , section must be built on the west side of the centerline, • • . Proposal: Construct 39 feet of paving on the west side of the centerline between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection to a point approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd driveway. From that point to the northern property line, a paving section of 33 feet will be constructed on the west side of the centerline with a transition to the north of the property to connect with the improvements adjacent to the theater. Striping of the improvements will be done to show 11 foot north and southbound travel lanes; side-by-side, 12 foot left turn lanes between Dartmouth and the site driveway; a single continuous left turn lane north of the driveway to the northern service driveway; aid a 5 foot bikeway along the western curb. • Curbs, gutter and sidewalk will also be constructed along the entire west frontage of 72nd Avenue. DARTMOUTH v The Dartmouth Local Improvement District (LID) will construct a three lane roadway with curbs and gutter within a 75 foot rights-of-way between Hwy 99 and SW 68th Avenue. This road, including all rights-of-way, engineering, legal and construction is entirely funded by 4 property owners including SuperValu. No public money is involved in the construction of this road. The LID allows the four property owners to pay the costs of the road through assessments on their property. The Kittelson analysis with its conservative assumptions, shows that the three lane facility will • be adequate through 2015, but that sometime after 2015, a five lane facility will be needed. • • e • , •. • 41 4 Randy Wooley � March 1, 1993 Page2 • with Office development under the existing plan. This is not to say that the projected volumes on SW 72 Avenue would be 80% less under the new land use plan, but simply that they would be less than under the current plan and would therefore would be less than projected in • , the Kittelson analysis. Even with 10% less projected,traffic, SW 72nd Avenue would function properly as a three lane rosd. Proposed Rights-of-Way ' • Since the future basis for traffic projections is very likely to change in the Triangle, and since '' • in the worst case, a five lane facility, if seeded, would not be needed until well after 2015, construction of a five lane section adjacent to the site is premature and may ultimately be .. unnecessary. However, given the possibility that a five lane facility may be needed at some time in the future, it is appropriate to reserve the rights-of-way at this time • Proposal: SuperValu will dedicate 25 feet, on the west side of S1fil 72nd • Avenue adjacent to its site to equal a rights-of-way of 45 feet from the centerline of the road. In the area between the Dartmouth/SW 72nd Avenue intgresection and a point approximately 200 feet north of and the 72nd Avenue driveway, 31 feet of additional rights-of-way will be dedicated to create a total of 51 feet of rights-of- way on the west side of the centerline (see discussion on Proposed Construction below). Proposed Construction Kittelson analysis.. concluded that such time as the intersection 'of SW 72nd and The , concluded t at such r Dartmouth is signalized (sometime between 1997 and 2003), the back up of vehicles waiting conflict with vehicles waiting to turn left into to make a left turn onto Dartmouth may begin to con ct g k the site at the 72nd Avenue driveway. sn� : ,side-by-side-side left turn lanes between Dartmouth and the Propo.����. 1 o cnn5truct side by site driveway on SW 72nd Avenue with one left turn lane dedicated to southbound vehicles wanting nto Dartmouth and the other left turn to turn left onto lane dedicated to northbound vehicles want to turn left into the site. The between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection and the site driveway street sectio �tw total street n b�.. e drive y an � °� t 72nd Avenue will be 51 feet of paving and will include: c a 5 foot bike the west side �. ke ,lane on o a �1 foot southbound outhbcaund'through travel lane a a 12 foot southbound left turn lane lane nd left turn o a 12 foot northbound • a a 11 foot northbound travel lane • "•1 4 , I l■ Randy Wooley • , March 1, 1993 Page 4 . What the analysis also shows is that the demand for a five lane facility does not necessarily • come from development of the four properties that are constructing the road, but from the build-out of the entire Tigard Triangle. Once again, the assumptions behind the Kittelson analysis are certain to change as the new Triangle Land Use Plan is adopted. In addition, future improvements to Hwy 99 will occur but are as yet undefined. Finally, the possibility of at least an overcrossing of Hwy 217 with a road that connects to Dartmouth continues to be discussed although with no consensus on its configuration, intersection location with Dartmouth, timing, or source of funding. ,I In a future full of uncertainty, it is nonetheless clear that under present growth assumptions, • the three lane facility constructed by the four property owners will function very adequately for .• the development of those properties and for development within the Triangle for the next 20 • years. However, as future decisions are made on other transportation issues, the impacts to Dartmouth will become clear and decisions can then be made on the appropriate additional • improvements to Dartmouth. • • • As with SW 72nd Avenue, construction of a five lane facility on Dartmouth at this time is at least 20 years premature and may be inappropriate depending on future transportation • decisions in and adjacent to the Triangle. Proposed Rights-of-Way , Proposal: In anticipation that a five lane facility may be needed at some time in •, the future, SuperValu will dedicate an additional amount of rights-of-way to establish a total rights-of-way of 45 feet from the centerline of the road. Proposed Construction Proposal: Because of the relatively short distance between the Dartmouth entrance driveway and the 72nd intersection and to minimize possible future disruption to the main Dartmouth entrance driveway to the site from reconstruction of Dartmouth, in addition to its share of the costs of the construction of the three lane Dartmouth, SuperValu will also construct a second westbound through lane between the 72nd Avenue intersection and the Dartmouth entrance driveway. From the Dartmouth driveway west, SuperValu 1 will construct an acceleration lane which will transition back to the three lane facility. In addition, •SuperValu will construct a deceleration right turn lane for vehicles turning right into the site from bartmouth, DARTMOUTH SIDEWALK The City has established a design guideline for Dartmouth landscaping. That guideline calls for a 5 foot landscape strip between the roadway curb and the Sidewalk, The sidewalk is 6 • . feet wide. The intent of this guideline is to create a consistent landscaped corridor with a specific set of street trees and oVerall design image, • SuperValu proposes to conform to Use this guideline except that instead of placing the landscape strip between the curb and the sidevvalk, SuperValu proposes to construct the sidewalk against the curb with the street trees immediately behind the sidewalk. The reasons for this are as follovvs. I ' W . • • w Randy Wooley • March 1, 1993 Page From an ultimate five lane road section on Dartmouth„ SuperValu has set the edge of its parking lot 34 feet behind curb. However, in the area west of the Dartmouth entrance • • driveway, the parking lot is also 14 feet above the level of Dartmouth. Using the city design , guideline, to accommodate this vertical difference a combination of landscaped slopes and a seven foot retaining wall will be required. However, if the sidewalk can be placed against the curb, the sloped area can begin almost'; immediately and the retaining wall can be reduced to 4 feet. The row of street trees will still t be planted parallel to the sidewalk and road, but immediately behind the sidewalk. . j • While SuperValu will be using an attractive split faced concrete block retaining wall system, a four foot wall is more in scale with the pedestrian environment than a seven foot wall and will provide a more attractive and more appropriate scaled backdrop for landscaping on the 10, sloped surfaces. In addition, the city's objective of establishing a visible landscape d corridor is still achieved. We think these improvements rovements� are not only consistent with the needs of the project, but go ��1� well beyond those needs to encompass much longer term improvements that may be needed as the Triangle develops. In fact, the level of improvements that we must by necessity build g p, p �'.,• on SW 72nd Avenue, will very likely exceed the long term improvement requirements for that . road. For Dartmouth, in addition to funding the construction of the three lane Dartmouth, SuperValu proposes to construct some additional improvements that may not be required for over 20 y p is constructed will improvements the disruption of future construction to the years but which if c.onstru�cted now, will p critical entrance to the facility. We believe the uncertainty of future conditions in and adjacent to the Trianle, particularly conditions occur years, construction of other imp rovem e nts o n may not and certainly unnecesa y at this time. yet having reserved the ultimate rights-of-way now will ensure the City that if and when future improvements are needed, the land will be available for their con ctidnw '' We look forward to talking with you about this further. Sincerer � '07:114 4%K - — Gordon E. Da, for SuperValu Holdings, inc. r Y,•d e 1 , ,,_.,_._._..1._..,.,... ..,.,n6..,._.. ...«....,,. -..n I ... ... _. ,....- ..« ....... .......... ......,....4.....w........ ..,. .. ,..,.,...i... ,rA:......-.-.._-:r,u.-...« ....,-..,w._ ,...�.».i k,. ....,.,..�h «-.. .. r.+.....1. .., RECEIVED PLANNING DEC 0 6 199 DI IS ON OF December 3, 1991 � 1. STATE LANDS • Gordon E. Davis STATE LAND BOARD P.O. Box 8774 BARBARA ROSERTs Portland, OR 97207 Governor PHIL KEISLING . Secretary of State , o. Re:Wetland Determination" for Cub Food Site ANI'HOasurer PR City of Tigard T:L S R 1W S 3 6 D State Treasurer Dear Mr. Davis : I have reviewed the wetland evaluation report prepared for the above site by Dames & Moore. I am able to concur with their determination as to which areas are wetland and which are, non-wetland: However, there is ,not sufficient: f, information for me to confirm the actual boundary delineations .s As they note under section 2 .4 of their. report, a sample plot was established in each plant boundaries were "estimated" based on Y � � . "eSt� n community and wetland bc5u .� n visual observation of site characteristics . The wetland boundaries indicated on Figure 2 of their report are likely quite accurate and may be sufficient for �' your purposes . If site alteration is planned in close ! proximity to the mapped and surveyed wetlands, ti vin the boundaries wou d need to be verified. its will bel s o ught for altering wetlands, exactboundariesmay beless crucial and can be addressed during the permit review process . If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call . Sincerely, aanet. G. Marian Wetlands Program JCM/j cm , . jah: 509 �1 oc o Phil Scoles, Scoles Assooiates Dames & Moore, Seattle Cit y g of Tigard Planning Department t g P 1 r Jim Goudzwaard Corps of X11 �. , eG t �Tl. rS 775 Summer Street NE Salem,(OR 97310-1837 1 (503)378-3805 PAX(503)378-4844 d I , • I..h.r .s,.... ,...l...L..V ....., ♦ a•a-....0 .Jr.......'4t..,+....+4.., ....iM. .Vr rn ...r r r, t v r 1 msµ„ •, I 60. . t V I • r CITY OF TIGARD (lia' PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES r DATE: _,•_ f o L. . APPLICANT: AGENT: 0 r~ L 4 —V VA Ph i knact': Limb;5T 6=.R oc;2;ies Phone PROPERTY LOCATION �-�� i 5, / t 4 ADDRESS: s .° TAX MAP & TAX LOT: ,y eAwA.414/`'t P "",'',..14.0,,r1 • � ,r()NEESSRY APPLICATION(S): E D eV / P/t4 , V i t) / f1�7 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: __42612#2_02_,2 i1�1" (r 'L 10.11/6 2 Qhc ios , � � f a n I , COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: (ZEP� '�"...X /14 e,T1 ,G t ZONING DESIGNATION: d. . (p PLiA) D L)t-V G� (r �' r e_VE 4 1 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION 4__ CHAIRPERSON: (LeA L, Jc /- A)SO, PHONE: .—,� i/-.Sof 6.3 0 , ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS , Minimum lot size: Ane sq. ft. Minimum lot width: .560 ft. s� Q y Setback front- ft. side- ft., ear-- ft. f,.. r R garage-. ft. corner.°-, p ft. from both streets. . Maximum site coverage: SOT Minimum landscaped or natu al vegetation area: 5 Maximum building height: Al ft. ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS UIREMENTS M1�;1V S Q Minimum lot frontage:e: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land • partition process. Lots created a's part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15 foot wide access ,- easement. • " Maximum lot depth to width ratio of 2.5 to 1. SPECIAL' SETBACKS 1 Streets:. JL1 - ft. from centerline of, oh lti. C } k.ata hed- rea-s- f-_-:---f.; aim ,.:__ . r .Lov, l-, ft., along the site's boundary - - nag lot: structures:side yard setback � � . ,,.' k from Accessory tr� ft. side 'up to s ft. in aize- tbac � q -5 ft;.. setback side and rear lot lines Accessory r� ctures st up to lOQa sq. ft. (where allowed) See ' applicable zoning district setbacks [ Zero lot line `lots p minimum 10 foot separation between buildings M'ttiti�-family residential building separation: See Code Section 10.96.030 Pa. g 1 • ak 4. • • • r SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS Flag Lots: Maximum height of '1--1/2 stories or 25 ft., whichever is less in most zones; 2-1/2 stories or 35 ft. in R-7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones if standards of Code Section 18.98.030(B) are met. , Building Height Exceptions (Code Section 18.98.020): Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided: 1. A minimum FAR (building floor area to site area ratio) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; 2. All actual building setbacks will be at least 1/2 `�,� the building's height; and 3. The structure will not abut a residential zone . district. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION „ Community Development Code Chapter 18.92 specifies that the net ' residential units allowed on a particular site may be c lculated by dividing the net ar- • o _ developable area by the min' um number of - square feet requir=a per dwel g unit in the applicabl oning district. Net development - ea is calc ated by subtractin he following land area(e) from t - gross site are. : 1. Al, sensitive lands -.real � - land within the 100 year floo-•lain slopes exceeding 25% -� drainageways 2. Land dedicated 'for, par , .0 ses �. 3. Public right-of-way -d cation 4. •11' land provide. for private streets 0.nc1udes accessways , 'ugh pan ,i -• areas) , . The City of Tigard allows a resident al density transfer of up to 25% of the units that could otherwise hay. been developed on sensitive lands I area i listed in (1.) bove to the evelopable portion of the site in accordance with Code Section 18.92.0 0 � . It is the responsibility of the appl$:cant for a residential development m' application to provide a detailed calculation for permitted residential f, density and density transfer. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SOLAR ACCESS RE UI'I MENTS Effective May ly '1991 all subdivision- and minor partitions are subject to solar access requirements which stet= that 80% of all lots developed-must be solar-oriented. The characteri.st cs of a solar-oriented lot are high wintertime of ;� levels sari striking thy- south walls and roofs of the housed house orientation maximizing south wLnciOW areas and a south-sloping roof r area: To achieve this,, one may uti ize the following: 1 Basic Design'ntah on within 30 0 feet least 9 of north-south and an orie degrees of-south ry 2. � w. u1� n lirie Solar building a) be oriented within 30 degrees o oath b have a mini i es ' r a,, a • option requires at least 32% of the glass and 500 square feet of the roof area to face south and be protected from shade, ' Total or partial exemption of a site from the solar acces- requirement can be for the following reasons: l.. East, west or north slopes steeper than 20'x» 2. Off-site shade sources (structures, vegetat'.n, topography). 3. On-site shade ices •egetation). / Adjustments alio ing reduction o the 80% sola• lot design requirement can . , be , or the fol owing reasons: 1. Reduc density or an increa.ed cyst of at least five percent due to: - ea t, west or north slope g ester than 10%, t - si i.ficant natural featur- • "- e 4 bating road or lottin •a'tea.: , - p lic easement or ri• --of way. 2. Redu Lion in importan develop ent amenities. 3. Pre= hosting shade egetatio ). Maps and to t— . ' ' Lent to show t - development complies with the solar design standard, 'except for lots f.. which an exemption or adjustment is required, including all of the fol owing items: . 1. The north-south lot dimension and front lot line orientation of each proposed lot. 2. ]protected solar building lines and relevant . building site restrictions, if applicable. 3. For the purpose of identifying trees exempt from Section F, a map , showing existing trees at least 30 feet tall and over 6 inches diameter at a point 4 fe-t above grade, including their height . diameter and species, and tating that they are to be retained and are exempt. , 4. Copies of all private rest lotions relating to solar access. FT k If an exemption or adjustment i- requested, maps and text sufficient to rx$ . show that given lots or areas ,n'the development comply with the standards , for such an exemption or ad jus' ent shall be submitted. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY' TRANiSITIO2d Regardless of the allowed h' / -sing density in a zoning district, any • property within 100 feet of designated established area shall not be developed at a er than 125 percent o f the' ma. ctium Comprehensive Plan desi yatri (not zoning) of the adjacent parcel. . PARKING AND ACCESS . Required automobile parking for this type, of use: C CLA "`1'o► re Per a p'_1d5 / /tqyet } Secondary use required parking: eve tie ,it I p c�� b _ • rx i ;pQcl50v cool u 25% of required spaces ces may be designated com p act c � S �c c spivi e standard parking space dimensions: 9 ft. X 1 8 ft., compact parking space dimensions 8.5 ft. X 1S ft. Handicapped parking: All parking areas providing in excess of five 9, required automobile parking spaces shall provide appropriately h 1 ocate d and designated handicapped parking spaces. The minimum number)of ha ndicapped Page 3 4. • parking spaces to be provided and parking space size are .mandated by the Y" Oregon Revised Statutes; (see handout). A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate • sign shall be provided ` Bicycle racks are 'required for civic uses, non--residential uses, • commercial uses, and industrial uses providing 15 or more automobile parking spaces. Bicycle parking must be provided at a rat w,o of, one 1 bicycle rack space per 15 auto parking spaces. Bicyci:.� racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic. The Planning Division can provide specifications for approved bicycle rack types. All parking areas and driveways must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: Cabe. cnh (,� Ion 0'a0.Bt Minimum 'number of accesses: See, _ e ec. o is.Ice, )+ Minimum access width: 'AA _..t.LW.. ..�..... ,�,, Maximum access width: _ , Pedestrian access must be provided between building entrances and parking 1' areas, outdoor common areas, and public sidewalks and streets. For detailed information on design .requirements for parking areas and accesses, see Community Development Code Chapters '188..106' and '18.108. VISION AREA CLEAR CLEAR N I•t The and eight�.he. City requires that clear. vision be maintained between three a 1 g feet above grade at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road . intersections in specified clear vision areas. The size of the.required {' ee ,•s functional the I abutting str t clear vision� area depends �upon g� � classification. LANDSCAPING Street trees are required for all developments fronting on a public or - private street or a driveway more than 100 feet in length. Street trees 'I must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private • property feet of ro ert �� within sir the ;' . inches at four l feet above grade" es must . p p tight-of-way boundary. Street tre • •• ,have` a minimum caliper of'"two 40 apart depending on mature tree trees should be spiced 20 to 4 P p g Further information on regulations affecting street trees and a list of ` recommended street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. . v areas tree per to provide a canopy effect. Landscaped arcau parking spaces must e be planted in and parking aeve'ra Y . n n ed g rofnp g from view" p• rights-of-way must be screening parking areas s from ubla.c provided. I I I I Page a 4 ry , • i \. .' pr. , BUFFERING AND SCREENING r In order to increase privacy and to reduce or eliminate adverse noise or P-------, visual impacts between adjacent developments, .especially between different H. land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site Q' perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of I width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and • evergreen trees and shrubs. g iI Site obscuring screens or fences are also s, P,. . required in some cases, and often are advisable even if not required. i Required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, t' utilities, anal.sidewalks. ;, Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be d found in Code Chapter 18.100 and the Planning Division bulletin on f'• landscaping and buffering. 1 Required buffer widths applic.i - o your proposal area: . ' • • ^* ftt. along north bound. ft. along east boundary • . ' ;, ••,Et. along south bo - . ft. 'along west boundary In addition, sight obscuring screer}ing is required along �nadi� 6.fea� . tcs h awtc� z.li g -Cat___Ltcc.a, a\C wchallica1 ei ,i,Hne h ,tct.Ai-Hong ' 1(4,J l ev&l *soiree►n L vt a f o+ re;u i u'e c( Code IS . ( 'O. i lo,A , I' ' " , f' SIGNS • Permits must be ,obtained before erecting any sign the City of Tigard. �' 9n A "Guidelines' for Sign Permits" handout is• available upon request. 1. •1 Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development application. 1A16 L AL-3 j t 3• s�rrsl�zvE :C��,NDS �1/-6 �`� y� 5�...�t....,,��.,�5 ,��'� T 1\i',t ,EILL�l"_.. C F" gRABLy fR io j. To Cri-y REv iE1.J_ 55 1 . cam` —43 c tc F40 ,FLA oi D.s e .t p_ PE (,1,5A RULE5 A,,Iry TICwRC> C©D z /4 0 0 / a 1 ADDITIONAL PLANNING CONCERNS OR COMMENTS - • .� �� - - ' �� i III .............,,..............*................._..-..... r r. pi ^. Page 5 r . • fir+ I • 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 N making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. Another public hearing is held by the City Council. +ll' : All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member a t the Community Development Department counter at City Hall.. Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications submitted after 4:30 P.M. on Thursday will be batched for processing with the following week's applications for processing. No applications will be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4;x30 on other days. Maps submitted -with an application shall be folded in advance to 8.5 by 11 • inches. One 8.5 inch by 11 inch map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. The Planning Division and Engineering Division will do a preliminary • e° review of the application and will determine whether an application is t: complete within 10 days of submittal. Staff will notify an applicant if additional information or copies of the submitted materials are needed. The administrative, decision/public hearing typically will occur approximately to days after an application is accepted as complete by the Planning Division.': Applications involving difficult issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to ,, • review. Written decisions are issued within-10 days of the hearing. A 10 s all decisions. An appeal on this matter would ' day appeal period follows • be heard by the .I 1?uA902... A basic flow dia g rats illustrating the review process is available from the. Planning Division. ,. . . _ r. The 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 development of a particular site and to allow the staff and prospective applicant to discuss the , opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of .. good site the to provide � y pan. ite planning that should apply to the development of your site ilure of staff p ovide any information required b the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the ippli cable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a pruspee ei_ve applicant either obtain and read the Cce llrunity Development Cod r a y questi f C City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting application. Anot he tire-application conference is r it ed p if a n. application is to submitted more th n six months after this pre-application conferenc e, Unless the by Planning r / / t nd conference is .. unnecessary a,nnn tart s recd ` de�.�ed iannecessa• b the Pl Division. i. PREPARED BY: 4 6� 0if )2 J PLANNIN DIVISION PHONE: 639-4171 #I, Page e 6 g • I , 1 IT PUBLIC FACILITIES g The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: (i) identify . applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions; (Li) to provide City staff an opportunity to comment on specific concerns; and I, (iii) to review the application review process with the applicant EI including identifying who will be the final decision maker , for the ;1 r' application., The extent of public improvements and dedications to be { • required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and approved by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision maker by•City staff until all 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 condjction of development approval for your project. Right--of-waydedication:' The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public to increase abutting public rights- of-way to the I ultimate functional street cl assification rights-of-way width specified b y the Community Development code. Approval of a development application for. this site will require � � ��' � dedication of right-of-way for b�. hem !' � �I 9,0-,,� ow .00'i� sae 1 "jUJ 7' h ot f� _, to feet from centerline.4rD4'" 5tk t* ` Uo•4 i skti-'5 ;,' 2.� c'�.�1,TW��t1�` 'V1 to 42--J feet from centerline. 3 A16o Ic•cal 64-rce1 epkisi ecf►hr] Dcw-4 hicdu. 5r aid 5+5 lar$ wz5-P of Recl,Reec, Cre K i> Street improvements: 0,4\sect-cor by Ctwk'.Qtk Tiro.45pOrf .(-rah Ititp. 'Dedica ietit , ►Ir proUtN�tFrt$ 1.yr� Pf street improvements will be necessary along / A rf eguave , ' 2.- _ street improvements will be necessary along a f : F(.11( 91 r e€{- 1 i fevego6 I1, re1tJtr&f o'i 't 1& f 5+rEe.f' '-(d,:, De,' � 14 Tv, pr 3.. Needed street (improvements will include feet of pavement • from ce nterline, curb and gutters, storm sewers, a five-foot wide sidewalk, necessary street signs, streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. r j In some cases where street im• -ments or other necessary public { improvements are not currently e• acti -le the street °0•rovements may be • deferred. In these cases, as a cond. ion o. -- ,e opment approval, the property owner(s) must execute a .. -r .nstrance, agreement'which waives . - the property owner's right to remonstr- e against the formation of a local improvement district formed to improv . 1. 2. Pedestrianways/bikewa ys ._.._. ' Sanitary Sewers: The closest sewer to this pro.perty is a* • anch �ineloC located a �b � E_ • The proposed development must connected to a sanitary sewer: It is the developer's responsibility to extend the Isewer along the proposed, dOvelopment site's Storm sewer improvements: S t V( � d Ill e-i- x - '{a F t Rock:._ Meet- 01 • y etti-t1:1emiti Li h w1�/I' a) o l',�J4A V<,'. teems<-7).d' >f a<+�' „starel,�'' ✓40,1d00:atu / 9 4 ,it 5 /'&71- Page 7 • { 1 j N 1 ( P.4 FF(C Snit D y r l I t 1 � to/ an ,reV ealJ b `J'�ir/Ze f . , i a , . r . Water Supply: The Water District (Phone: �' ��) provides public water service in the area of this site. The District • should be contacted, for ,information regarding water supply for your proposed development. 1 - ' Fire Protection: rualatinValley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene , Birchill, 645-8533) 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 i . questions related to fire protection. Other Agency Permits: 1.,✓RP6 OF G1►� �;� an Pi PRtI 1� i " .6),. NOw^Qo1NT SOURC P m IT Wiz. PARK o�•.K, LOT AIR NAu , ,. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES TV � In August, 1990, the Washington County Board of Cosnmi s er.s adopted the county-wide 'Traffic Impeict Fee (TIP) Ordinance and referred the,Measure to, the Washington County voters. , In September, 1990, the Washington County , electorate overwhelmingly approved expanding the TIF program throughout all jurisdictions within-the county. This action placed into effect an increased street development fee on all •new -development in Washington County.' The City of Tigard. has adopted the county's program. The. City Traffic Impact Fee program will collect fees from new development . based on, the development's projected impact on the transportation system: , • Developing properties will be required to pay based on the number of trips they are projected to generate. The. TIP J . calculated based on. type of use, size of project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until '` issuance of occupancy permit. Deferral of payment until occupancy, is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. • ' r , STORMWATER QUALITY FEES The Unified Sewera g e Agency has established and the City has agreed to enforce, Resolution No 90-43, Surface. Water Management Regulations, f. , requiring the construction of on-'site water quality facilities or fees in lieu of their construction. The resolution requires that a fee and/or construction of a water quality facility be built. The fee is based on the amount of impervious surface; for every 2640 square feet or portion , thereof, the fee shall be $375.00. The City of Tigard determines if a fee • or facility shall be built. STREET OPENING PERMIT No work within a,, public right-of-way shall commence until the applicant has obtained a street openi w • •'L9 1•w rJ'• .-.. ...._,.n•..n•.4A r+d..✓.:,,. .A.....H.wk.w'..r1=.t.e.+.Iwvw....YU....r1..w,.r.n1...«- 1 . ' -,<.........r.. .•-+r __.e_.. .,..„�...d:.... _r.l . ., .... - .._ . .'r..neA✓+.rJ..M«....5&..I.vL.✓.t.:-•-d— u+.-.•.i.:LrM: 4)', ( ,!''- Staff Jc �.. ,. Date /v •,�q-�`l/ CITY OF TIGARD 1 ; COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST . The items on the checklist below are required for the successful completion of your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be brought and submitted with all' other materials at the time you submit your `y application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call Planning at 639-4171. , ITEMS TO BE j BASIC MATERIALS INCLUDED: A) Application form (1 copy) [ 8) Owner's signature/written authorization [ C) Title transfer instrument � �� � � � i� � [j D) Assessor's map [1 E) Plot or site plan r) Applicant's s statement [a/(G) 1=-1-.'st.....o.f...4.apapa.c.t.y.--own.er-s-4.--Pgriti-r-sast- „ _ e _ [ ': / (H) Filing fee ($.see: ke. .$ ite4e4G62.- ['' ', , . • 'T- C°.cosrr-actic Csf 2‘.3f7t- SPECIFIC MATERIALS . A) Site Information showing. (No. of copies G )' [ 1 1) Vicinity Map � � � 2) Site size & dimensions [ ' 3) Contour lines (2 ft at '0--10% or 5 ft for grades '> 10%) [ 4) Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds [ 5) Locations of natural hazard areas 'including. a) Floodplain lain area s b) Slopes Slo es in excess of 25% c) Unstable ground [ d) Areas with high seasonal water table b e e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential [ on of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive f) Areas having severel.� weak foundati [ ] 6) Location 't Map inventory including a) Wildlife habitats b) Wetlands [ , 7) Other site features. ,'. a) Rock outcroppings [ ] b) Trees with 6” ÷ caliper measured 4 feet : . from ground level [ ' 8) Location of existing structures and their uses [ -r' �. )O, Location and type on and noise I� � � � sources 10) Location of existing utilities and easements f.:;.)1,// 11) Location of. existing dedicated r'ight-of-ways [ : B) site Deue1opment plahi showing (No of copies 5): t �a,,.�� 1) The proposed site and surrounding properties ( `� . 2) Contour line intervals [23-'-*" 3) The location, dimensions and names of all: a) (fisting platted streets & other public ways an easements on the site and on adjoining properties APPLICATION CATZph CNECkLIST Page e o- x • r'' 1P . Mme._.._„„ '�....;...,..., .._.. •< M r b) Proposed streets or other public ways•& easements C� on the site. c) .'' Alternative routes of dead end or proposed . streets that require future extension [ 4) The location and dimension of: a) Entrances and exits on the site , CL-3' b) Parking and circulation areas [, c) Loading and ser,ices areas • Ley d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation e) Outdoor com [' ' . f) Above [ ) ground utilities 5) The location).dimensions & setback distances of all: a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site b) Proposed 'structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the 'site [ 6) Storm drainage facilities and analysis of r d downstream conditions [ 7) Sanitary :'sewer facilities [ � 8) 'The location of, areas to be landscaped [i-3 9) The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention .techniques [ 10) The location of mailboxes [ 11) The location of all structures and their orientation 12) Existing or ,proposed° sewer reimbursement agreements• [ C) Grading Plan (No. of copies C � The site development 'plan shah, .include .a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information. • 1) The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating general c o' ntou r lines,. slope ratios • and soil .stabilization proposals, and time of 'yeair /'� ,. �it is proposed to be done [(” • 2 ) A� s fate statement 1ro m a registered i s tared en g ineer supported b y • data factual �ub I�) 3ubsurface exploration�and g eotec hn�cal engineering report,re g p �. ] b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm 1' drainage service proposals �� [ ] c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated [ D) Architectural l Drawings (No. of copies s � ): [ 3 The site development Th e plan proposal shall include: Floor la 1) , ��� plans indicating the square footage of all es proposed �. d [�. � Yfor use on—site; ah structur �; .• 2) Typical elevation drawings of each structure E) Landscape Plan (No, of cop i.e s , The landscape plan shall' be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis 1.i n or a larger scale if necessary and shall Indicate'; 1) Descript,iori of the irrigation system where ,applicable [ ' 2) Location and height of fences, buffers and screenings [ APPLICATION 'CHECKLIST' Page 2 A q G .. 4"r ' , .,.. �, gr{ . '' 3) Location of terraces, decks, shelte'i-s, play areas and common open spaces [ ti-'' 4) Location, type, size and species of existing and 1i '. , , proposed plant materials. [. ` The landscape plan shall include a ,narrative which addresses: ' 1) Soil conditions. C 3 2) Erosion control measures that will be used [ 3 1 F) Sian Drawin9s ' � . Sign drawings shall be submitted in accords cQ with Chapter A8.114 of the Code as part of Site Development Review or 1 . ' prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct the sign. C%j / . • t . G) Traffic generation estimate ���.I • H) Preliminary p.-> #�i -e40• lot line a j_ustmeht map showing (No. of Copies ___12,T__): __12 _): 1) The owner of the .subject parcels EI,,e t,.' / ' ' 2) The owrner s authorized agent r 'e ` , 3) The map scale, (20,50,100 or 200 feet=1), inch north i; • arrow and date C e . " 4) Description of parcel location and boundaries [1,4'" 5) Location, width and names of streets, easements and other public ways within �trnd adjacent to the parcel [y►J'" , 6) Location of all permanent buildings on acid within 25 feet of'all property linos. Es..? 7) Location and width of all' water courses [vY 8) Lol ation' of any trees with 61° or greater caliper at 4 feet above ground level [se 9) All slopes greater than 25% . C43 10) Location of existing• utilities' and utility easements [ I` 11) For major land partition which creates a public street [ a), The proposed right—of—way location and width � , b) A scaled cross--section of the proposed street F plus any reserve strip [ 3 1, 121 Any applicable deed restrictions � �,� �� [ 3 a 13) Evidence that land partition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable [ ] i; I) Subdivision (Preliminary Plat Map and 'data s.howin (No. of Copies ): , 1) Scale equaling 30;50,1O0 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet [ 3 ' 2) The proposed name of the subdivision [ 3 1. 3) Vicinity map showing property's relationship to e . � � � slam and streets t � 4 � n arterial and collector 4) es, addresses a` d telephone numbers of the owner developer, engineer, surveyer, designer, as applicable[ 1 j 6) Date of application C 3 6) 3oundary lines of tract to be subdivided [ 3 a 7) lames of adjacent subdivision or names of recorded . owners of adjoining p arcels of unsubdivided land C7 1. . �. contour related to' a� C�t City—established ed be. n G h- 1' mark at 2—foot intervals for 0--1:0% gradot greater i, than 10 C 3 m , APPLICATION CHECKLIST''— Page 1 '''',•. \• G • _ • 1. .. ' ., .. r . • ■ r 1 e5 CD5 , . ± .� , ( f�r NOTIFICATION LIST FOR ALL APPLICATIONS 1. 1 :WO NO �--1(2y :..wopies CPO vw.: (;),,.3 _1-3 2. CITY DEPARTMENTS d�IA:T P r�- t✓r' r . P rks &"Recreation Board !^ Building Officialfx7x�t-1¢"'"' ~ .SIG elde • City Recorder Field Operations ngineering/Chris D. �ermits Facilitator/Viola G. /�. petite,ta , 3 SPECIAL DIS CTS a Fire District School Dist No. 48 (Pick-up box) (Beaverton) Jo y Pahl • PO Box 200 { Beaverton, OR 97075'. Tigar Water District School Dist. 23J -- 87.77 SW Burnham St. — (Tigard) T ard, OR 97223 137 SW Pacific Hwy. igard, OR , 97223 Tualatin Valley Water District Unified Sewerage ;'Agency/SWM Program —'"- 6501 SW Taylors Ferry.Rd. 155 N. First St. Tigard, OR 97223 Hillsboro, OR 97124 4. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS Wash. Co. Land Use & Transp. Boundary Commission 150 N. First Ave. 320 SW Stark Room 530 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Portland, OR 9/204 -. _ Brent Curtis ` � Kevin Mart METRO Mike Borrevain .� 2000 SW 1st ave. Scott King Portland, OR 97201-5398 - ti Fred Eberle :+k ' DLCD (CPA's/ZOA's) City of Beaverton ---- 1175 1175 Court St. NE Jim Hendryx - Principal Planner Salem, OR 97310-0590 PO Box 4755 Beaverton, OR 97076 Other ", City of King City City of Durham - City Manager City Manager. 15300 SW 116th PO Box 23483-3483 King City, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 City of Lake Oswego' City of Portland - City Manager Planning Director 380/SW A 112,0 SW 5th , eke Uswego; OR 97034 P i:tland, OR 97204 , 'State Highway Division ODOT Bob Doran Lidwien Ralnnann 'O Box 25412 9002 SR McLoughlin Blvd. Portland, OR 97225-0412 Milwaulsie, OR 97222 City of Tualatin PO Box 369 Tualatin, OR 97062 511 SPECX AGENCIES //r Ge�leral Telephone __•,°'_Portland General Elec. RUO Wells Brian Moore 2460 SW Main St. 14655 SW Old Schol.ls Fry. Tigard; OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97007 0 NW Natural Gas Metro Area Communications 4 .,. Soott Pallier .,_r. Jason Hewitt 220 NW Bedond Ave. TWin Oaks Technology Center°rµ'r Portland, OR 97209 1815 NW 169th P1aga,8=='8020 Beaverton; -"91006-4880 Mike dablevi ion of Oregon UB dt 3500 SW'I Bond St. Bete,Meltion 1 Portland, OR 97201 ''121 Oink St. "� 1' land; OR 91204 of a:(Frank Stone 1rr I .-g �°` ee. Galiuubia Cable ) 0 SW Bri adooii Ct. / � Sri.-A9e1. Transit D Beaverton; OR 97005 RimKnox '` 4b12 SN 17th AM'e. 6. STATE AGENCIES Portland, OR 97202 eronantios Div. (ODOT) If D GRMI, �..�' Division'of State Lands .)i It CL4''`p',e- .) _ �" '' / 1. �"�.. Commerce Dept.-M'a. Part. gTSRR G'. `" ' 4.. Dept. of E' ;zirort. Quality' _.-"..... Corpo. of Engineerd PcSt offidrd 1 8. OTHER Southern ia ci ic'i rrah s po r d do n Com 1h y Duane M. Fbrnel+; 'PIS *. Project Engineer 1 r 800 NW 6t Averiu��'"R. 324 Union Station � ; � I, II FOrtland; OR 97200 I \ A n o , . C IRCUGATB, �;' . "r' BR J k '„.. __. ...."'Rtri ;:� i CA ..,,, �, 1- ' RC 4� • xJO x •Stf f Review s>/ OII ....mod.' •Yu a i.,; •�;f ,��.4 it. b\/ N ie ,C Lc/ t' CITY OF TIGARD . . , w , ..�,.. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I PRE—APPLICATION CHECKLIST 1 D r ,,,, . . 1. APPLICANT A L4 c. k tj,„ ,P1-14,0 i tq1 to �i. t, ,,; `- Nil�ht , (b .— 9 ,,,,) `"`•4.51 ___� Fait,. / k,./,Ns'•Vjel Vic tr CV"ocery .5 0 d -1.01 u.'i' 2. PROPERTY LOCATION ` • Addt^esS 1)Arirrivlourm, .L._517-;: .� -- . »uA"� r' `W a—+" xp�r�1y 'tc,�"`y�``., " �,1'fr •R�' a"' +•��U+�S7ai ' •'�'E.�we�ia. M , ' T Map/Tax Lot . .�w a 4.�JC; ;1 :� �._ ._. ' ' - ' 3. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION/NECESSARY APPLICATION(S)' S/r ' 1:) ' '". e o '1 `y14«a) i 1 li ,J I C:ax t f,Yw , 1 e: + ..�� f. ��W.,�,,t :'m P;q Wwakc4 FtW'M5'iW%i's CYk_ ..I.r i L i/ . � "K...• ,.r. 'w•. �'�> srawY.». >.kAP �U:T+.,K1:'Xi{i:7 U,w�°7RfRKg Y {y�15�`,�� (�p.t 4. uSE ,,,51d. )r°t x L, \)D T L 1J/.� M t�f i c �„r 4 ..x, ° �, � `f ,1�� , + Z. s j>. Existing ot t Y `___ e,r in e 611 .11 / ' ' i. S+ Adjacent Property f' P »8 ” . 1 4 south lt'��1'tC.� =, ' A ipr�, r� :er„: die/eil '. �"tie;:`' Viµ 7, ! e s't . . - I1 We3t __..._. 1 ESx VE 'PLAN DESIGNATION 6 1: i L C' 1relErpe r 1 r ,p ”are � ., 6. ZONING DESIGNATION, -"e� (J. ' • i, i','f r �l,t.., ,.C"y�E� „ 'w, i, .4- ' ^C. �,I �P ''1,�.Dt7:'.+"' .1...4PA's�,UT I i• 7: NEI G BORHOO D PLA N�IU G 4R GAN�Z�TZ�N �� C� AxRPERSO N�. .._..l... a m �, : ' PHONE 4;14'11. 4 cY • 8 CODE REQUIREMENTS x - • Minitnum lot 'size/Width P ri ,,� ,.." ,_,_, So.tback front corner s ide.. w rear I . Y Speckya1 setbacks z streets r estak lashed 3 teas lr er' Intensity zo1e$ , Wetlan�s P. 1e44l, 4 n yy f I lag of Mccetsory strdJcthres � eo 1 t line „ m 0rp i F , -raf(X.fI uttt i.t coVerag,d # ,,,;, , ,' , ,. ,li Maxitnum building height ` I k n' 4 rl • r • ■ • r • ( 4), ; •Special height �:i,mit;s flag lot other . ""..",,, � _� , i.. 45, . ' , ` ,. Density calculation � 1 "a R i Density transition Mew h,w' Y �i i, ,,,•.„,. A*,, T . .ham , , • I �” ) � �» Landscaping: minimum % of lot area s " � . ' tip-�v Street Trees e i°V 'd ; t It a�'t', "zi «,') e' � O It i �:',el-xs'��t ,, , 'L.0 tL: rZ ` ' , Buffer Rreas/p r' d.ovrehrtti izguit ,�?��;6,�e 644x r� y is, " `1• t Parking g Areas./ ,,,. �� ip `rici�te ` » �, a pl �d 1'� ii X414 "t � '7,:'' r, Visual �c learance ,,e-4,2 t ,. "41^ ° d",'>� � 411 r° t e, ,= r ty` "t�; t"4,1 '1A , ' �` and load. � � t4„ „y `M' Parking t�G� o� X t`►g t .�.�,�a�"°..�'.e� ".1'' t .1�»��:�+� ''�" '�`fi''�" ;i,f�� ����;�0 :+r:. ' per_�+. U"+ f'�„k�4M��r �Y`" �, � � ;, 4 Ott ,;, 'VC Cry„ 6� elir t1 �rLle -.,. � tic c4 e. 36 c i6.',. rA ,,Itr "lc do ,. acety rA � r . j,0f,:{ i Q ,.--77--, r ` 6 4x In., (�y,M i Access and Circulation ;�` ' "�=+�.;,_.� ) '�'"�"i °e �'M�t'�i�l�'1"�,. .��e '" �5ti�; ��s1� �.rled�,� , , A4 foci'' (Aft 4 ':. �;4.t Cam, jlAry_ in.fe t Wk Div,,cu .f'i"0II signs , Al.. as ketitft I f'4't V t 44..k'iv 1,14'L. , 0 4":4- .. 'P 7(1,e,,,,?. .9. OTNE , CONSIDERATIONS (See application checklist for specific items) r and d 6, .�'�"'4, pAyi„' .„04At Sensitive lands: .floodplain -- dra.inagec�►ay >25% slope. ., 1 ,a Ve' '' t ,c::° Wetlands 4 't ” Will r( z ,,w,y ' / 4 L'il i+r e .`v /PL pc ° �r1',4,-. , .r.•i 40 t"1" Open' space " I 6'yy' $ :y t �� 11 K L",-I �f t �O 1,414'ta t t" le '' i 1� to �'� '�64 .wi Historic over lay "»�.. ►% .e+ . 1,:,.' , 0.°, i c i " - ,,,,,Street im rov'ement�s/cannecttxans#,bra ora�i-s , r -./!, a ,wr6ve's") '�,7 �',i 7?i/ i' , ' � t,,,, ¢ t t i I/pip uw Y / 14 ,,1� d t � �u.»g i I V"."0" 64 ii ' : ?::),� 4y i q pp,�'ti j'""'.L ,4 k 4it fe i 11"714 t''&e �Pr":'it i YA^�$d't?1 �d�r'F�G" t trvi�i I a A Fes" ark,,....,.,,- yry� Y V , b n'� G.+ N'ryV w �' � �,; �"Rx"Right-�o��ia� dedi.catxon��7�� �� �t�'� �,� ���,���P�, ��'" to P `,�rv° Sanitary Sevier improtrement ",i '' C " , , X o;f .5e t 41''''_ J ,5; + J ' . 1. Nil, 0t ,� Storm Sewer improvements + ,antic .c:, ` .1. . .; ' ' 'r'?, �' i4 404.1 i, yI -tv,eix,�•, it" "G, raiwag' J4 ,n �`7k w� "' tiSdit" _._..: yJa N M ' ' °'r zN`r-t'.;� )1`a�provemont Agreement — Permit; Bonds: Pees :l " � � ;(1.1'Flos, _ �� ___ . �,i.i s�}'�t� ' Other" agency•permits ."f ► :w °u "wl" r?,:,;' _ _ • ! tom, ' 4 i � x ,,,,*"7-- . ����yypp��ryry pyaryy,, �Y �! g �( p {y < � � r°,� F„r ',l\"� `1 �F 01F+n1.tr P i ..._ 'f'�'4 L 7 � .....��.n' L '°.F,. ....', d'h;'i f ry k 'ii/ 0'.7'',,W A..f�'t ( ,r.�, Y Adnuntstrative staff reV/etr� Public -ka ring Hear1ngs Offxier • ,'" Publ ic ! earirg/P1anoi ommis ion e t r , "_, ”" .._ - . � k rk" \ F, " C , �t 1 A Y'a �� .N�r The Adrn%r�istratau e ' .decisp.on il' Public Hearing shall occur 1 � approximately days after a complete application is filed. A .A '4-a J appeal: period all decis of s v, x,a `" i .' ' W '04 (0573P/0022P) �, '� . 1 ,4,,,,,. ► dirt a' el/ eq4y ,� 4 1 '� P p�pn,� L 'i N `�.1 I U . 741 . '�,,,,,x',1, ,i4. r P Y,, lwi���,Y,„0F ;F te,t1..4 � fie,is, Zip',`; ' 'e `-4/ //, I H� �� +.:_,a�:_ •.!a'-h ...�..,...,,.,. ,._.�...� .»�,..._.......� .,i,... � ., _ � ,, .,„�,_,.u_..n.,: ..,yu w,�a_...__,. a,.,.—..•_..._,.._................_r,.....a».,,.u�»....,.,..i..:_,...*..W.�..i....,:.,,.�ti.:...�......::,.-.M'.i�,,.,� ...,.�..1..,,:.:.+4..,xt..�,.•-„_..n.,a,.i�..u.'�i,,.,,�.,.:.1�..:� � , • r II 441.).(1°I'lt,el'1,,0,44t,,ot... ia.t4tij '9 r rr LDU l /eo T, , , . $4t&tuf...44 . ri 1 ka I ' I 1 I I , 4 , I I I� , '{, f I r • •_ 1 Ir'- . 1 1 3 Z i c iLi . : . Ah0 1ii t . . . I Sr J , Iii AC L.0, .....4 AN z_ -___ as. _ ___. PHIL LEWIS' aO ;.�S► iii1IPf III �fti G. #.ill • .111 ININ_ mil ..-Ej -,,.-!:s - - -- - - . . I mown - ile - _ - ili 7 _ _•' _ -- - \\_______- - -- SCHOOL :--- cri -- \ 1 ■ - -- - '- -WIN . iii _-allialani _ _ 1_ _ NN j I ..-----7.-----1c---------------7 -1-----5. - _ I - : at Num 'A PTON lIST. r all MIMI F - - - -al • / t /.. __ I I __. :, ___ _i _\.% ,,„- _ j_. _ __ _., t \\ \ I _ L_-- ..i.--- _-__,_ __ 1 1 \\ LII!!. -_1:- - - -- - - - , . ;_, ,__ _ ._- ___ i__, - --/--- ---'----------- = -.- ---'-'-- -.- ---------- -- 1_- _---- --- -- -- - ' -' -I - 1--- --‘- --f I t ii _YARAIS - ! jT-- 1 - \ - .--. _ P,URKW,OY 1- - TH:.-- ' \ - - - 1 :lit �lAFtt3 ' �R�F_, _ r- . MEI - _ :- iiL:,:\_ , __ _ __ ____ _ __ _ ,i,_ _- . _ _ \ _- M. - ' - _ FIR .st.\1›-F)"\--'\\N II f `.� Q \/(77'. S.W._, 1 if\ ii I\- \ - -L-7--- - - -- / - I F\\1: r--"---.,-. ' --: - - 1--':- --- i-_ - __-,:,-::N_. \\--\ At is I l-. I_ DR. I ._ ' / /1 I \ \ :;.__ _ __ \ --;:::_- _____ - _- If -\.-- _ IAEA Ng _ - r Yi€ S____H® l [. _t 7_.\- \ \ ! / j! �_ Ski R`EE --�`. �\ ���� �fl '_, \--"' ' .. . - I t f - S_Yit`.. TECH GENTEe� t DRIVE \ j (��, ��` { L.N..'N.,- .N.:7 . \ - i ,,,....,...i 1._, _ : - ‘_._ ,. \\.: _ \ - 1 - V Li.-- I \C( # � A /�/ R ff R4,H410 110APWAY 72nd 70rh I / il c- rc I IR m rn 1 ,� �: J DmN K z 64th ‚-Wi'- . : — 110 AVE A_T-- r .96 AVE. IN volt 63 rd II ■ INN 1 AVE s y 61st' 9 11a Jai $,W. I 67th SW. 64 t ' 87n Irm Q 'r. I/1 rd.L 1 ovalkd -n r m AV III, !II AVE. VIPA ,AVE. S.w 73. r-^ s,W, 76/P 74t1 PL AVE, AVE ,v1 'AVE, m l AVE. r Iz z -4 AVE AVE. r• S,W, S W. 64th • 1 AVE LESSER r S .S S' ' •♦ i ' i •v a,wl VA..u..w......,ur..n..A.m..,M+,tea` xoa...n. . -i,...n 1 , a V.,y♦y,,., r AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss City of Tigard ) I, ]C22iIc 1 1 '+L��'G Vim' .._.__.r being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath ' depose and say: (Please print) That I am a l.(.., � , t�'J { for The City of Tigard, Oregon. . ifhat I served. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: That I served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: ? ic - _. City of Tigard Planning Director L..."'"--Tigard Planning Commission , r Tigard Hearings Officer p4, Tigard City Council ♦ A copy (Public Heating Notice/Notice of Decision) of which is attached (Marked Exhibit "A") was tailed to each named persons at t ddrea9 shown on,the attached list marked exhibit "B" on the day of (�� .k '. _...,,,......., 19, _, said notice NOTICE OF DEC/SION as hetet9 attached, was posted on an appropriate • bulletin board on the --- day of .J , 19____y and depo,,p,i�t�� ed in the United States Mail on the :2_128„t: day of Ara ...,..__, l9. ._, postage prepaid. Prepared Notice 2 -:f-,—E....$ bed and Sub�cri firm to me on the 4-'4? , day of ;� , :! , l i N w ,1'ry r it+4! A i Y NOTARY 'PUBLIC OF �1fGON ° r ' My Commission Ex p area': °' _, , J • • • • • • •. • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT ITS MEETING ON MONDAY, November 15, 1993, AT 7:30 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BLVD., TIGARD, OREGON, WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO: SDR 93-0002/PDR 93-0001 FILE TITLE: Cub Foods/SuperValu • APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: SuperValu Holdings, Inc. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 11848 Valley View Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (503) 639-4171 REQUEST: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 93-0002/PLANYtD DEVELOPMENT PDR 93-0001/SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 93-0002/...algitsop:E EXCErTION SCE 93-0001 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU To amend condition of approval #11 in 0 • the March 25, 1993 Planning Commission Final Order, ,thereby allowing the westbound lane of SW Dartmouth Street from 72nd to the site entrance to be constructed by the developer. I '• LOCATION: 7500 SW Dartmouth Street (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; a portion of WCTM 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; and a portion of WCTM 281 1BA, tax lots 100 and 101) ZONE: C-G and C-G (PD) (General Commercial, Planned DevelopMent) The C-G zoning designation allows public agency and administrative services, public Support facilities, profeOsional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business Support services, eating and drinking establishmentO, general retail sales, and single-faMily residential units among other usee. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED S/ON LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST, PLEASE CALL 639-4171, EXT. 356 ' (VOICE) OR 684-2772 (TDD TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FORME DEAF) NO LESS THAN ' ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. , ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC REARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER; OPEN THE PUBLIC REARING; AND ,Iff / * — • s . 4 . •:"?..\ , : : :, , ,,.. . . .,-:. , . : , O INVITE BOTH ORAL :AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE. PLANNING COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE THE ' PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR .CLOSE THE' . PUBLIC HEARING AND TARE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE • IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER October 26, 1993 , ANY'PARTY .IS ENTITLED TO ' REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF'THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NOS CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE ' 'HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. ' b INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST'OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST ! FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR'DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE COMMISSION WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE;' HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS ' ' RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. R • • FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE. ' . ' OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY TO AFFORD THE DECISION'MAKER'AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND 'USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ' ' ;LIZ DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE, ARE AVAILABLE FOR' ' INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. AT LEAST ' SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST,, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. FOR 'FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE' STAFF PLANNER , Ed Murphy__-_- - AT ' • • 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 133,25 SW HALL BC�'V'D., 'TIGr.RD, OREGON. , • a r . ''' ' '' ''' ' ' 1 •L')''': '.: ' ' ' rt.'..• ' 1 ', ' - .I' ' -' 9/: : ' ' ' : . . ' - ii w r: -v ., " c7c,,,..‘i. v: z v,, . v , , . 4 �� yam, �t 4 j sly. i j pUVALC ;:iTf1T 11!.. !• - n V i s. r�11� �! '- ■ r •'1 J. ' ' ' 6l.14tnrl • 3rneEr .. `.Pp rE y ,tips. ���, �, . _„.., . _ � . el:- (( .mow < �', --44.146 UTh EHTCNSION T. J • ' ' ' ' ' ' ' v ' '' ' ' H:' * ''' ' ' ....L.L.,■.. -1.■■•••.* . ---"-'---''--- ' ' " . ., . . 1."iF I 1 1111 _ s E � [ M� AIM vs, I S , : . „': ., • •'. , .. 1 ...Hr.,. :' '=.11 E . 1' ill : ::::- -, . . .' i N' it „ .,..1r, ., , , ,, , , . , , .. , , , ,. . . . , . ,„ „ . , F.. l71b d �� FRANK(H6,. ,... , „. J � � .. , . ,„ . , , : ' . . ' . : :' . ' , ,, '<> lit. '--.. ,,- : .- ..'MINI ; ,-1 „„ :, , ii : , . .. v „ „. . „ „ E .l4EVEl aNt� .,, . in : , .,, , ,., . :,,, . , ,,, , . „ , , : ; . .„„ . , ; „ . . .. : :., . . , : . .. .. . . ,., , ,..1, II. :,., V. : „. WL. LEwtt � N � ., 5 �1st. I,,,,4 ,,. : : .. V. r: . , „ „ ; v. ..,,'' ' ' 4 ' f][4:TIfT ' '.. 1 , a , . . i '. .- ti 1� - ` w .., , .. . . ' �,,;, .w . . .... ., r.4..••.ww.o..a i 1S136'!CD-01400 . •�.♦ •..,w .'..,'..••,.• 23304BA—O0.300 (,',1„ QAYUM, ABDUL 1ND ISMAT '.. ' Y)�UCTA, J,,II1DA R , .t TERRACE 18245 IE�V$R EDGE � 12.010 SW W']��TBLIRY �'EF�tA TIGARD OR 97223 , I'' LAKE OSWEG O.OR 97034 . ., • `I 4 1S136CD--E71800 .....,,,....,•••',..••••••••'• .1S136C D*01501 . .1 SCHULZ, DAVID T R .•Q ,YUM, ABDUL '*0 ISMAT , - ' . ' GLORIA TR 1 (,'� ' 1 18245 • ' z '�• B CT , - v 1 550 SW HA ELTREE TRRR I. LAKE OM GO OR !37034 i. ' TIGARD OR 97224 , , , N. • ' ' 1S1360D..01603 •....•....4 1 .1S136C D--016.1 •.......••''.. •me. ' • 1 . , DOUGRTY, J PAUL LILLI °. ', yJOiJGH"rY, J P1li,� Ty7LLL1: , 10150 SW CANYON RD 10150 SW N' BEAVER ON' OR 97005 - M BEAVERTO R 91005''''', . , ,■ .,-.,1«.,.5,_.13a...6,..«CD,,.W..-.»,0.,...1....700,.... ,.a1�.M10 G.a'.e s w�wa.....>...,w.e + 1S136�''plp 0� ••a•w.o y..•....i.••.w w '1' PROBST IELLD JUD ITH M ALEXANDER' JOHN " ' , ' ' , '' % O C ,SAG , T X & N N � a, 11700 SW PACIFIC HWY 1 . 3590 SW CEDAR HILLS BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 BEAVERTON OR 97005 ` , H. 1►136C D-0180 . . w... . 18136CD 01900 ,. NEW WEST FEDF SAVINGS 61, LOAN ' ALEXANDER' JOHN D , 343 EAST Mti: ST SUITE 805 ,,. ' 11688 SW PACIFIC tWilr . • Pa BOX 30 '�ICARD OR 97223 • ST CTO C. 95202 . ..,.,.�..... . „., ... ..,.r S136CD 02206 S1UPF. VALU STORMS WESTERN—DUFF-nom' TIGARD PARTNERS PAUL SIMMONS — DIRECTOR RETAIL DEW 10080' N WOLFE RD SI`S 316 � PC BOX 1 969 C TINO 95014 SALEM OR 97309, SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC . 11840 SW VALLEY 'VIEW RD' ' EDEN PRAIRIE MN' 55344 , S , GORDON MARTIN O 1.2,0x 740 ,ULENEDEN BEACEI OR 97388 • f ODE DAVIS O P4) $OX 8774 r f PoRt LAND 0R 971',07 ' • " '9660 'SW', VTURA Cad I0 OR 97228 s „ti { . ' -' ''' ' " ' '' , , 1 H , , , , 1S136DC-00200 w••••••„•w.wwr.s...... ' ` 1S136DC-00300 .. THOMAS, ALFRED E AND JUNE R ' , , WOZNIAK, JOHN G ' 7135 SW BAYLOR ' ' 11550 SW 72ND AVE ' . . TIGARD OR 97223 , TIGARD'OR 97223 • 1 !p q y 0 I1S136DC.°0®3®1 oo•r'•w,w•'•••.•s•swo''••• � 1S136DC-00400 •• ' BUEHLER, JAMES D CHASE, WILLIAM L VIOLET 7175 SW BAYLOR ST 115910 SW 'TIGARD 72ND AVE ' OR 197223 TIGARD OR.. 37223 13136DiC-02900 ' 15136DC-•031000 ,� ' 1 TERSON, DAVID MICEAEL AND' HORNE, ,WILLIAM I/ROBBIE L'' ' \ MELANIE IC' , ..w. J 7160,SW BAYLOR 7130 SW BAYLOR ST ` , TIGARD OR 97223 \ TIGARD OR 97223. \ •,• 15136180-03100, .. •••....w..; 1S136DC---03200 ANACHER,1 JUANITA r FEGLES, MARY A ' :11680 SW,72ND 1720 SW 72ND ' TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 ! 1$136c-0330O 1S136DC-0 4 0® ...........1...••w•.4•..� ' NOBYa4 THOMAS L LARRIE P MAHON, 'HUGH S ANNA BELLE 11750 SW 72ND 11780 SW 72ND ' TIGARD OR 97223 F PORTLAND OR 97223 TOM MOYER ,e••w.• CONNET, ANI) +JC3 •� 513 1 • . . ' OYER THEATRES , JOHN R / 703 1►ROADWAY SUITE 605 8416 'SW 57TH AVE VANCOUVER WA 98660 ' ' PORTLAND ;OR 97219 '' ' ' 1S136DC✓03508' a•.......••..e•...•.• 1S136DC-04000, w•.r .•».w • 4.444 i■. ' PETERS, ARDEN L PBILPOTT, T t P8 IS t , 7135 8W cLINTON ST 7140 SW O, II' ON ST TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 ' ' 1S13SDC-04100 . 1S136DC--04200 •• . , ' LEWI S LYNN C MARY C LEWIS, LYNN C MARY C ' ` ' 11860 SW' 72ND AVE 11860 SW 72 TIGARD Oft 97223 TR I0 0 97223 f', 1 S136DC.+04300 4„44 ' ' . � " ' V.. 1S1361C-0 4400' .. . .:�4.4.4.4..:..»'„.• � , . r AIDERSONiI RAY 0 & MARYLIN G NORT HL AND HONES INC .* ] 00, 'STEVER 18 4 S W 58TR �'' 11930 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND OR 97201 ' TIGARD OR 97223 1W:361)0-64402� 42 1►a'.a.,4ieV•,iWo .4ro,i► wB 0 . :'261048&:-60200'' S1®� A 09)2 91 e a +u �..,i rDOEPET 'y t�Ty ���.y.�.8 I , wittTNS, MERRILL N II A»D .. � i Ad p J.�'✓V I wCid:! �7rLq L'07 � � � I "' ' "' ' 11990 SW 72 Ni AVFN g GINA gAilic8n ,, ' TIGARI 011; 97224 12103 SWW 135TH AVE ' TTXCAR D OR 972,23 ' , I AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard I, � �,�.� being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say: (Please print) ' .�pry/ A (5kL��'j/yam That I am a l� . for The Ci ty of Tigard, Oregon. VThaa I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: That I Served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: City of Tigard Planning Director p.-''Tigard Planning Commission ._.�._ Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Hearing Notice/Notice of Decision) of which is attached (Marked Exhibit "A") was mailed to each named ers gas at th addr Os shown o the attached list marked exhibit "B" on the day of � I' %�, said notice NOTICE OF DECISION as her t. attached, was pouted On an appropriate bulletin board on the day of , 9i; and depog ted in the United States Mail on the day of �_•, 0 postage prepaid. I , _ �._..._._..._._.._..... , ., • prepared Notice 19j2.4114 the day of 4Zaeidrzete_,I,„,Z_____,S i,�tbdcribed and svaorn/a�.firm to me on • NOTARY PUBLIC tpr OREGON }' � My Comrn�ission Ea�,x�ilr�s. � 7,V • ,r . . . . , . .,,. , . , , . , : i - - • . i . ' • . . . . . 0 4 ,.. . 1 , ■ I tar ■ 11 ' 1 . EX t k •' ' . '•i• • i bk060 A. . , . . . . / ., 0• , . : • 4 . NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING , . # • ' •, ''' NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT ITS MEETING ON , MONDAY, March/24_11U, AT 7:30 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, . 13125 SW HALL BLVD., TIGARD, OREGON, WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: . , . . , FILE NO: SDR 93-0002/PDR 93-0001/SLR 93-0002/SCE 93-0001 ' FILE TITLE: Cub Poods/SuperValu 1 . . • APPLICANT: SuperValu. Stores OWNERS: SuperValu Holdings, Inc. I. . Paul Simmons 11840 SW Valley View Rd. , PO Box 12909 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Salem, OR 97309 Gordon Martin . AGENT: Gorden E. Davis PO Box 740 PO Sox 8774 Gleneden Beach, OR 97388 . • Portland, OR 97207 , . , REQUEST: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 937.02 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW .. PDR 93-01 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-02 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 93-01 . 1) SitepemplgormntReviewLElanned, DeVelopment Review plan approval is requested . . to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square . foot, multi-tenant retail center with two out-lots for future development. A .- grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet 4,---- of the center. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling , ' of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from . a wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications i0 being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sj,.mCc.,_242Ejiggt. approval 1.0 requested ' to anew 28 foot high signs on SW DartmoUth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the . .. Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed - between the two Signs. In addition Sign are Exception approval is requested , to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided signs ' whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be permitted. , ; APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA: Site Development RevieW: Community Development . Code Section 18.120.180; Plq,nned DevelopMent Review Code Section 18.80.120; Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; Sign Code Excepttkm: Code Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapter : 18.62, 18.100, 184102 r -18.106 r ' 18.108, and 18.114. • LOCATION: NOrthwest dotnet of proposed SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd AVenue . (address not yet asdigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC0 tax lot d 600, 2500, 2501# portion of H ' , 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion Of 281 1BA, tax lots 100 and 101) . • ZONE: C-0(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development overlay zone) The C-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative sex-video, publid support fadilities, professional and adminisitrative services, financial, insurance, real ' esItate, and busgineeis support dervides eating and drinking establishtents, k general retail baled, and dingle family residential thitd among other udeS. , - THE PUBLIC HEARINO ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDMICE WITH THE RULES \ OF CHAPTER 1.8,32 OP THE COMMUNITIt DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OP PROCEDURE ADOPTED 1 - V THE TIAb CITY COUNCIL b AVAILABLE M CITY !AtaL OR RtJLES OF PRO bURE 8111T FORTH IN CHApTEn 18.30. , - y ' ANYONE WISHING TO PRE( 'T'WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PRd;, AM) ACTION MAY DO SO IN ' . 49.�. WRITING PRIOR TO OR AY TEE PUBLIC HEARING. ' ORAL 'TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT . THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL'RECIEVE ' ' A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER; OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING; AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE THE . PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE • PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE 'ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE ' ' IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION 'AFTER March 2. 1993_ , ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO ' • REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN ' FOR AT LEAST, SEVEN DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE 'TO THE QUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. , ' ' APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE COMMISSION WILL BE BASED UPON THESE ' CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS ' ' RELATING TO THE REQUEST, SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON'OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE ' OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY TO AFFORD THE DECISION MAKER AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE,BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. , (• +' ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED, FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR ,. ,. ' INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED F"OR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. AT LEAST ' • . SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR ' INSPECTION AT NO C'IOST, OR A COPY"CAN''BE OBTAINED FOR, TEN CENTS, PER .PAGE. ' ,' ' FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER per__ Offer ' . � AT ' _ 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BLVD.,' OR, CONTACTAtOUR NEIGHBORHOOD .: ' PH CUMBER:: , 684-52 PLANNING ORGANIZATION (NPO) # '4 ._ CHAIRPERSON: Carl +3ohrt�ir�n ONE 6:� : . /' , , , , , '','' , : , 1 , , , ,_ , , !,. '' I )I,,,/ , '',,,,' mum ' I,''L� � w � : ��� � . , * , , /, �� s:N. ` ATLAticA s'�-.+� ' , 1 �, ,.' anum, I4 r r ' ' ' 1 ' ' ' I - w� II IN Sit/ ,04WA IL ' L. 1 ' ,fp 1 I i �� t�j ' . , . , , , .� �, �` i "f a ix II 1� - C1 1tl fd(�(V�+r i r�vN "'. 0$�' R:102". r i»,... .,T EYI � , ff i k ' ' , imm - ', , , -----_,......_t „ 1 ,,,, , , '1.1.ektiiiir . , , ., , . .,, .. . , :, ,,p. ,d , S �, �Ft' I NI C ' ' '''' r , ,, , I , , , . .. . , ..n,..4.„0,,, 1, tv%.,' ' 11111 .... , S.W., . FptiWLIP, i S p , . „ .. „, , . , . t) PH IL. . 1 . „ . , .. ,,, , , .. . ,, ,, , ,,, , , , ., \ iL M. s .eLelogNirAtte „ ,,„„itt..de,,,4„,,..ii. st . , , ,,, , ., ..,..,.. , . 7....... .....„.. .„, ., . , m 1 , .. . . . „ ,, ., „ , , , ,1 \\, ,SCRObt.: kri '171*173:p ' ' ' 4' , ; h,• 4, I. fi 1, . . • V w , ii,....' 1S136DC-00200 0 1S13GDC-00300 ' 1 'TTHOMAS, ALFRED E AND JUNE R WOZNIAK, JOHN G .. . 7135 SW BAYLOR 34550 SW 72ND AVE • TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD' OR 97223 '' ' . , 1S136DC-00301. 1S136DC--00400 • SUERLER,' JAMES D, CHASE, WILLIAM L'VIOLET . 1 ' 7175 SW E AYLO1& sT ' 11580 SW 72ND :AVE ' ' ' ' ' ••. TIGARD OR 97223, TIGARD OR 97223 . ' ' ' ' ' 1S136DC-02900 w•... 1S136DC-03000 ro•rrlw•emowoarr•rr•.• • „' , PETERSON DAVID MICHAEL AND EHORNE,' WILLIAM,.I/RO)38IE L 1 ' HELANYE 7160 SW )3AYLOR' 7130 SW BAYLoR ST TIGARD OR 9722.3 ' ' TIGARD OR 97223 1 1$136D0--03100 1S136DC-03200 - ' r u ' AMACSER, JUANITA FEGLES, NARY A ' 11680 SW 72ND' 11720 SW 72ND TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 ' :•r 1S136DC-03300 ' ' '. 'i.a•••w o 1S136DC--03400 a.'.w•.H..w e.•r.:••r..o • ' NOBLE, TROI4AS L LARRIE P MAfON„ HUGB 'S ANNA BELLE 11750 SW 72ND 11780 SW, 72ND ' ' TIGARD OR 97223 PORTLY'OR '97223 1S136DC--OCi500 1S136DC--03501 ••...w �4•• 'TOM., LOYER THEATRES BONNET, JANE AND JOAN A 7A3 BROADWAY SUITE 605 8415 SW 57TH AVE ' . VA.Z'COUVER .WA 98660 PORTLAND OR 97219 ' 15136DC-03508 w w•.le z.••.•.••••.•u•. 1S136DC-,04000 - PETERS, A 'L B.D PHILPOTT, PHYLl IS L ' 7135' SW CLINTON, ST 7140 SW CLINTON ST, ,1 TIGARD OR ' 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 1S136DO--04100 ..••.....•r• .r•..O ' 15/36DC-04200 ,... «•.w •+..•.4444 ' LY '., . - ' LEWIS, NN C NARY C LEWIS, 141N'd 0 kP 'C' � 11860 SW 72ND AVE 1I1850 S� 7� '� ,VE TtGAPn OR 91223 TGAR.D O ' 72 23 ' • ' '' ' • ' iS13600.-0430rE0 4-4,—,. ; 1S13 6DC-04400 .. .2: .... '. •' a w • AgDE ON„ ,riAY D it, MARYI N G v0t , ALD E i 000, aTE9N. 1834 � �lTi � 0 , 11930'8W '72ND AVE PORRTL.ANO OR. 91`221 • TIGAi OR 97223 ' 181a DC OAH02 .00.. ” 4 4 4 4:4'4,4 • 4 ' 28 LA'"0 0{ A W ♦$O M. Y O.O I •4 4 9 r 4,4'4 4:4 Y i y�EPETR m �. SE WILLIAMS,; 'RRI � II AN� , 900 $W ?2N3 AVEU RNER ,I TIGA i•OR,' . 97223 ' 580 SW is61lL`Lt 46U 9 0 ', ' ' ALOE OR �C� 7 i n .. [ ... . • 15136CD-6i4Q C e r ..... • " • ' 2810484 00300" •'•.•. ' *DETDCIA • . s A R QAY7M, ADUL AND 13MAT ` 12010. sW WRSTBURC TERRACE . 1424,5 ICyEt EDGE CT �, TItD ©R 7223 LAKE;4$W§GO ,OR . 97034 � � '\'' : ., 1S136GD-01500 ••e-•o r e i.a e,',.•.e•e—e e ' ', 1S1o6c4D.O 501 e'•e a.,r..d e.,•..... .•w'•w '. ' ' S Lg, DAVID' TR Te ABDUL r ;GMT KERR,, GLORIA TR 1' 18245 RIVER ,GE CT • 14550 sw 1ThZELTREI TERR , LAKE Os 0 OR 97034 •, • \ ' : TIGARD OR 972.24 : 1 I '. , , 1S L't6CD -01600 0 1S136O0-01601 . DOUS�' TY, J ;EANL Lk LLI ' DOZJOHTY, J, PAUL LILLI , i 10150 SW CANYON RD ' ! 10150 SW N RD ' BEA TON OAR 97005 BEAVERTO R 97005 I ,1,• ' , ` 5136GD. yy ®0 •�M o.•r w a e e' r ew•.e.• 1 135CD O15 OQ PRORST1N'XELD, JUDITH M M EXANDERs JOHN ' % O'CALLAGHAN, T M & N N , : 11700 SW PACIFIC RWY ' • 4014 SE WioNNWooD DR ' ,TIGARD OR 97223 , ' nttLssoRo OR ,97123 , 1S%36CD-01900 1, d b 18136CD-02200 d r. •i r a.w.e k ' ALEXANDER, JOHN'DD' I WESTERN—DUFF TIGARD PARTNERS. ' 11688 SW PACIFXG• HWY. 10080,t WOLF RD STE 310 TIGRD OR '97223 • ' :� (UPXRT!NO 95014 H ..• . SUPEJ STORES , • PAUL SIMMONS —' 1RECrOR RETAIL DEV. . PO 130X 1909 SALEM 'OR 57309, ' 1 . I. . SUPERVALU HOLDINGS, INC. ' NC• 3 1154 VALLEY VI RD ,1 ; : EN PRAIRIE MN 553 ,9 1 . GORDON'MARTI,r . PO y�� 3/y 11,'. t3LENBDEN BEACH, OR 97388 O� DON'E DAVIS ,: PO BOX 8774 PORTLAND OR '9707, „ ' ' 4 ' - CARL JOHNSON 8937 SW BURNHAM S`:C TICAM1 OR 97223 . �� L •,i. r ti 2S104BA-00300 ( 15136CD- ,,,,I...�AO . ...p. DELUCIA, LINDA R QAYUM, ABDUL AND ISMAT , / '• ' ,' 12010 SW WESTBURY TERRACE ' 18245 RIVER EDGE CT TIGARD OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 '. 1S136CDA01500 . ......6 . . . .... ... , 1S136CD-01501 . . SCHULZ, DAVID TR I I ' QAYUM, ABDUL AND ISMAT KERR, GLORIA TR 18245. RIVER EDGE CT • \' 14550 SW HAZELTREE TERR LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 . TIGARD OR 9.7224 - 1S136CD-01600 1S136CD-»01601 . ..... ... . . .....,. .... DOUGHTY, J PAUL LILLI 1 DOUGHTY, J PAUL AND LILLI 10150 SW CANYON RD 10150 SW CANYON RD BEAVERTON OR 97005 ' BEAVERTON OR 97005 1S13GCDW0170U 15136CD-01800 . .... ........4 .. ..... PROBSTFIELD, JUDITH M ' ALEXANDER, JOHN D ,. , %' O'CALLA.GHAN, T M & N N ' I 11700 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD 4014 SE WYNNWOOD DR .PI'GARD OR 97223 ' HILLSBORO OR 97123 . rr 1S136CD-01900 . . . ... ..I..... . . .. . .:a.., 1S136CD 02200 ....l. ..... ..........,. ALEXANDER, JOHN D ' ' ' WESTERN-DUFF TIGARD PARTNERS . 11688 SW PACIFIC HWY 10080 N WOLFE RD STE 310 TIGARD OR 9722 CUPERTINO CA 95014 I W. j o I I 1 , h I I I I I .'�.I.- .. ........... ..-,,........, ..a.'.....�. ...u...l.,,,............ r,.....r v. ..r..».,n,� ...,..�.r u....l,.,,...t ... .,....i u�i�... i.....,.,.. V. ..i ..r..... .., .,,.i,.�r, .. � �i,.� ... r. ,.� .,.. i..i e . I ,..... 4 1 �, n . 1S136DC-00200 oa •• e••o•0• w7 , 15136DC •, 100 'THOMAS, ALFRED E AND JUNE k , WOZNIAK, JOHN G " 7135 SW BAYLOR ' 11550 SW '72ND AVE ' .1 TIGARD OR 97223 '' . '',TIGARD OR ' 97223 . ...,..) . 1S136DC-00301 1S136DC-00400 ' BUEHtER, JAMES D, CHASE,' WILLIAM L VIULET ' 7175 SW BAYLOR ST , . '11580 SW, 72ND AVE ' TIGARD OR 97223..''. TIGARD OR ;97223 ' ' 1S136DC-02900 . •,. 1S136DC-03000 PETERSON, DAVID MICHAEL AND ' HORNE, WILLIAM I/ROBBIE L ' , MELANIE IC 7160 SW BAYLOR' . 7130 SW BAYLOR ST ' ' TIGARD OR ' 97223 ' ' 'TIGARD OR 97223 ' 1S136DC-03100 •• e',.�•• :.'a•'• •• 0 ' ' 15136DC.432,00 'N•.r. •r••••'c. . AMACHER, JUANITA, ' ' ]E'EGLES, MARY 'A ' u ' . 1168U SW 72ND . 11720 'SW 72ND ' ' ' • ' TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 '' ' ' .NOBLE, THOMAS L LARRIE P• • 15136, HUGHOS' ANNA BELLE ' •a 1S136DC-03300 a•ao•e,.,• � • e • • • .•oo . e'e • • • •r• e• ee• •ea• MAHON, °. 11750 SW 72ND ' 11780 SW 72ND1' .. ' ' TIGARD.: OR 1 97223 . . ' . PORTLAND OR 97223 , 15136DC-00500 • • ••• � • • .• a • • • ti • • • •,• . 1S136DC-03501 ' Y . J •'iillo. TOM MOYER THEATRES' ' ' CONNET, JANE AND JOHN R ' x416 S 5 TH AVE 703 BROADWAY.SUITE 605 W 7 VANCOUVER WA I, ' 98660 PORTLAND OR '97219 '1' .. .A" ' 1S136DC 03508 '• . ' ' ' ' - 15136DC-0400 o . Le • a a..•• .•••p. ' ' PETERS,, ARDEN 4. 'PHILPOTT, PHYLLIS '1, ' : 1135' SW TIGARD OR CLINTON TON 97223 TIGARD OR 9'72 7140 SW"CLINTON St 23 1S136DC-04100 a• . . •• •. . .,. , • a • • . r • ry 15136DC-04200 . . .• ..• .. . .• • ...i,Mlr:e , LEWIS, LYNN; C MARY C L EWtS, LYNN 'C MARY C, ' ' 11860 SW''72ND AVE' 11860 'SW 7 'ND,AVE T7CG}IRD OR 97223 TZ`'GARD OR 97223 7 / ' : I . 1S136DC-043.0 0 r .•... • . •.• .•. • •••• � .15136DC— 04 04 ' . ' �'•u•. .IL r•JI� 1 ' ' ' ANDERSON, RAY D & �ARYL�N G P1LLCCI�, DONAIL E ' ' % KROOo STEVEN 1834 SW , V41 #202 ' • 11930 SW 72ND AVE PORTL AND 'OR. ' 9 7 2 1. ' ' . • . IGARD O 9723 15136DC-04402 . W'.4 a..'.: .'.'. :.. . a.,i .. 2S1O4'13A--OQ20a N 4 .. 4 a.i 4,,,:a ,•: ' xEbGERETH, LOU'. I4I,IAMS MU ISE A,GNEa WI , RR11,L M II AND 1. ' ' 11990 SW 72ND AVENUE, ' ' 23 ', ' OXNA RARMIR '' 10ARD OR 972 1 5300 SW Bom 50 i• ALOHA OA 9 T 0 U 7 1 'c'' ... i EST FOR COMMENTS • 3 TO: �� ik REQUEST . DATE: February 4, 1993 PROM: Tigard Planning Department • RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PJVIEW PDR 93-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 93--00011 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU (NPO #4) 1) Site Development Review/Planned Development Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an approximately 20 acre bite with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi- tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. •.r 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a wetland, A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sigrri Code Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sion Code Exception approval is requested to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided signs • whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be ps ro fitted. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Bite Development Review: Community Deve:e.:. :n tIn'i' Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Development Review: Code Section 8 e 8;��,,x,20; , Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; n Sia Code Exces3t o : Code Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.:020 18.1O6, • 18.108, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmouth street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 6G O, 2500, ,. 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 2S1 1BA, tax lots 100 and 101) ZONE: C-G(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative: services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail, sales, and single family residential units among other uses. n supplied applicant's statement for. your review. From Attached is the Site Plan and ' statement Y informatio pplied by various departments and agencies and from, other informatin and a decision will bet enderedaon�the proposal in l the near tfuture. If youp h wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Feb. 16, 1993. You may p provided attach a ,Se.arate letter to return your comments use he space rovz.cied below p • If ou are unable to r ppond by the above date, please phone the Staff contact with your co is and confirm your comments in writing g i noted below w'' comments i�rin as soon as possible. If. you have any questions regarding this Matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 1312$ SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer C PLEASE' HECK THE, FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal a-ad have no objections to it. Please contact ;. of our office. ___.r.._. Please refer to the enclosed 'letter, Written Comments M , Name of. Person Commenting.. PhoneTtiniber ` A • , . .. * �; . , :' s '. • :.1':-, , ,,..,,... CI. .JOINT. . - t.i.e..,,, ' .• i ' / t/t d 1 iI i • .U'S Ai rn Corps . PERMIT. APPLICATION FORAA� ,rf . ..e Y Y,I• r , . , T uc oN Wu L M:EET THE REQUIREME of 90H AGENCIES ` *YYdr. r 1 ' , AGrNc;rs.t,Yttt•.A551CyN Nut ittin • ' , i Corps Action ID Number' Oregon Division of.State Lands Number �/ f'� ?�f '' t 1 date Received Date Received • . • Distract Enginver State of pre on . ATfN:CENPP-PE-RP Division of State Lands ' . ' P 0 Box 2946 775 Summer Street NB i '00 Porfiand,UR 972©&294b Salem OR 973 1 0 , , & 805' ' 50337 3 ., ,503}'32Er7730 � / � tJPtX ALtl • 'S btt.ainess phone# 0b3)%1^/0 04 Q Appliccant NameA. chi: PAL sioin+oN ,: and Address p.Dd k l2MM?9' ' homephone# t." Authorized Agent' FAO 4 I E tVAV S business phone#563) 446 /18,5 .: ' , 0 Contractor 11,A ,e*.€77` Name and Address 1n0 big'q77 home phone# , ' ' ° , Property Owner , business phone# , ' • (if different than applicar t) Name and Address home phone# '; Street,Roed or other'descriptive location ,$1"$'1PEs 4,'• Legal Description r � 5U) �2.-° Am �d� �r !idl� q Ari m Quarter Seciio n �ow�ship Rang® . . . OfT4,$rft e JO �6M o �4.ua14 t Sr. •w7 (0 1- :I Ili In o Near(Cily or Town) County Tcr Map# ��Tax Lot# k r t • wcitetway River Mile Latitude Longitude ,; : F "t' 1n' t� D w o is c ent to e p p; rty g anted 4 Corps'an ..ar ds? S Ye ' tarts rater rr� E r 0 tlrie d�e C�vlslc�n of State i P i)osED PROJECT INFORMATION! Activiiy Type: F.ll 0 Exc vation(removal) 0 in-Water Structtr'e 0 I\lalnfdin/Repair on E istind Sttuc- Lre ' Brief De srrr p f ar�� _ Evil will int a1 b c y ard s ann�aily a nd/�r ' �u�ic�yar ds tot ifia t of a 1 probe wf , . Fi!l will be � Ri p ra p � Bock �rtiel Sand S1l t 9 City 0 Organics 0 Other , • d de �atl Impac���,�Area� �' Acores; len tht i � th ,._._,_.r ' Removal will involve . _ cubic ards anndali and/ .: • • � '� �y or .cubic;yc�rc�s for the tata9 pro��ct - or vc f will be Pi rd Rack 0 gave! 0 Scatld 0 Silt 0 Clay 0 Otgianirs 0 Othec . Removal Impact Area is� Acres; .,_ ....:.. length: „:.......,,,,,,_ .:._ Wldttv .:: depth • Estimrated nrrip atio [hate � tirt�dtod 5tc�rt Date 6'' n do material,constr a iiVili° �y' � - �cfion debris,t�unoff,e�to. enter a wetld ar'u�c�ter�raay? 1res� °�". No ��� y,� be the e Of I i Ib - , �� a�� � � e rtv plctn� , o�cri ditch r �and shoes ti7�dl�ct�c�r' a i���i !f es,d a. "t • J G PROPOSED PROJECT PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION r ,Project Purpose and Need: ' , I . „ ,• :, . •• Protect Description: , I 1 fir!. 1 I • 1s 1 How many project drawing sheets are included with this application? __ , ,'I NOTE:A complete application must include drawings and a location map submitted on separate 81/2 X 11 sheets. j C ' PROJECT I r ; IMPACTS AND ALTERNATIVES . Describe alternative sites and project)designs that were considered to avoid impacts to the waterway or wetland. I ' ' I -'r1' H . ,, I ,1 construction) impacts waterway or we Describe what measures you will use(before ond�ai�er co - to minimize imp s to the uiat®r wetland.� ' ;• • I I • NOTE: if ne ry use additional , NOTE: nca)sheets: � ... c®ssa ... ..... MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION Ad)olning Property Owners and Their Addreses Land Phone Numbers I , li j' approvals) i issuin Agency r certificates Approval Identification Number Dotes of application /QApproval /Denial • List�©ilga��,r � or' afes rece�i�re�,applied fors or denied�tia�are 1. r r 7i it b t'"'r 1 , . k ' l''' (":1 1 CouemNruP °� t NI�G�®EPARmEtu fi~ L„`.T . . ' ' (to be completed by local planning official) . . �Y , • ,O This project is not regulated by the'local comprehensive`plan and xpning ordinance. .' , : ' 0This project has been•reviewed and is consistent with the local comprehe6sive plan and zoning ordinance. °*.'''. . .°,This project has been.reviewed and is riot consistent with the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance," 1 ;: Consistency of this project with the,local planning ordinance cannot be determined until the following local . approval(s)are obtained; I ' °Conditional Use Approval development Permit I 0 Plan Amendment ()Zone Change °Other�_ . ,, pplicatio 0 has 0 has not bean made for local approvals checked above. , , _�.t vkac ,,.,,, Pi( _ O i. a �L 1e� ,r+h 4,/_ ' Signature(of local planning o dal) Title City/County Date ' I 4, COASTAL ZONE CERTIFICAT1ON i ' If the proposed activity described in your permit application is within the Oregon coastal zone, the following I - certification is required before your application can be processed. A public notice will be issued with the certifications ') statement which will be forwarded to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development for its concurrence .. or objection,For additional information on the Oregon Coastal Zone Management Program,contact the department at 1175 �1 °. Salem,Court Street�NE.Stile Oregon 97310 or call 503/373-0050, � � � I' � � � � � � �� - Statement I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief,the proposed activity described in this application complies with the approved Oregon Cr�ostol Zone Management Program and will be completed In a manner •bnsjsteft with the program, b Applicant Signature Dat SIGNATURE FOR JOINt'APPLtCAT N ' (REQUIRED) I Application is hereby Made for the activities described herein. I certify that I am f amiliar with the information containe d in } ' A. .. the application,and,to the best of My knowledge and belief,this information is a complete;and accurate;I further certify ' p authority . ._. IY t � �federal a to undertake the roposed�activities, �i understand granting� ° , un ,possess or fe agencies lease Me from the.requirement of obtaining the r iaf miter . uest d before 1' authors � p � p � cil rbjecf. q re t>"e state enmoval-tillrpermit I sing the'p I underst nd,ttat Icacc:�l permits tray be r�► "aired,befo permits p Is issued, I �� ° commeti '' ° ta'� payment of the re uir unaor� P y q P E� 9 1�,., nd that j � .. . ce, �� � hat o°d state �ifa�cessin �fe®cibers dot uai'`cintee e� I't issUan ' ' , Applidcttit Si .111re+ , Date I ce ',% that I 1 dat •• t.i(duly authorized c gent of the dppiiodnt, dV 'Ft y. a• i' fro. . I l� Authorized Age .slgnoture � Date k' I .. I i • • 4. LEMENTAL WETLAND IMPACT INFORIVIATIONt (FOR WETLAND Pius ONLY) • • , ' ' Site Conditions at ampact'`dreg' • Impact area is 0 Ocean 0 Estuary 0 River 0 Lake • 0 Stream A'•' Fresnwater Wetland* ti Y • I Note: Estuarian Resource Replacerraent Is required by state law for projects involving intertidal or tidal marsh alterations. k A separate Wetlands Resource Compensation Plan may be appended to the application.' ` Has a wetland delineation been completed for this site? rI•4. Yes 0 Na • If yes,by whom: I ES Ass 4 1511- t.)!R1 t%' AW l� 'l ► •�! 48 Describe the existing Physical and biological ra r t er o f t he wetland/waterway s • to by a r ea and type of . • • resource(use separate sheets and photos,If necessary) s vim P pas 71.41-i LJ - l N TWY wricylli At,12 siP, A i1/4/041.11$15 A-140 etweitioNfirt, Alribimbp (, .$ ,11 ft1 ,dad fieL! Z) I I I , Resource Replacement Mitigeiti©tt , Describe measures to be taken to replace unavoidably impacted wetland resources hog2 dam• •a ate' re-Aviv F' • • • • Y I . Bedduse this information Is riot necessary for a complete application,you may submit this sheet and other orMrc n- i mental information after submitting your application. • Ls. T i1 Liu AS a �i AIMS 77:101�.O .• '.1��y,Ft iY)13W$4 `r • r WETLAND PLA.NTINU I G Nom. ®�� p .�. . ' r. ;•,.w 13th .Ne' au auuhn.ot :GAUL ' e,ci1l I�1 �•� 0 '' a: ' r. r•'^ san'aysM ►mas m uws• 1104 a i 1' • '/ Yaw•.I AC,.0 wow.nrwtA • -. Iwo u' 12 11 :r @Iw► r $:. Y/ ' a. wwnA vax AMG17 rwvAaitris (f00 1r �" • ?� .A4.00 nl bJJIU,4/ s,4n,r,s W,JIOIAwls11 . 11101 1M l � - w.PA,O' SAtl R•,0A UMOUA � 1000 II'''` ' �/ ® � • ilr (9 Nuw,,yrfu euelrw son.ul Aa soo Ir t. "'9a A �.�2 ��� _ �/� 'irc :Aal 1•;•,,+wtt0 w01A„00t1t ••L.WAn11 : 1000 lY• / (,} ,•'IQs .JnA."IW. , suu,,a'CN ' I W.(3 ft) ' O' e fi, \j '' 0`0(��V:f}o •Y�;j ,.. , I�'' rJ M00WA nO1c nosA hU111444 ' I'Uy 1.0 3 41 .. . '� %. .1 10 0� aAr•taAs oouaASn 4 n ro a oY ��' +to.o-aa oao�xo cam.n srC4O CS1A w w o►r II SCALE: 1 = 20' ti awe. 0 w . �.®,...MiA1Y, ,.....IA Mv01UUAIA 1 CAL• 10 10 Pt. ,' „. • V�!'^�SA9'Aruct$40,0XMIM1Y 40,0.3.„0.4,1 Alj•rn,UA Arc • 10 rt. ...71.�'I�a IOC ,21 •� 1111 n.r Al.Mr 00(AO!.A1141 A It 13 4 r1 .�) f - X�� .� 1'�'M3!-iAOaLwa{„;adlNwf,, nRt3 swIWKU+I t'ry, is 4 R, i� � � �i 19 ,�10�.• ai, .�i .... 1 2 two'COCMIV •nurus wnz•AAUA a n la 1 rt. V s�� no 6' FYI f1EES L LEND mill 1r' `��►� '� ' :2u,ert+Aaft 1Q, i1/4 1 ,! hh .0371 ..NCMN A'wl f/ %4 r �`p ', y • ....Nn,on euai 7aw,111).hr 6 €) A j• R r71t$pe n °• I. •/ .• ■. ••■•tiw YAf:Ntg1010w / # I�{'1 ♦ 1 I.�� n m� 1 CU—SL FrAN TINE LEGEND 16 Asr�• 7` «A";"Cy i��R� "_ �, ■ Caukte,nl�t zcvaruK u. rus /'�� �7� ��IIR; `; ';• *An.0a1 Ask hl•17M1s ortCArb'1 lA�o, 1'c,L.am !o'c c 5� 1 I/11 1 n Ai . no SUNSCT UAJIC ACfJI IIU•AM kttl 3LY'9Lt' 1'CAL,eb 30'-+0•QC �r�`! VO ,.. MAML oar ah'WAtW r-1o',s 1 insi to'at 0 ��1 1 `. -1� 443ICh4 nob cLD,A IR11AA cucAtA 1-J'i',•N3 1T 0,C 7'. 0 �;.4`it :''',-- .•":•to a t,a,•Un(i .Mlw4w UMMMd,'N1CA{Vw YU/Ntsr I4•-w' 4 oC 15'A5H• ®.-'` �``` `1►* i , ' -e dw.i4404 4$ LY • Ilt1'Gctt1AR'C0NK4A• 1 CAL 4 's-' '1�r i t! w� "' ,. � W.I0.o $t 'MWT SAkr3 VW.t•uCo 11•-21.SPI1tAa 3'-1'oz � 0 •' ,T};'1,W ;, '" ,✓,. o:Ogcc.o okwt UAIIf>•N AOUVOl0k1 3 OAA. A'O.C. W'f�l►y' 7 8arw Wwtk UIF.CI NM tS I•AUSOCL1A1U1'or1111.1100 R`-70 3'OC , 0y ® i ^I�,2ti`.�r�� ^+' .. (4 i a , p ' 0•AANCY cfTc4•s,t$ colt*CArtro Ucttlis '2 C4L 1'O,C - O `-.-�' Ir ♦, `�y(y� '�R �i. . IJ nCDrMO 0641400 '001.10!3 Sh9LO 4C1A'•7#0N' 3 CAL 01.0.C. 7 f r 1 0,4 0, '- !"21, , ,. e• 'nY..ow 1FN0Lnn• 300044 IWrv0C0C•4014 CLO'r 3Oµ. 3'6,C �f ' �I' 4�1�I `y• S3 C+M'N"110UM1 SD,nCS s�,n[,t 1UUi41,1A SHO.UQIq' 1 O0L I'o I O©+ i\ r •�j �•-,' I ./� r a g r. 4 6�J a YCAeoCnnr •CASftA co1p.tASitn o.uwt,A r CAL So'■ CiY +' •:�'AMY .. ,- N(IanA nat woke hUMWA 1 I, . �! �+ ,' r r r ;m 16 r' 0, �4* r a, 0 6 i����� is .. •'� �- ��." �' r EXITING RUSHES �,,' •Alcoa�n � F�� .t i�rb ��„..,,,,, „--,,,, ,, ,, ., , 'a �',ri 1 u ASH,h, Aki r rmurT w , 1•,ill'•1 1 i{i �r ' 7 \ \� S”,NAWfHtlR• L%cam' A ° a n r f� ey� ' :`1 a v • \ 1\\, rJ b Si 2\ 4 61'7 �;,. C.�; t,..!l .' v In HawlHOft ., A% & r A, 41E �' d+Va ' ,I ' '� \ \ A , r ff1! 1 1��' h. 1 ) a a gH �' ran,. 1 cA.��i� �' � r� a�i��i'G1 EPA 1 ,! A. •'.•`..r \ 'Y td`�ti .111 r'J r�'`• ' 7!A„ 1 i \..,` aC/ • �; , j JiR��AS`' ,"' ,�In•H ��F,Yy�1, �d^�. � J�,•�{' • a•, f; ;;• \, `, i e/44 ® 'N ; w ' . " 70 , , 104 j' N1,ti ,• '\\\ '*ss,' \\\ .'::,'S,',4,t...1 6 ., i.ili,V ' .S.,.. . .......„„, , ,",4-,1,,%.4 Z.v..,..,.•,-T:74*.,..,......, ' , ,, . , , ' ., q 111 .v,• ',`',� ,..411.,k1L'. EINI L ELL i` EA1 TENT WETLAND) \\4 1 1�. , „r >w7 1 Y� , \^/\`✓'l��1 1 `' *^+.•�+Lw� .,.. ,•°" Iii ,101., /A `'+•T''1wR�.."ti►. - 1111..•, .... 0.l`4 Y,•�� . •NP 6 � • .•,G�� r ti ke . i( til'�. fc,r�0, yd w.� j i� l, 1 K I1�J1 'L�II�b 1�LIb1rt +Suii6oi,as `�� PLP'N . v 'L n g amraa,w3. 36010104E rover,IOWA f maw Fl b�'t`itiA'Ib , M tro41 tom/ /l Jed Fi ribig . ,3�! ,a�u a , p g A `{�y �+ �ma w,rsnl.r'.,mswl,anwrAa F1LAl'iY1CJR7 OLAN ku.,,t.4, p:Ni•"{++.- .4„i ; i .'. 1 i 1 1 t 1 t \ V 7 4• i i . . ' • • . !, . • ' Supplemental rental 1 of orrna t i n . Permit Application Proposed Wetland Fill I SuperVafLi Stores I Tigard, Oregon • ITEM 4: PROPOSED PROJECT PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION . Project Purpose and Need: SuperValu Stores is proposing to build a commercial center on its 19.9 acre site that ttvili • contain a CUB Food Store along with three additional retail stores and their associated parking and servicing areas. IES & Associates was retained to conduct a wetland delineation of the site. The IES report, which is included with this permit application, concluded that there are two areas of jurisdictional wetlands. One wetland area is directly associated with Red Rock Creek which borders the northwestern property line. A second area is classified as an isolated jurisdictional wetland and encompasses an area of approximately 6,900 square feet. After acquiring the property, SuperValu re moved 18 homes, utilities; under g rou underground fuel �. r tanks, septic is tanks fencing and associated buildings that were located on the property. In the course of that work, the isolated wetland area was disturbed. In any case, uPerVal ' development plans require the filling of the isolated area in order to • de+✓ a ated wetland a ccommodate th e ne ed ed parking and on-site movement to and fro from the stores. , • Project Description: { filled of 10 vertical feet of engineered fill on top i The area will consist a� approximately �h i i g of will e construct a parking with approximately 3 inches which be constructed p g lot wpth s of asphaltic concrete. • w s • • . ! Supplemental Intorm ldn February 9, 1993 . i. ITEM.5 PROJECT IMPACTS AND ALTERNATIVE '= Alternative sites and protect designs that were considered to avoid impacts to the waterway and wetland. ., ., The City of Tigard, through its present adopted Comprehensive Plan, has designated i • this property and the surrounding properties for commercial development. 'The City is :• currently considering a revision to its Comprehensive Plan for the entire Tigard Triangle , 1.- area including this property. In that proposed revision, this property continues to be k, '; •• designated for commercial use. '.�, Development of this property and others in the immediate area has been forestalled because of a city policy which states: , In the Tigard Triangle..., those parcels designated for any commercial . development shall not develop for such use...unless a major collector, ' • connecting the area on Pacific Highway at approximately 78th Avenue and r' •' the westerly portion of Haines Road Interchange at Interstate 5 freeway (at ' approximately 68th at Dartmouth) be constructed, be guaranteed within one year for construction by a public agency, or be approved for :. construction as part of a local improvement district... i (Section 11.4.2, � .,., Tigard Comprehensive Plan) � �` • The City is ncwv proceeding with the construction of the Dartmouth Collector street as , ,' is , As part of that p submitted �� - anticipated in this��pol A y p project, the City ed a wetland fill ; ' • ,, ,, . p e rmit application (Corps Permit t #92-6 7 [Nationwide Section 261; I)SL L Permit #FtF • h,, .' 6866) for necessary fills associated with that project As of the date • of this application, a �� : draft permit has been issued and the final permit is immediately,� � � �� � � � �. The City has long anticipated the development of this property for or commercial purposes ', and while not y et forma lly adopted by the Tigard pity Co uncil, their current plan Wing ' process is reaffirming their i expectation that commercial use of this property is the g� ear �e��ectat p p iv�e to other were considered. :. preferred alternative possibilities ' ' t e 4 •'1 •, ply'; '1' ' ,II , e r''.! . '-1•. v d,/ f, r q .*' ' ;r. x'10` .h. ' ,d *,te. `,, _. .,'I'.• {t;.. I. r. / ', i 1 " i 1 F ;,7 x r' { Supplemental nfor d.�n { , February 9, 1993 ' . it, , 1 . , ` SuperValu has considered alternative development plans for the property that would 6.:, lessen or eliminate'the impact to the 6,900 square foot isolated wetlands. j', Two alternative designs were considered, both preserving the isolated wetlands along ' with a 25 foot buffer. The first alternative attempted to protect the wetlands within the •• ; parking area with as little impact to the parking area as possible. However, given the • • location of the wetlands in relation to the parking area, the need to create a fill slope ? from the parking area to the edge of the buffer, and that the westernmost parking drive aisle also serves as the exit aisle for all service trucks leaving the rear of the stores, the . impacts to parking and traffic flow on the site are substantial and highly disruptive. 1 .p.: In addition to the loss of approximately 30,900 square feet of parking area and the loss .• ,. • approximately of proximately 117 parking stalls, all service trucks would be required to either drive I , p {'rr,.. along the front of the retail stores or meander through the parking lot to the exit f i driveways. In either case, these truck movements would create congestion with pedestrian and auto customers and a generally unsafe condition This alternative also !, i`•.: creates a very inefficient and inconvenient parking area along the western side of the { �..;, project which will result in few people actually using the area for parking. The loss of ,. .. this number of parking stalls would also require that the actual available retail space be a reduced by 19,500 square feet. Such a reduction represents an annual loss in rental . revenues in excess of$250,000 making the project uneconomic. 4 �, �I A second, alternative was considered to preserve the 6,900 .square foot wetland area q }µ and its buffer. However, in this case the parking lot was fully redesigned to make sure '' d`1 I Y 1 1 I Y i I Y in ; 1 ,1,, that all parking is efficient and convenient and that traffic flow is maintained on site in ' ways that insure smooth and safe movement of customer cars and service trucks, This 1, ,11 alternative results in the loss of 69,125 square parking ye loss of 184 ,,, loss s ware feet of area and { r , Arkin stalls. Without the necessary parking, the actual retail space) must then be ;,:" parking , reduced by 00,650 square feet. This reduction in the project size results in an annual , � ■" reduction in rental revenues of almost $400,000, again making the project uneconomic: '2 r The net preserving 00 square feet of isolated wetlands ` etland� overall , t result of reservin 6,9 q is an ,t reduction in the size of the project by 21 percent. : ' I , I .Y • . I I II , { ,¢� R E I '� + C ,Cv ■ 7 'I• o'• : / A rrqt,ry 1 Y ya� . .. : . . , . , . , , . , ... , L, ,- Supplemental Informrlon ' . , . v. . . • • , • February 9, 1993 . . ,• . . , . ' . . . . . . •- .. • , . . . ,.., . • .. . . . . .. . „ ,••. - Measures that will be used to minimize impacts to the waterway or wetland. . ,$) . • , . Erosion control measures such as silt fences and other measures consistent with „ standards adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) of Washington County (RO , , ,, 91-47) and the City of Tigard will be used throughout the construction process. In fact, ' such measures have already been installed on the property to minimize erosion and ., \. siltation of Red Rock Creek and its associated wetlands from site disturbance rem fiting •, . from the removal of the homes. . . , - In addition, utility plans for the project include storm water control measures and torm .,. water quality treatment systems consistent with USA and City adopted standards. • 0• SUPPLEMENTAL WETLAND IMPACT INFORMATION . General Description of Wetlands: , . , ., .- . ' 1 There are two wetland areas identified in the IES Wetland Delineation. The main , 1 ., wetland associated with Red Rock Creek (Wetland #1 - IES Report) will ncri b1/41 ilnl....A.,,...; 1, by the proposed fill. A second wetland (Wetland#2- IES Report) will be filled as a result ' •,. t, .: of this proposed fill. This is an isolated wetland (depression) located east of Red Rock . ^ ', 4 . Creek in the bottom of a linear swale and extends westerly into a small depression that .. ' is perched on the slope above the stream corridor that separates this depression from • . , I ' ,- the overflow creek corridor. Water is trapped in this depression for long enough periods , ... of time to create hydric soil conditions. Vegetation is primarily a grass meadow , •. including field horsetail and creeping bentgrassi Hydric soils in both the "A" and "B° . . . .- horizons, soil texture, cracking soils and time of year of the evaluation were used as indicators of assumed positive hydrology, . . . . . Resource Replacement Mitigation ''. . ., . i A three-celled emergent marsh/shrub scrub wetland system will be constructed along the east bank of Red Rook Creek, near the point vvhere the new Dartmouth Road will cross the creek The proposed mitigation site is located west of the proposed water , .. quality treatment pond, which is to be constructed as part of the commercial development. ' . P . r . . rl 0. .■ ry , . 0 / : y . . . , ,: „ I I, ' i ' . `‘. --1 . ' .;\ '-, ' ' t.' '. ' • t ..' ,,, , (t• . . I • ' • ' • r ,. • Supplemental inform mon Februaly g 1993 • The Mitigation Plan will utilize surface waters from the Iwater quality treatment facility • and seep waters from an underdrain system under the commercial center to provide • a necessary water to create hydric conditions and support the wetland plantings. As ,. water overflows a berm and outlet structure from they water quality treatment pond, it wiii sheet-flow across an apron, enter into a swale between two of the new wetland ponds f and flow into the lower two ponds. Water from the underdrain seepage system will ono into the upper of the three ponds and during high water conditions, will eventually flow ; through all three ponds. The movement of water through the three ponds is designed to go through a mix of rush • and sedge plants and wet tolerant grasses. With beans separating one punk Irom another, water,will flow across a shrub/scrub, emergent marsh/grass arsa, ,i, the water creating a tertiary polishing effect to already treated surface water. Water onI' the berms, because of the elevation and length of saturation, will support a mix of • marginally wet to wet shrub plants with a wOt grass ground cover. 1, 4 • , As water enters each pond, it is trapped in the lower elevations of the exoavatuc.:, ,at creating an emergent marsh habitat, with pockets of deeper open water along bothC' ends. Overflowing water eventually flows through some intensified shrub/scrub vegetation until it reaches Red Rock Creek. • r , . The areas between, and Dartmouth Road will be I he etween the new emergent ponds a e planted with mixed shrub/scrub plants. The area to the far north will be planted with wetwtolerant R I� a, shrub/tree communities to create an additional wetland habitat type and provide a 2 physical and visual separation between the wetland area, Red Rock and the • development l area to the east •. • ',� . The com bined mitigation ation features will encompass 0,68 acres �g ���square feet) or an I I;I , area 4.3 times larger than the area impacted, . r • • I +P i lye_ • •yam 1 //N • ' r • ;', �rx« • • • . ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS •i :•\'' '4. .. , . . w r ,: Steven Kroo .1° { •. 11930 SW 72nd Ave. Tigard OR 97223 , Jane & John R, Connet , 8416 SW 57th Ave. • Portland OR 97219 Mary A. Fegles MI,, 11720 SW 72nd Ave. • ''`:.d Tigard OR 97223 • Western-Duff Tigard Partners 10080 N. Wolfe Road #310 • Cupertino CA 95014 • • , • : �° Tom Moyer Theaters 703 Broadway#605 . Vancouver WA 98660 J Juanita Amacher 11680 SW 72nd Ave. , �' Tigard OR 97223 ',.• ( Thomas L & Larrrie P. Noble ..•,„, 11750 SW 72nd Ave. • Tigard OR 97223 ,• Hugh S. &Anna Belle Mahon h •j: 11780 SW 72nd Ave: . , ,i, Portland 'OR 97223 � Lynn O. & Mary C. Lewis 11860 SW 72nd Ave: ,. Tigard OR 97223 ' Gordon f Martin i • 12285 SW 72nd Aver , Tigard OR 97223 Louise Agnes Hedgepeth ' 11990 SW 72nd Ave. Tigard OR 97223 J , . . UPEIWALU Holdings, Inc. , Atth: John Wald q Box 1243 ' IViinne'apalis MN 5544E . � I .1,',IC N; • I rt !�■1 I i • ' . . • 1 . • . .. ,.. . ("'...: • 1. '• . (''''' • . , • , a 4 t Y it 1 . y + • V 1��., , • " ,• • {tp{,. I . FF a' Wetlands Mitigation i' • and Compensation Plan For X Market M it CUB Foods arket Site , • SW 72nd 2nd Avenue 1 Tigard, Oregon : Super Valu Stores, Inc. 3601 State Street ; r' r~ Salem, Oregon 97309 h by I r1,� 1 IES Assbe±atesl�� ); . 1514 Mui:rhead Avenue Olympia, WA 98502 (206) 4 6 } FAX (206)(206) 943-2791 I February 5, 1993 • • 1 , a `1 ;. S'. •a ♦ �' • • • • • • • ,rte' . Table of Contents I • I I Y ✓ Introduction . -•`; • 2.0 M i tigtionConcept • Y • • 2.1 Component 1 O • • • • • • • • • O P • O • • Y 3 J w. 2.1 1 Grading Plan i, • . • • • a • 4 1 • 2.2 Component 2 Y • Y P •/ • 2.2.1 Grading Plan • . . 4 • • • � I 2.3 Component .3 b o a Y Y • .I • • 3.0 Planting Plan' • • . Y • 6 3.1 Components 1 and 2 • . • • • P • i Table 1 Emergent Marsh Plant Species • 8 ,,. 1•. Table 2 Component 3 Plant Species 10 4.0 Monitoring and Contingency Plan • 12 L Y Y ', 4.1 Monitoring Plan • .° • • • • P 1 4.1.1 Monitoring Schedule • • • • Y • . 14 "x: 4.}1 y�.�2(� Monitoring, Reporting • P Y o 16 • 4.2 Con Mingen Plan lan • Y O • O P ♦ O Y Y O P 17 I trr• kr 1 V V •1'' • 1 t' , 4 I 1 • n• I♦ ryry i r .4.Y • .l 4�v r y I ' •� �, `...•. I I` �r. 1 ♦.t' ` 1 1 1 1 • ''/ r I , _ 'TM, 4 vr.,' Vct ♦ 77 {. . •, $S e d' • �; {, C (. '2,` • . Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ ♦ ,. Enhancement Plan ` CUB Foods Market Site �vX,,February 5, /993 1 cs; 1.0 Introduction Based on field studies conducted by Ills Associates, two ,,`, • wetland areas were identified on the proposed CUB Foods Market I , site located west of 72nd Avenue and east of Red Rock Creek in Tigard, Oregon. The larger of the two wetlands assoc , ter � with Red Rock Creek is to be left undeveloped in the ' ' construction plans for the, property. ! The second wetland is a small, 6, 900 square foot, I ',-4 isolated wetland in the west-central portico of the site, that was cleared during the initial '" � t clearing of the site and would { •,A be filled during the proposed development. (See Wetlands /,, •, Delineation, Evaluation and Impact Analysis Report, I I �; Associates, 10/26/92) . f^ To compensate for the losses associated with this • wetland, a Wetland Compensation/Enhancement Plan has been ;: . designed within the high reaches of the overflow area, along ' '��•' the east side of the creek. The proposal is to incorporate two water sources into a series of three small pond/emergent l' • „ ,• marsh areas within the wetland boundary. ,' The compensation/enhancement area is divided into three � segments: (1) an overflow emergent marsh curtain between th e ' water quality treatment pond and 2 of the mitigation I r ' n, plan; (2) a series of three linear excavated emergent marsh 1 . 1 . • . i, ij• iii 1 40' • • . . • y M rMiti �ation and Com ensa6.ion/ , �'etlar�d g' p � • 1, 'Enhancement Plan ,. cUE Fopds Market Site A February 5, 1993 : • ponds located parallel to Red Rock Creek, between the development site and Red Rock Creek; and (3) an area to be planted to a wetland shrub/scrub community to increase habitat . diversity. I' Components 1 and 2 would be 0.38 acre or 2.5 times larger ,`�y than the isolated wetland to be filled with the development of the site. Component 3 consists of 0.3 acres of an area that will be planted with shrubs and small trees with no grading, tilling or disturbance of the existing system, other than the .. holes dug for the plants. The combined systems of these three components will encompass 0.68 acres (29, 620 sq. ft. ) or an area 4.3 times larger than the area to be impacted. 2.0 tigation Concept The mitigation plan is divided into three components, onents> �. each with a significantly different design. Components 1 and 2 will include grading, berxt creation and re-vegetation, with , . emergent marsh plants and a hydrological connection between em and an overflow s' ' � � �the surface e � water run-off �treatment system . connection with Red Rock Creek. The design of Component 3 is • ,, strictly a planting plan sh owing the place m ent of different r , species and the size • r aa spacing • n number and of ',each,. • • it i ii i J i •,. \.+ ,• " " '. d '. • • ,yy. •, ,• • WETLAND f�.P.t�111NG LEGEND fD�Q� 0 Re f• �i1. C A .�. ' anAw..•.A rs 5r= wdaniX stecem 12 (Dm •m� - , . ( .. ♦ rr•w,.� 1%3 ''1e• 2 • •, ./ swuw,sma ca+cz as wrA 1 uo 1e y 12(Penal t acn+1A sma¢ ne1LVS iaveonlDS' ' - To te• I / 11 I iT♦'1:i 1. "0,• r� rMO-frU+eumral zaccus Amm� - Soo ed y / SKki POU;cc • PDTA�A'%T117+i CKtTMA/1)3 .. Da0 Y2• (2' •� re, �{ '�r•0 , „` i. ®LK.A eet0♦+ SN1X 17 TCJS')SrS 1 cel(�rr,1 1.20 o rf■ • 1 * 1 , ,'♦i/ (:. .�e . .. aootxe nose nose uVMANA 2 teO 2:1,. ✓ W � + ;6 ,u.. MAo,,D.N g1ATKGV3 Da 4, 13r• +i1' 9 i4 ,. ,fa••a,R71 D4Y'r•o0a tX}Un)Y Stq.a+rnnr• tb t _ . ,- f.'', �nur+neny Ca+ A x1dAe71ATA z au 10 10 n. SCe4Lt_ 1" 20 L 9 {� C ' Se'DAR:DON SLI1NLLaeR71Y, elALSd4�.Y2+g1 e1,l.roalA t R. e la R. i_�� AIL' � I a �^� • \ 1 U �.•0:1 1)NNC dMIC , 1, AC01....M1 A R� 2$ '0 R•, ' ri•' Ili...Q.. J (CI Qom, 4 ' ( � 1f13-n.0 o artnu+t MKS �J }. �'' _1 ., i t snnawnr+ r:At is 4 rt, -- 12 nY nrHUS wrow.Nn' Y1a a rr. (� • 7���'� ���i�� • CF) EXISTING TREES LEGEND �� Q � ra rrn�ad�t 177,' d:;:::;,':,, i�� ,1 •4.9+ ,OftC0C0 ASN ' ' ,• , �.v;no, nu.at NergNpRN, �� ����� m .... ..11►.,� • .to. PA0rIC Meta« ' ��1�•• y `� 8••I •. �i,1l� m 'ON,—SITE PLANTING LEGEND 16 A$H• s ;: 7% : ( iM !�iiii`' . camel N, Ira-R rc b . , � � N� 911£ S7'dCa{4 I .R/. ou�tuCT•�'r� •��RC�''y �.,��,��►1 11 • . � ,Arr.aAx,Asa IAASS+US D>grJl,ops 11Areoe000 .,CAL,ow so*at Q C% WI �+ '•lN1 ire)�+''•4SI, ,o sn1s1 u1�.c Arn1 nuear.,Ira%MT z"CAL,J. 3'-4 0.a ,j/ r, 6 ,y 'l�''�1►�' �' .. 'V (7y (�� i9 q►1 v �) epos claWeiVN r)0,OAn,a sro+ )a amp�� . r•, resmm AU ceoAa muu nxAra 41',44 011 sr ae • �� t • 03,04311.2 V100100111' rlsuMMAlu roan$+wurx!r 24•-3o" ,•o, 16 ASH• .� or ii.� ,\.-� . . e JMAM:SC NOU.Y AU U01At2'cc it x.' a C+1L, 4 0,6, /� 1i1/� r 4 ,...a pi pwu,1.00 VAR,OUCc tl- ;� 1 , •! ,� � 21*,svnrao„ T-n`QC. / f� 1' ' •' OonetxN 0!1)+'C' UAk4GL.DUrowu J aAl., 4''a•0. '�8` Q a" 1� W' 1y, . \� 7t1�,ii!,,■ 9eorru wrowN lM)RCL '' 'mn+us t�?naw+Asts'arta wTKCn•' 14"-14• 3 ac 0 r i d i -0�1 6,•.n,•o�eoTaNe/4nm Con:moa,i.'Wro 2 0A1- z el'' �8 1�7' P 1 t . •-•/S ARK G,.•' , .. ' )■tar.la DDC•oca ammo a)OtoNrexe•morn• s 0.u. e•o•4 r� V 7 . ))SSG; .�' ' -e-+osr o bvJ onntum+r o.rteaas)YiNatna nasty ato K s eN r ae f • ® 7 �M I a' `�I '''� �. aH.fhAIrJ1Mq BnARra SrrltA aUlU DA!9V0.40111W' 2 C.Af. 1'0. 1 � �.�Q ■ i 6 1' �,' �,tMo J RY eOt4•+CAsrat Cotwer 1rn 01.4Cm 1 ck, ]0' 4� 4• ® ' .. d g{ e ��1• %'' 'Q naOMA has[ Rc$4 MUMANA 2 CJJ. J'• •'�'"�� 1' A O 6 A!! a t-+ 'iti% ,>' ASH 0, e (O fit(;rT L� �► n sG 5H 10 b EXISTING'FtdsHES AT[A .usn 0 -1 1�r is Ai I a . =A5H ti�3 d .' A�r, �t(;;1 r y/ASH/ �'II'( q AA �! '�°i1 1:^ 1 'a a:. 10,HAWTHOR• ‘ ,: ,.,,y, . . �A ,' t ,. (►lCI 4,il ,i',; i t f V� '� Ai �� tryl r -�• • lb HAW ;,6 a y' a. , �,,t,,,,,'' ��)1, ii 1 , . t� . • 7 1T r' ' ° •24 ASH v row. A� 't) V �S'; 1:;� ∎"'* 5-5 r• V i;t?1! t g7 i,t4e.i...,(0113,91 i .' t", ' , ' ' . 46. . '; . ti..454* .r ''N'' '1.41.11 tii f'P 1 PI r"1 r I t Al v,t•r^1 . 1* / ��•c 4) ,j: ,� SH ,„0k1 i 0 � r`}}}' ,y p A5H1 c.��? 1 A rGr t o t3 SH 4 .�c►!�;.�. `�`�4. .1 e1� I��' `7 �1�:' t ` JI,nO! �+ 'Y r:� �tr��.'ri ." i �'f >T1 / (��y ► .'f 1w AsH9 < ,�.�� )�. t+. t•7r '� _ 7 74 1 �4� ■ G�1 .,13 LQ. 15Y�•4 V•~ f1 ,s`T%�0�".fhRl 'r1�\ . e�r CC-17*--'` •• r' '\ • ks.a8,c� 7d '�_.,"� � ,_.1,ti 1• 18.2, ,•p.y ` ' �' • • A? ,,,t5 ;., 114 . WATER QUALITY FA L '1.'*,rS.� S; ,�!i 71 A t 1 • . ••* 1741+4, ��`, �+,n,1 � I r 1 ' t ,• 6�' �e��+ ir�4 N�( 1 ' , `,,N.N.,,,,,,,,,.. ,/41, , A. ..„. " ..'--4,;..eit,...;,..4....,.... , • ..,,,,„,...,. i „:.,',,Ill ,..,,i,,L , �� ix 11 all d • w� erA � LI �.., H.;ITii3A71b t� , ll 1511 A' i;iad A IM'Ar. + .1.1. b.d ���jj�1• y PLAN' d�1a116.W: r•t�M,����� 1�1�7'L�l�s1 �J LEA! �4d�JJJd1 imp t2mtlss*mfd iil �1 atr�wl�,�'• r cum PIA�J1l�1 PLAN �� nat►1r5,aa►i r • CrTY ►u lA a2 ..+n.°" i nMi Auto»w :;.j„n . 44 v ;ZWetland• Mitig'ation'and Compensationf" • . Enhancement Plan CUB Foods. Market Site February 5, 1593 2.1 Component 1 Component 1 consists of the integration of the sub- surface and surface water collection area to Component 2. Water leaving the water quality treatment facility will discharge from a point near the north end; of the facility onto a flat, vtit emergent marsh/grass area, extending for ' approximately 210 feet, from north to south along the west side of the water quality pond berm. A wet g rass/emergont marsh combination will be densely planted in this area to stabilize the area and reduce erosion. The planting scheme for this area is the same as designed for the area directly west of the water quality ponds and east of the surface water swale, connecting the, northern-most pond to the two southern- most ponds of Components z. 2.1.1 Grading Plan The grading and Planting � � n exhibit lbit is provided� by ' A 1pha gngtneer 1ng Portland, Oregon (Exhibit 1 and back sleeve) . 2.2 Component 2 is the main emergent marsh � . Component ;a. t g portion of the ' 'mitigation/compensation plan. It consists of three isolated depression , paralleling the east side of Red Rock Cree s ar k. Pond 1, northern pond, lies north of the , tkie nor p retained emergent marsh d. (softrush) wetland and due west of the u , • • Wetland 'Miti ation and Compensation/. g p Enhancement Plan ' • 1 CUB Foods Market Site February.5, 1993 ( retaining wall. It has a deep water component at elevation h 168, grading up to elevation 174. It is connected to Pond 2 through a linear Swale leaving the south end at elevation 173 1, ` and extending ,along the west face of the development site and a the water quality y treatment and dike. Pond 2 is linear from northeast.' to southwest, with its deepest elevation at 1I elevation 167, i.e. , 5 feet below surrounding surface • elevation. Water collects in this pond and then flows - s westerly into Pond 3, which is a similar depression with a bottom elevation of 165 for a maximum depth of 5 feet. The � water leaves Pond 3 in a linear pond/ depression that extends 1'` . westerly to Red Rock Creek. << Pond 1 is fed by an 8-inch pipe that flows continuously, '. draining the groundwater seeps (that exist on the project the This site) �to e easy. � �`�'h�, flow runs continu©usly year-round and runs near full during the winter months. Water will fill Pond I 1 and maintain an open water component in the center that has , n e an approximate sutface area of 1600 sq. feet. As water elevation• rises,I water will flow southerl y.r1 y. The slopes of ., Pond' 1 ate 3:1 to provide l a gradual slope and growing area for ,- . emergent marsh plants. During high storm periods, water may � . overflow the pond, directly to the west, where it will sheet flow through Component 3 in an exist in g grass wetland � area � � �' , , into Red Rock Creek. The water, as it discharges to the south t d 9' , in the grass-lined swage, will overflow in a gradual sheet 1 flow, across the eXisti nq rush '.wetland area. This wader will ' replace the se ep water that historically r cal ly ed this s area from the east. There will be an increase in frequency, duration . and of flooding ng into this over what existed �� nd� volume � odd, 'area � . . 4 • • ' 7 1 h • . ' Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ . ' Enhancement Plan . CUE Foods Market Site • February 5, 1993 previously. This should modify the area slightly and increase . the potential for the wetter tolerant species that are mixed I 1 K} with the softrush, to expand and provide greater habitat diversity. When water reaches Pond 2 it will form a small open-water pond of approximately 1200 sq. ft. surface area and 4 foot r : depth. With the dense clay soils on site, water should stay � . in both Pond 1 and Pond 2 for significant periods of time. When Water reaches elevation 171, it will overflow to the east • into Pond 3. • o As the water flows into Pond. 3, it will fill a smal:l +: depression with an approximate 800 sq. ft. surface area, to a p feet, before i will overflow. During depth �of 4 � � t 1 start to g peak flows, when the ponds reach their maximum depth prior to discharge, Pond 3 will exceed 4 feet in depth. ,j. When water stops flowing in in the spring, or the level�:e g e of � r . water decreases to the point where discharges from the water , q xali t y treatment pond and from Pond 1 are no long readhing ' . Ponds 2 and 3i the ponds will drop ih elevation to the deep water areas, whit will maintain open water or wet emergent h n marsh for significant � s ' he �. ma � �areas ��fo � periods of time. because of t dense clay soils and high water table. � a� so�. • w 0 . , wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ ' Enhancement Plan 'CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 22.1 Grading Plan I A Wetland Mitigation Grading and Planting Plan exhibit is provided by Alpha Engineering, Portland, Oregon (See Exhibit 1 and back sleeve) . , I 2.3 Component 3 , Component 3 consists of shrub/scrub plants surrounding Component 2 wetland ponds. The purpose is to provide diversity, cover. and I a physical/visual ;separation between the wetland pond units and Dartmouth Road to the south, and also between the ponds and the development to the north and east. 4�ri f 3.0 Planting Plan r{ • 3.1 Components 1 and 2 • The entire area will be over-seeded with a grass mix as soon as grading is completed. . The intent is to stabilize the area and create a dense enough root mass to compete with the expected invasion of reed canarygrass (Pha 1aZi s artndi naooa) � • and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens) : The grass mix will include species that have a diversity , a' of growth patterns, being able to survive extended flooding dzig on as • � ��� as extended periods for� durations,� well p of' dryness. • I Species common to the ar ea, even though not necessarily native I; �i V a I t 0 Wetland Mitigation arid,.CompensatiohJ ' • 'Enhancement Plan • u, CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 . , t o western Oregon, a r incorporated n t o provide that growth. The grass mix will include: Redtop, Agrostis alba 25% Red fescue Festuca rubra 25% Oregon bentgrass Agrostis oregonensis 25% Meadow foxtail Alopecurus pratensis 10% Common velvet grass Holcus lanatus 10% . Perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne 5% The entire area will be seeded at a rate of 100 pounds to the acre: The site will be fertilized with a 10-10-10 organic fertilizer mix ' and over-planted with Annual ryegrasu (Lolium multifiorum) at 20 pounds to the acre. Depending upon the time of constructions the area may be = required to have intermittent irrigation to stimulate growth v •"'. of the grass species. If the work is completed late in the fall, a single watering, shortly after construction (using a ) sufficient to force ce grasses to water truck), may be � su cie t t o� ��the • germinate. If an irrigation system is to be installed, the emergent g 1. g marsh planting will occur during grass seeding. However, if "'. it iS late in i the season, the planting will Wait until the beginning of the rainy y eason. 2mergent marsh plants its will be 12 to 18-inch inch center: . ai planted ' on � A of sun tolerant with high .biofiltration and Micro-organism habitat , species,, `' values, been selected. � These are indigenous to the area, have� 9' � portions bein hard. invaders i � � orta�on.� g �' .. The species with Y'1 wet areas. mix is included in Table 1 {{ ht; } , ' r ; • 1 • r s .• • C 4 ,„„/”' Wetland. Mitigation and Compensation/ PPP ' Enhancement Plan CUB Fodds Market Site February 5, 1993 } Table 1 Emergent Marsh Plant Species : p Common Name Scientific Name Number Spacing (Soft rush Juncus effusus 1500 18" . l I i (Slough sedge Carex obnupta 1500 l8 . �s 1500 18" � u ne adens a..� • (Sierra rush Juncus� v j . 2 (Small-frt bulrush Scirpus microcarpus 1500 18" 1, (Wapato Sagittaria latifolia 1000 12" (Hard-stem bulrush h S c�r P u s a utus 50 0 ] 8. 3 _Sago pondweed Potamogeton pectinatus 1000 12" I Small-fruit bulrush, Wapato and slough sedge will be planted into Pond 1 along with the grass mix. Soft rush, slough and Sierra rush will be planted into Pond 2 and • 3. Hard-stem bulrush will be planted near the outlet of Pond 3 and in the over-flow channel that leads to Red Rock Creek. . , The outer periphery along west edg e of Po nd 3 and the south edge of Ponds 1 and 3 will be planted with a shrub community to provide a shrub/scrub wetland com ponen t. Wet } . slow growing shrubs have been chosen to reduce the possibility of the plants over,-taking and eliminating the potential of the emergent marsh vegetation thrive and proposed. e � e etation �to � +� func�;ian �as The e xis ttn g vegetative along the creek, both oth 1 ' through south property, were ough `the property and to the sou�� of . examined ed to identify those species which were '� �n txt3.fy� "t� functioning determine growth patterns. in this area and to � � � � '` � �� � � eras. e; /�,' • • µU.. * (7 ' • • • • Wetland. Mitigation and Compensation) • . Enhancement Plan • CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 • Based on this analysis, the following plant species were selected for this area: ID # Common Name Scientific Name Size Number Spacing, 4 Sitka willow Salix sitchensis 1 gal . 30 6 ft 5 Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 2 gal 180 3 ft The combination r of the plants will be mixed to provide a • dense, low hedge effect along the edge of the wetland/ponds. 3.2 Component 3 Component 3 consists of a shrub/tree/plant combination to buffer the wetland from the proposed Dartmouth Road, from the north 'end of the development and to provide a transition from . the cre ek into the emergent marsh mitigation/ compensation '• • area. Due to road height and visibility constraints, specie composition consists of plants that are lower ,growing trees or Medium-to-low growing shrubs. The list of plants is included as Table 2. • ■ 4 ..•f.i.rm,.. C.xsiw.:....H r..xL.!J Ht'.i..J.AF.Ma.-1.:.,t'LYYxknV—.W I .xr w,V .ter.4v..:-.rY >-i rl•._ru a.. ....+..r' . • .. } jf 71 4 ( ' Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ . Enhancement. Plan . • CUB Foods Market Site ' February 5, 1993 1r Table 2 - Component 3 Plant Species ID # Common Name Scientific Name Size Number Spacing ,' 6 Black hawthorn Crataegus douglasii 4 ft 20 15 ft. 4 Sitka willow Salix sitchensis 5 ft 20 10 ft. 7 Red-osier' dogwood Cornus stolonifera 2 gal 60 6 ft. 8 Twinberry Lonicera involucrata 2 gal 10 10 ft. 9 Saskatoon Ar O1 anchier serviceberry alnifolia 4 ft 6 10 ft, I 10 Vine maple Acer circinatum 4 ft 25 6 ft, 11 Red--flowering 1' currant gibes sanguineum 2 gal 15 4 ft. ' • t 1. 12 !Chokecherry Prunus virginiana E ft 10 E ft. ,r, 10 i. , 0,,r7 , , ' \ J7 t .., A a A o ',p , • . (7 (4' ' . . :./, , a ..w..i,.. ..rl.Y.w ...-...».....e--4 ................x. _, ..- . ,.--r,,,i . ....,.. «......l It....F .ew•at.-w„-✓,i....,.«... .u.... ., i G,.n.......,u ren,F...,,,. , ...'. �,1 .. Wetland Mitigation and Compen,satien/ .. Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site • February 5, 1993 All plant species will be multi-stemmed. Potted plants will have been potted for a minimum of 6 months prior to planting, All plants will be subject to inspection by an ;lgency inspector and a • c',� property owners consultant. Shrub plants will be planted in the winter, when the plants are dormant, to reduce shock„ Shrub planting will occur after grading, seeding and marsh specie plantings are completed. The area between the south end of the . 'I emergent marsh wetland and Dartmouth Road will not be planted until Dartmouth Road construction is completed. This will reduce the , ,3 "+ potential for destruction of the planted material during the • I. construction of Dartmouth Road. „ 44 • li V • I • , I l r 1i ^-. •.n..n r..wr»u urn x,.t,. ., ....,...., w ....,. . ».....,r.. .... ...... .,.. ... t . ...,n .., ... -.... .... + •... .,, ..u. ..,, .. ..., ■ Q Ty •• ,Y . 6 f • Wetland, Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan ,., . CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 • 4.0 Monitoring and } Contingency Plan I C 4.1 Monitoring Plan A three year monitoring program will be established for the mitigation site. It will be initiated when the grading and first year planting are completed,, j • At the completion of construction and planting, a Time-Zero GI a Report will be completed by the contractor and the wetlands consultant, i.e.., design biologist. The Time-Zero Report will identify problems in obtaining materials; differences of sizes of �' materials than were originally a ca,lled 'for r replacement materials, v if necessary and any other conditions that varied from the restoration plan. At the initiation of the Time-Zero Report, a series of p r I ti permanent photo points and vegetation measurement plots will be established. The photo points will be designed to give a representation of the entire site during each stage of the monitoring p ro9 ram. Photo points will b e es tablishe d with • permanently marked stakes. An instruction sheet, with the i I direction and number of photographs to be taken, will be provided to allow continuit y if the monitor cha nges over the years. c'I f Vegetation plots will be established in each one of the • � habitat types to provide consistency in quantitative measuring ;a • plant.of each Plo t- s i n the marsh h areas will be fi ve feet ,.'. . in with �` I diameter,b all plants measured and counted within the five- • I I , 1 I I , Y • 1, a 4' V d . , I int! \ • ' Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 199 foot plot and identification of general conditions in an area 30 ! feet in diameter surrounding the plot. Thirty foot diameter plots will be established in the shrub/tree area Species composition and percent of total cover and canopy cover will be measured at each point. In addition, invader species that were not planted will be noted and their . density recorded. Records will be ]kept of non-native invader species, particularly reed canarygrass. At the point where a noxious invader species becomes dominant, a contingency plan will be initiated to take this into consideration. Planting locations of species proposed osed in the mitigation plan , have been selected based on anticipated pon d an d g roundwater , levels. The success of plantings will be dependent upon t . maintenance of these anticipated water levels and limited el disturbance in the maintenance of the retention/detention pond. Monitoring of hydralogic conditions in the created wetland will consist of observations ofwpond elevations and seasonal inundation of the wetland plantings. This will be accomplished by the establishment of a monitoring schedule that allows the monitor to be on site during the non-growing season. 13 l , 4 • Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ • Enhancement Plan cum r'000s marKet ;3.te �V February 5, 1993 . .; 4.1.1 Monitoring Schedule Year 1 Year l consists of the growing season following the first year of construction. . The first site visit will be conducted at green-up, •I approximately mid-May, to determine the initial survival of the shrubs and trees on the site. ,':t will include a plant-by-plant inspection with a notation of any species which appear to be stressed, dead or delayed in initial growth. Photos will be taken of the site per the established photo schedule, which will be • , created at the initiation of the Time-Zero Report. A second site visit will be in approximately mid-June to check . germination growth of the grass and sedges and to evaluate the need • for first year emergency, irrigation. If at that time, it is determined by the monitor that the area is not receiving sufficient water to provide adequate germination and initial growth, 4 temporary �irrigation system will be established. The irrigation • : system co uld b e a temporary pipe system from a well or a community ux�ty water system or water brought in b , tank truck, • ` � ' g in �' depending on the estimated amount and frequency of watering required and the. resources available. Photos and plant plot surveys will also be completed at this time t s will site visit ii The third � ,� � occur in early to mid-August, depending pend�ng ,on weather conditions. Ifth the steer is extremely hot, ' the visit will occur earlier in the season; whereas if it is a cool. summer, T er, the �isit will oOdur towards the end of August. The visit ability purpose of this ., �. be to evalua'te the abi�.it: of the new ur " �t w��; � �" \ i ., .. ..u. .,u. .wa t .•w=ia.w...aa...w.0 .ww Wet;!.and Mitigation and Compensation/ • Enhancement Plan r • CUB ,'cods Market Site ti, . February 5, 1993 vegetation to adjust to first year stress and summer heat conditions. r Site visit 4 will be completed at the end of the growing . season.` This visit will determine the success or failure of the plants at the end of the first year. At this time, all dead plants will be noted and recorded. Thir information will be supplied to, the planting contractor for revegetation during the dormant winter period. • A last site visit will he conducted toward the latter part of ' December, or at the end of a major storm event, if one should to evaluate the hydrology occur, � tra�luat ��drolog�r �and the� relationship��of the high • water to the vegetative communities. It is anticipated that it will not be, possible to take certain, photographs at this time; however, these will be supplemented with water level photographs and general photographic coverage to document conditions during the visit. Year 2:. Year 2 will consist of three site visits. The first site visit will be during rg the spring, i.e. , during ran g g reen-u p r to evaluate over winter success and to inspec t plants ! th at were dur ing the dormant winter season as part of L* the revegetation construction contract. I 5 i A second site Visit will be completed in mid-summer to • evaluate summer groWth characteristics and revegetation g et ation and to monitor the and can,op y c o".ver per th� performance standards. 15 • ii • r. V C 'r Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 A final site visit will be completed at the end of the growing { , season to determine summ - Success. Site' r Year 3 will include, three site visits ..e�.te V1.S�.t S � Year 3 1 and 2 will be the same as those outline in Years 2. The third visit will be the final visit. At this time, it will be determined by the monitor, with assistance from the • appropriate regulatory agency, whether the site is meeting the a, performance standards and goals ' as identified in the Mitigation • Plano If it is determined that the site has met the goals, no additional work will be done. If it is determined that the site has not yet met the goals, a contingency plan meeting will be established between the developer, wetland consultant, contractor, monitor and appropriate regulatory agency, to modify the project so it will can the performance standards. This could include additional plantings, replacement of plant species and/or an extension of the monitoring period. e 4,1.2 Monitoring Reporting Annual monitor reports will be sub mit te d t a the developer and appropriate regulatory agency by November ,15th. The monitoring „ photographic g P reports will include h®tea ra hic documentation fer each site visit, with photo descriptions and a plot-by-plot analysis of the vegetation pl.ot s» T he re p or t wi ll generalize the ove rall conditio nS and address the effectiveness of the Mitigation Plan in meeting the performance standards. 16 • . , II 1 l l Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/.— • Enhancement Plan . CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 A final report will be completed by December 15th of final year and will include a summation and final analysis. If at that time, the performance standards have not been fully satisfied, but the monitor believes that the site is viable and growing and that the standards will be, met, it should be noted. The final report will be the determination of whether the site is a success and whether the construction bond can be released �', 4.2 Contingency Plan If the created wetland and upland buffer plai stings do vlot moct established performance goals for vegetative cover, plant survival, drainage and water quality controls, revisions to the -plan will he made and implemented. Depending on the problems addressed, activities could include changes ,n soil or hydrologic conditions ns and/or the replanting of wetland or upland buffer vegetation. This constitutes a Wetland Compensation/Enhancement Plan by IES Associates for the Super Valu Market 'project located on 72nd Street, Tigard, Oregon. R. L. Van Wormer Senior Biolog,1.st IES Associates 17 s r.n.n,mrr.r.r,r r r••%; 1d1'nan nn.n.n.n r.n.r.•h• r r11 ,d ,.-:a'4.k;, ...x,.i�.tF•«:w...:.:.wSr•.i,«......,n.t..:+:..`,L�..'x!...a:!,......a:..;., • , DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Date: FE8Rt1,19,e '21/) 1793 • PUBLIC NOTICE • The following shall constitute public notice by the State of Oregon that the Department of Environmental Quality, pursuant to the requirements of Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act of 1977, PL 95-217 has been requested to certify there is reasonable assurance that the project described in the Public Notice No. , ,°c-P 7.2-10 will not violate applicable water quality standards. Comments regarding possible water quality effects of the proposed project shall be sent within 30 days to the Department of -.A: Environmental Quality, Water Quality Division, 811. S.W. 6th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204. • SA.\WC9\WC9738 {{ I I I ef» 811 SW Si xth.Avenue Pt rtla,nd,OT 97204.1390 (503)229.5696 TDD(503)229-6993 , er , A w. \ .Ga W ..,.•.-�._.. r�.Ai, (: ,,. d, \ .�.,.., r�...r.,.,,..». _-.,l.v,«..,.,.. ..lriiww r.4..._,.,�du.,.ari.::... „�1i.�.,..� ,.,,r A • S .YrYrr.wy C. S‘,, on o. RECEIVED PLANNING . I S E P 2 8 199 r. • I s September 22, 1995 DIVISION OF STATE LANDS •ro • Mr. Gordon Davis STATE LAND BOARD 1020 SW Taylor, Suite 555 JOHN A.KITZHABESi Portland, OR 97205 Governor. PHIL KEISLING Secretary of State • RE: Monitoring 16) ��,��HILL : Iortorrn .e Report R�'�72 , State Treasurer Dear Mr. Gordon: 775 Summer Street NE Salem,OR 97310-1337 . r • r � , �� � � � � 'Thauk you for submittal of the Second Annual Monitoring Report for Supervalu (503)378-3805 FA. ((.550°3)). � Stores (Permit No. 7216)on Red Rock Creek in.Tigard, Oregon. TTY 388 378-=4464515 After car efil review of t the report we find the area to be fi7nctio•n z n a s desired d with very successful vegetation establishment and wildlife usage This letter serves as official notification that you have complied with Condition to monitor the site and are found to be in compliance with your permit. Again, we commend your efforts to meet all requirements of the permit. If you y have any questions,please contact our office. Sincerely, a////&,-L a,2 William Parks Natural Resource Coordinator Field Operations h cc: � Tom�pho���tou; Oregon Department Fish cc, I ��tsr � of and��1c1,,lXfe Getty Black,US Army Corps of Engineers Dale flaslem,US Army Corps of Engineers City of Tigard Y ♦ S toM 1 43 clavisltr',doc ?fir f ^ .r l • • irk ik .,J rrj I { AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I I , II STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ( is 1 , being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depo e and say: (Please print) ( „ That I am a .v\«.7 The City of Tigard, Oregon I , Tha t I sI erved NOTICE OF PUSLI C HEARING FOR: •,, _.14.'That I served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: I I I I City of Tigard Planning Director _ `Tigard Planning Commission l Tigard Hearings Officer 4 ' Tigard rity Council . A copy (Public Hearing Notice/Notice of Decision) of whack is attached (Marked Exhibit "At° was mailed to each med a spins at the ddregs shown on the attached list named. t marked exhibit "B" on the 2.40'day of tA 19_1" , said notice NOTICE OF DECIgiox as he eto at~.ached, was posted.on an appropriate bulletin board e t n b and on the _���,�c�a�r of �Irr.'„ n I �.�3 `�� , and depra �,ted in. the United States Mail on the day of �(...lt , 19 .3' , postage prepaid. 4 I I I • a' . Prepared Notice I , Subsgnibed and sworn/affirm to me, on the )' day of � • Y Y F Y,rt='` t' •TAR PUBLIC -i O• ,�,�► • r� y �.rJ` My Commission y rites« -" M,71.•1#1 R + 4u r J,ar ` e Jti • • • F1 o rr Jf • 1 YY 0 1 1 ._ - ...y.,,s.�.h.y..'.a. . . W1 �'._.�..• hrr.r rN w1. /•A��r.a. ..Mt.JW.... CITY OF TIGARD . .County . . NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY, PLANNING COMMISSION . 1. Concerning Case Numbers) SDR 3- 90002,,'PDR 93-0001/SLR 9_3 4002/ . - SCE 93-0001 2. 1 Name of Owner: , Superalu Holdings Inc. Name of Applicant: Superyalu Stores 3. Address PO Box 12902 City Salem State OR _ Zip 97309 , 4. Address of Property: Northwest corner 0±-2E2222291-047 Dartmouth Street ' and SW 72nd,,�.13venue (address sat vet assi;ned . Tax Map and Lot No(s) . : 1S1 36DC, tax' lats 600, 2500, and 2501; portion of 1S1 ; 6CD,, tax lot 2.221,7_2221t22.12 of 2s1 1BA tax lots 100 and 100 5. Request: 1) p i t I eve' ment Review/Planned D ev 's men t Review �..,�,. conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an approximately, 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi-tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and '' an,approximately seven foot intrusion into the normallyl required 25 foot development setback from a wetland. A separate applic-::Ltion for wetland ' modifications is being requested from the Division of State bands. 3) S qn Code Exception approval is requested to"allow' 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth. Street and SW 12nd' Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the 1 r two ;signs. In addition, Sign Code ti Exoe Ora approval is requested to , 11 allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided } signs 'Whereas a combined'' sign area of 210 square feet would normally be p' permitted. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA: Site Development Review: 1 Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; »Planned Developm nt Code Section » section 18.80.120; Sensitive Lands Re'vie'w: , Rev�.e,-w. Code .�ec.txon 1 , 18.8(.040.D; Sign Code Exception: Code Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapters 18 62,, 118.100, 18.102, 18.106, ' 18.108, and. 18.114. 6. Action: Approval as requested '�X Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice w'as published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, I and mailed to: X The applicant and owner(s) X Owners of record within the required distance ' X The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies , . THE ... FINAL ON i.. o 9 �� 8. Final Uedzs.�.c3n T�iE DEC�'a�QN ��'�,� BE Fx '_April_24-� � N � 7_ ,1993 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. ' The adopted �: . conditions be obtained from the Plannin Department, Tigard City Hall, can adopted findings of fact, , l; 13125 sit Hall, P.O. Box '23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223• 'A' eat. Any party to the ion may appeal this decision 9 Y P _y lze', deco pp ` `on iii accordan ce1 ` 18°32. B) and Se 10 days after anotice is�giaen and with 1 290( Section 18 sent. The aappeal mmay be submitted lon City forms and must be accompanied pp fee ( by the appeal peal $815.00) ana txariscript' costs, (varies up to a maximuM of The deadline SforOfilin g of ai appeal ii 3 3 1 $ I . I � ,g lap 0 p ozn. ,A-p1`�:1 14. 10. �ue s' eions» if y o,u have any qu' e stxoys, please c all the city of Tigard Planning Department, 639-4171. o ■ • • . CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 93-05 PC A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR . DEVELOPMENT OF A SHOPPING PLAZA PROPOSED BY SUPERVALU STORES. , The Tigard Planning Commission has reviewed the a pp licant's Plans and narrative • materials, comments of reviewing agencies, ' and the Planning Division's staff t. report and recommendations for the application described below. The Commissionz'' held a public hearing for the purpose of receiving testimony on this application on March 22, 1993,. The Commission has based its decision on the facts, findings, and conclusions noted below. I. PROPOSAL U AL S , MAY CASE: CUB 80cpSL SUPLRVALIx 'HQLDINGS INC Site Development Review S sR93-0002 Planned. Development, Revie, PDR 93-0001 Sensitive Lands Review SLR 93-0002 Sign Code Exception SCE 93-0001 REQUEST: A request' for Planned Development Review/Site Development Review approval of plans for development of a 15© 000 s pP P P , q. ft., � single-story shopping plaza'on a 19.9 acre site. 1. Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow, development (a retaining wall and site grading) to intrude 7 feet into the required 25 foot buffer area adjacent to the wetlands adjacent to Red Rock Creek. Community Development Code Section 18.64.026.A states that land within 25 feet of an identified wetlands is considered as wetlands. All development is 'normally prohibited within wetland areas unless a Sensitive Lands Review permit is granted. Although not a part of this application, it is noted that the applicants have separately applied to the Oregon Division of j State Lands to fill an approximately 6900 square foot wetland. siglisigsje Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high freestanding Signs on both SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street whereas Community Development Code Chapter 18.114 would normally allow a total combined distributed between the twoSigns.height In addition, e ,Si Sign de Code Exception approval is requested to allow these two signs gns to have a combined sign area a' 2$0 square feet whereas a combined sign area of 210 feet is normally p ermitted. rValu S�` � APPhIC�AI�'�. Gordon E. Davis for St�pe. -ores � � � � �� � �� P.O. Box 8774 Portland OR 97201 WNErt.. Su P er �'al' u Bolding r .s Inc. 11840 Valle y View e ' a. Road Eden Prairie, MX 55844' OWNER: (Tax Lots 100 and 101) ` cordon R. Martin PO BOX 740 Gleneden Beach, OR 97808 FINAL ORDER - SDA 93-0002 CUB B F'QG1DS/SUP:ERVpcLU INA ge 1 / • • • i h 1 , • • " L .-«...... ....,.,._,«.....�„..._.,., ..,� ......�..,. ., ,.■■ ..�..!.:1.,,,.,._,._,�..,. ....,......,.•N,..l ,.11 d:,.,,-...,..».,.............. xl.•.,,.._.. ,, ...,. -.:,,. »Fr,,:.n,,,-,...,..al4......._., ..w .i..._.,.-..�.,,.,..d.� :.,,4,Yt,i .X....'.,;. .} M I' f• w •. 1 .tu tr, pp t LOCATION: Northwest corner of SW 72nd Avenue and proposed Dartmouth 1 rl. Street, (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; WCTM 1S/ 36CD, tax lot 2000; WCTM 2S1 1BA, tax lots 100 and 101. These parcels are listed as shown on the Washington County ■ Assessor's maps currently on file at the Tigard Community Developxnent Department. The Community Development Department 1 has previously approved several lot line adjustment j ' applications for these I' pp parcels so that the actual proposed development site after recording the surveys of these approved ¢1 , - • lot line adjustments will be bounded by SW 72nd Avenue on the i east, SW Dartmouth Street on the south, and Red Rock Creek on , • the west). I m PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial' ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G (General Commercial) and C-0 (PD)• (General t' Commercial with the Planned Development Overlay zone) See attached zoning map. 1, APPLICABLE LAW: Community Development Code Chapters 18.62, 18.80, 18.84, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, 18.150, and 18.164. 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: General l approval of all applications listed above f, subject to several, modifications and conditions of approval. SITE NAP/ZONING MAP: 4, \ ' .. H:, Ltfis.„);11,,,,,,,,„c, 1..,_____‘ 4 ...."/ \S 1 , AN 7G s.+�. Axe. . ( 4..- ii. III s' Ill III 11111111 1 1 �: S►1TEE Y' al f tl ♦ i 1 Ili M •.,"4"--1 „ . 1 Ili , , ME .. °ti ftbso , a II, hadiaL iM II• u i sm. t—jjr-PJ ---- 17 rJ . 0 . FINAL ORDER SDR 93-0 o� CUB PO0Us/S Page 2 G J" • • ,._,. .,,. ... .....,..,...... .,. ... ,. ,_,..,...................,...._.......,...,._.,....,.. .. ,...._.r� .,....,.,._.w .._r.,,,,...,..1i �..,., ,,.,.,.. _.....,, __.,_,....„a....„,a... , ,ism._.. �,,:... .�::.,,.1:,.:. ._..� ..... w . II. DETAILED APPLICATION, DESCRIPTION' Planning Commission final orders typically include a fairly detailed description of the existing site configuration, zoning, surrounding uses, and a detailed description of the proposal culled from staff's review of the development pland. With this application, however, the applicants have provided a very thorough narrative describing the site and surrounding properties, as well as a very detailed description of the proposed s. Therefore this order will not development and the necessary applications. . repeat this information already supplied by the applicants but will list the following as the exhibits to be considered as the applicants° statement: 1.' March 1, 1993 letter from Gordon Da vis to Randy Wools y, ' 2. January 28, 1993 letter from Gordon Davis to the Planning Division along with attached Narrative Description; I . N 3. Site Plan (sheet 1 of 4) and Grading Plan (sheet 2 of 4) dated March 1 . 1 1993 by Al ha Enineering, „ 4. � Utility Plan (sheet 3 of 4) by Alpha Engineering and Priest Engineering; 5. Elevation (sheet 4 of 4) by b' Planmark; 6. Landscaping Plan (sheet 1 of 1 by Alpha Engineering and Priest • P g ( Engineering). 7. Topographic Map of Site by Alpha Engineering; t 8. Tranaportatil Associates February, 1993;Foods Commercial enter by l. Kittelson & A y�, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE SITE AND GRADING PLANS THAT ARE UNDER REVIEW WERE SUBMITTED AS REPLACEMENT SHEETS SUBSEQUENT TO THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL. AS SUCH, THESE PLANS CONTAIN INCONSISTENCIES R WITH PLANS LISTED ABOVE T WITH THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. THE COMMISSION HAS CONSIDERRED THE SITE AND G TO THE EARLIER SUBMITTAL. ' E � SUPERSEDE 7 N NOTED THAT THE SITE PLAN REFERS TO FIVE SEPARATI IT IS ADDITIONALLY E S WHEREAS THE APPLICATION DOES NOT REFER TO ANY MINOR LAND LOTS P ' D PART NOR LOT, LINE ADJUSTMEN APPLICATION APPLICATION TO BE MADE AT THIS TIME SO AS RESULT IN SUCH TTO T APPI,ICATx � S TCJ RED`.. A LOT CONFIGURATION. THE APPLICANTS' AGENT, GORDON DAVIS, HAS TOLD STAFF THAT THE APPLICANTS MAY FOR APPRO T RECONFIGURE SITE INTO THE • FIVE LOTS IN THE FUTURE. HIANALYSIS CONSIDERS THE SITE AS ONE DEVELOPMENT SITE, site were In addition, the following ,. g re,.. t by owi doeti�nents relating to the ai viewed b staff prior to reviewing this application but were not included in the g omni ' packetS echnidal nature, ' Planning s acket.� due to�'their length and t These�doc meats dare' available for revs. g Division office. a�aa: reView at the Planna.n b 1. GeokechniC, al Inyeeti ation Pro.osed Ti.ard Center by Applied Geotechnol,ogy Ind. 2. Joint DSL/Corps of Eng gineer s fill l permit ap..plication FP #7216 and supporting docz melts, FINAL ORD ER SDR 93-b0 e..2 G UB PA„D„S S.UPEBV ALU P age 3 ft • • III. AGENCY AND NPO COMMENTS The City of Tigard Engineering Department, 'Tri-Met, and the Unified Sewerage Agency have submitted multiple pages of comments on this proposal. Their comments are attached as an appendix to this report. The City of Tigard Buiidi g Division has reviewed the proposal and provides • the following comments: a. Finished cut or fill slopes shall have a maximum 2 to 1 slope, b. Erosion control measures shall be maintained throughout construction activities; c. Disabled person parking spaces will need to comply with Oregon 'State p Statutes with regard to size, number of spaces, and signage. The State of Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) has been notified of this proposal due to the portion' of the site which is shown to include possible wetlands area by the National Wetlands Inventory map. The applicants h,I . Wetland' delineation prepared by IES Associates confirms the existence of wetlands on the site. Application has been made for on-site mitigation for the proposed disturbance of a portion of the wetlands. The Division of State Lands has commented that a removal/fill permit is required for this project (comment of February 5, 1993). The applicants have submitted a copy of their application for a Joint DSL/Corps of Engineers Fill Permit 'r PY pI? I P 9 r `9 �,_ , #FP '7216). 1 93 I?SL, Permit P dated February 9, 9 (DSL # The Tualatin Valley. Fire and Rescue District has commented that all fire hydrant locations are subject to the final approval of the Fire District. .. The Orecspn Department of Transportation has reviewed this prop°oral and has commented that the traffic study should, have included analyie of the ,.; proposed developrent'e impacts on the Hwy. 217/SW 72nd Avenue interchange ! for both existing conditions and with improvements. ODOT has further ' analysis they cannot DIVISION COMMENT: interchange CONTAOntil, the commented that the cannot comment on y is�l,is completed. PLANNING CONTACTED ODOT AND TOLD ODOT THAT THE CITY WAS NOT GOING TO REQUIRE THIS ADDITIONAL REVIEW 1 REQUESTING. ODOT HAD BEEN APPRISED OF TH ADDITIONAL POTS TIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR SOME FOR PROJECT TIME AND HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED THIS , ANALYSIS, is �: Northwest Natural Gas has commented that a 2 inch diameter gas line oexi its on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue. This line has not been shown n h preliminary improvement plans. The applicants' engineer in eer should contact ' 1 Scott Palmer at 721-2449 for information on the location of�this line:�and responsibilities of the. gas il�.ties for.��relocation.' o line. Portland General•al Electric! and General Tele hone have reviewed � rr p ewed 'the ,�iicrapoBal, and have issued no comments or objectionbo The Tualatin Water Dis tr ict and N #4 were provided with co ies of the proposed d veto pm en p la nd. As of this date, no comments have be en received from those agencies , Staff riled a written comment+ f Larson of 11120 +SW 68th IAvenu to'.the Commission for. consideration: No other" oral or farwa'�� from Iry Da f l.]L�1`� � 5 Avenue � iasa.ca for Written ccnnments were received at the public hearing. FINAL' ORDER - SIB 93 02 CUB FOODS/SU ORDER R 3� O� PERVhTs'U � � � � � ��� � �� Page • • I i , �. , F Y. • rx, IV. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Chapter 18.120 - Site Deveelopment Review Code Section 18.120.180.A.1 (Site Development Review -- Approval Standards) requires that a commercial development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community Development Code chapters. The applicable criteria in this case are City of Tigard Community Development Code Chapters 18.62, 18.84, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, ' 18.106, • 18.108, 18,.114, 18.120, 18.150 and 18.164. These Chapters are also listed as approval standards for a planned development review application under ° Code. Section 18.80.120.2. The proposal's consistency with these various A Code chapters is reviewed in the following sections of this final order. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapter 18.92 (Residential Density Calculations), Chapter 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), Chapter 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), and Chapter 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) which are also listed under Code Section 18.120.180.A.1 and Section 18.80.120.A.2. These chapters are therefore found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Code Section 18.120.180.A.2 (Relationship to the Natural and Physical ' Environment) provides other Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of those previously listed Code chapters. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal is found to comply with the applicable portions of Code Section 18.120.180.A.2 relating to Site Development Review approval standards for provision of buffering and screening- of the proposed development through ccapliance with the buffering and screening requirements of Code Chapter 18.100 as described under the review of that Chapter. Code Section 18.120.180.A.8 as well as Code Section 18.80.120.A.3 1 states that where development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining the floodplain. This area shall include appropriate portions suitable for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedeotrian/bicycle plan. The Flood Insurance Rate. Map for the City Of Tigard prepared by FENIA. does not map any 100-year floodplain area for Red Rock Creek on this site (FIRM Community Panel No 410276 00038, dated March' 1, 1982, although floodpiain area is mapped to the south of this site). Therefore, no : p required. dedication of floodplain area is re Code Sections 18.120.180.9 and .10 require consideration of crime prevention and safety in the design of a proposed development. The relatively open development and landscaping pattern proposed along with the design for future � a reasonably parking lot and building lighting should provide safe site `g -ure• customers and employees of the development. Chapter 18.80 -., Planned�beveloprent.Review G thea application of ke a flexible development creating standards. The purpose tstatement oVide a atin planned 18 80 � process Chapter environments r en r statement note.. that g this section' to preserve to the greatest possible the existing landscape extent s . s at ape features and amenities through the ; of site planning ro that relate the type design of a use pl��nn�: g p ceduices ,. e t e and desa: n o development to the site. Since this development site carries a Planned Develo p ment designation, a ge neral rev iew of t hese standards is necessa ry. ER - 8DR 5/3.0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERV.ALU Pag . 5 FINAL ORDER . �, I ' 1 h • • • r 4I Code Section 18.80.120 identifies approval criteria for a planned • development site plan. Of particular note e with regard and to the current request is Section 18.80.12Q A.3.a which states: ... streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the greatest extent possible." With the underlying zoning district allowing large scale commercial developments, such as has been proposed, and the substantial slope of the site that needs to be graded to allow such a development, it would be'very difficult if not impossible to allow this type of development without substantially altering the tree cover and existing topography. The application proposes a very substantial amount of site grading and removal of almost all existing trees in order to accomplish this development. However, the application provides for preservation and substantial enhancement of the wetlands associated with Red Rock Creek. In addition the landscaping plan provides for a significant amount of replacement landscaping and trees to provide a relatively attractive development around a large commercial box development. Therefore, the Commission finds that the development plan makes a reasonable attempt at satisfying this criterion. Section 18.80.120.A.3.b provides standards relative to buffering and screening a proposed development site from surrounding uses and streets. This criterion is addressed under the discussion of Code Chapter 18.100 below. ' Sections 18.80.120.,.3.c, .d, and .e refer to residential developments that are developed as planned developments. These approval standards are therefore inapplicable. Sections 1B.80.120.xr1.3 f, e , .11, and .k are essentially references to the requirements Of other Code Chapters dealing with access, landscaping, signs, parking, and sensitive lands. Findings relative to theee Code Chapters should be considered' • tantamount to consistency to these planned development approval standards. Section 18.80.120.A.,3.h allows the, approval authority to require the developer, to provide facilities relative to public transit needs such as bus turn-outs or shelters, if the proposed development abuts a public transit route. SW 72nd Avenue abutting the site is not currently served by Tri--iMet bus service, although Tri-Met's comments raise the possibility that current service routes might someday be shifted to directly serve this area. T'ri-Met has provided comments on the proposed development plan but has not requested the provision� of any tra isit related facilities Therefore, no transit related facilities will be required as condit;Mns of , development approvals Char ter 18.62 C-G Zoning Dietridt Th e pro p osed uses of the site, foe..d and beverage retail sales and general retail sales,. are permitted uses in the C-0 tening district (Code Section 18.62.030). ' . ae applications and b e of the site ', through the revieW is charged with reviewing future usage in f W of business tax a l' building permit applications. • Pr op o sed site improvements e co mply With the C-G toning district diiensionalr height ds (Code 030) for building height 145 foot maximum Standards � +Cade ��ection',.18.52 0 v,g. ... maximum height proposed), coverage (85 per nt s .allowed; 2 5 foot tnaae' � lot, age �' ce Maximum allowed site coverage in, the C-G zone; proposed site coverage Of 15e75 ? (minimum percent proposed landscape coverage in excess of 25 percent). There are no applicable building... setback requirements since none of the site directly ab'° a residential zoning district, except across SW 1 2nd Avenue uts ^ i denta.aZ� zonin district from the site. • F ,\.... ., CU .: �7F�7EP. SAI3� 93-0002 �� OOD FINAL 0.002 8 SgPF Page 6 . I }} to 4 M . ., .,.. ..............+w.._....... ',.. ....,..,,:,.,..,..... ww'z.,,, ,._ ..-.,;,..,L.. ..a:J.«n..J.,,.,r,-,..-.,...........,.... ..a...,3,h_.._...,..«,...«... .,.,-l,..Y.:...1.. ...,.,.n ._.hw1.M«,,,...+.,.4„tu'7 ,...1.M .;1..,..,,,.....a«a.1,,... a!t`%�•.,, Y,.gal,. Chapter 18.84 - Sensitive Lands Review The applicants retained IES Associates to conduct a wetland delineation on j the site IES identified two jurisdictional wetlands on the site as indicated on the site plan. The wetlands area that is located within the proposed parking lot area has been proposed to be filled. Under the requirements of Chapter 18.84, the City of Tigard defers to the. Oregon Division of State Lands and US Army Corps of Engineers permitting processes for wetland modifications. The applicants have filed a separate joint permit application with the DSL/Corps for filling of this wetland area. This area is therefore not subject to City review. The joint DSL/Corps permit application and wetland ' ,i.l.l. mitigation plan is ' available for review through the Planning Division although it is not ' • techriCa1ly part of this development application. Page 8 of the applicants' narrative describes how the proposed wetlands mitigation plan will work in consort with the stormwater quality treatment and detention. . . • plan required by the USA requirements for the Tualatin River Basin. The Planning Commission approves the preliminary plans for this facility Y` subject to the conditions of approval recommended by the Engineering pP by g g Department. The Engineering Department will consider the comments provided by USA in the review of the final facility and storm drainage plans. Contrary to USA's recommendation, however, the City of Tigard typically does not desire dedication of such, facilities to the City with the added maintenance responsibilities. Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested, however, to allow modification of the 25 foot buffer area adjacent to the wetlands adjacent to Red Rock Creek. This area adjacent to the wetlands is not subject to DSL/Corps review, but is subject to City of Tigard regulations. Community Development Code Section 18.84.028.A requires that land within 25 feet of an identified wetlands be considered as wetlands. Modifications to any • area considered wetlands, not, including areas under the ,DSL/Corps permit requirements, may be permitted subject to the review and approval of the modification plans consistent with Code Section 18.84.040.D. The applicant has addressed these standards on page 8 through 10 of the applicants' narrative. The Commission concurs with the applicants' analysis for this • • request. The Commission approves the Sensitive Lands Review Permit for the proposed wetland buffer modification. The following is adopted from the s' applicants' narrative as proposed findings in support of this request: Section 18.84.040.D outlines the following numbered approval criteria necessary to obtain a Sensitive Lands Permit for a wetland area 11!! alteration (in this case a buffer alteration) that does not meet the. i�a jurisdictional definition of other state and federal regulatory • agencies.' The applicant has proposed findings to this criteria. The city adopts those findings. 1. The proposed landform alteration or development is neither on 1' wetland in an area designated as, significant wetland on the II Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor IS within 25 ,eet of such a wetland. P'i.nding: JI wetland in this area is not The Red eelc area identified a a si s d ROck ` Cr wetland or otherwise wet ' Comprehensive re Plan Flood therwise irdent'ified in the City's 1 1 g � s p `� plain and Wetland map. I I } FINAL ORDER „ 8DR 93-00 02 CUB FOO Ds/SUPERVALU Page 7 • di 0 �` L, 0 2. The extent and nature of the proposed landform alteration o r • development will not create site disturbances to an extent t • greater than the minimum required for the use. Finding: Because of the meandering nature of the wetland line, the wetland and its buffer extend eastward toward the development • area in only one spot. While the parking lot itself will be 30 feet away from the actual wetland line, the severe grading requirements of the site force the parking lot to be elevated at the western edge almost 10 feet. In order to minimize Intrusion into the wetland and/or buffer areas, retaining walls. will be used. However, construction of that wall will intrude an average of approximately 7 feet into the buffer area for this approximately 110 foot area. Of the approximately 800 lineal feet of wetland edge, only approximately 110 feet will be impacted by the retalning wall within the buffer area. The intrusion area is approximately 770 square feet. However, , in an approximately 200 lineal foot area immediately north of the intrusion area, the wetland boundary and parking diverge so that the average buffer is approximately 40 feet, equalling approximately 3,000 square feet more buffer than is required. 3. Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage I` b which would adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated. .' inrix,n . g The proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention basin and the proposed wetland enhancement/mitigation plan are I. designed to manage on and off site drainage. s, 4. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to landform "r,. '• alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surfaoe Water Management program of Washington County must be F. met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will ; e replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.100. Finding:, The proposed stornwater qu alit y treatment and detention basin and, the proposed wetland mitigation/enhancement T llyenhance the level of both will g program replace, and substantially upland, , transitional and wetland vegetation within the Red Rock Creek corridor. �. All other L3erlsit�v met. �, �. a lands requirements have been me.. Finding: No other substantive re uiremen..s are applicable" to this ' oche � �' proposal 6. The provisions of Chapter 18.150, Tree' Removal shall be met. • ; .I Finding No trees; are to be removed within this area. FINAL o ROER - 5Ukt 93 OCl4 2 CUB F OC11DS SUPFR�`.�Ta�T / Page a • 2 / a ,-..'. , . . 11110•11111k1MIIIMEMIIIIIIMIIIIIIIINII • . . r , 1 M ' 1 . y , \' ( ' . .. , 7. Other Comprehensive Plan policies are met. . /N Finding: ' . . The proposal is consistent with Physical Limitations and ' Natural Hazards (the area is not within a 100 year floodplain . nor contains other physical hazards), Parks, Recreation and .. Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan (the area is not a designated park or recreation area and the proposed mitigation plan meets the general open space policies of the plan) . . .., . Chapter 18.96 - Additional Yard 4rea Requirements -. Code Section 18.96.020.B.2 requires a minimum 30 foot setback from the centerline of SW 72nd Avenue, beyond any setback required by the underlying zoning district. As previously mentioned, there is no applicable setback imposed by the C-G zoning distriet. The proposed building would be set back 80 feet from the centerline of SW 72nd Avenue. Therefore, Code . Section 18.96.020.B.2 has been satisfied. Chapter 18.100 - Landscaping' . ' Code Section 18.100.030 requires street trees to be planted in accordance with certain detailed standards fer ell developments fronting on a public or private street. Code Section I,8.100.035.A specifies a minimum caliper size of 2 inches at planting and 20 to 40 foot spacing. The landscaping t plan proposes minimum planting sizes for Chancellor Linden street trees of ' . . '' 1 3.5 to 4 inch caliper on 40 foot centers along SW Dartmouth Street thereby I satisfying this standard as well es with the Dartmouth Street landscaping ., ., guidelines approved by the City Couneil on October 27, 1992. The , :- 7 applicanfe' landscaping plan also proposes minimum planting sizes for / Sweetgum street trees of 2.5 inch ealiper on 40 foot centers along SW 72nd / Avenue consistent with the Code's street tree standard. The landscaping plan provides for appropriate low height plantings along ' the site's frontages on both sides of the sidewalks to reduce the impacts of on-site lights on adjacent uses and upon traffic on the abutting streets to satisfy the standards of Code Section ip,looplio.AA as well as the Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines. Zit is noted here that these comments are based upon the review of the subOitted landscaping plan which calls for a landscaped strip between the curb and sidewalks. The revised , 'e... site plan which is part of the review package does not provide for sidewalks to be set back from the curbs. The landscaping plan ie e consistent with both the City Council's adopted landscaping guidelines for , I Dartmouth Street and also with Code Section J4.164.070.13, whereas the site „ plan ia not. This Code section requires that a planter strip separation of at least five feet in width be provided on any collector street, except „. . 0 in certain donditione - nane of which apply Lo the current situation. The Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines call for a minimum seven foot'wide 1 . planter strip. Therefore, the site plan will need to be revised to provide for a seven foot wide planter strip conestent with the Dartmouth • • guidelines and the applicants landsCaping plan. The landscaping plan also provides more than 120 trees relatively evenly distributed within and adjacent to the parking lo E at a ratio in excees of the Code's standard of at least one tree pet seven parking spaces (Code Section 18.100.110.A.1,d 11. itefuse and recycling facilities are required to be screened from views from other propertied and from streets by Code Section 18..100.1104B and .b. The plans do not indicate areas for refuse • FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB POODS/SUPERVALU Page 9 ' , . . , • . , 1 !Is • • and t;,cycling facilities (although it is likely that these will be provided on or adjacent to the loading docks on the north edge of the buildings). The applicants will be required to provide details on the screening of these facilities. Code Sections 18.100.80 and .130 provide for vegetative buffering and screening between a proposed development and, abutting land'.uses. The Code's buffer matrix does not provide for any specific buffering or screening standards for a commercial use such as is proposed and abutting A commercial properties. The buffer matrix requires a minimum 20 foot buffer I. yard between commercial development and single-family residential areas such as is found to the east, of this site. However, this buffer standard does not apply when there is an intervening street. Nevertheless, Code Sections 18.80.120.A.3.b (Planned Development approval standards) and j ls.120.A.4 (Site Development Review approval standards) provide more subjective approval standards for the buffering of a new use from surrounding uses. The landscaping plan provides for well landscaped 66 perimeters of the site with a minimum dimension of fifteen feet. The f' Commission finds that these landscaped perimeter areas will provide for sufficient landscaped buffering and screening to satisfy the intent of a, , these more subjective Code buffer sections. Chapter 18.102 - Visual Clearance Areas 1- Chapter 18.102 specifies vision clearance triangles adjacent to intersections in which the height of plantings, signs, etc. are limited in height to assure safe and adequate sight distance at 'intersections to reduce potential hazards from vehicular turning movements. The landscaping plan appears to be consistent with the standards of this Chapter, as long as lower shrubs are kept trimmed below three feet in height and deciduous trees are trimmed so that no branches are lower than eight feet in height. Signs are also subject to this Code section. i Chapter 18.106 - Parking /1 The The site plan provides for substantially more than the Code's required minimum number of parking spaces for a combined grocery store and general • retail sales plaza of this size (Code Section 18.106.050.x-. 398 parking I ♦ spaces would be required by the Code standard of . space per 200 square feet eeta.3� sales.s. floor area for the 75,45 square food and beverage gross be required fort proposed ood 66 spaces wou.�d he �"�' s are foot f � i 66,295 square feet for ]gene retail stoics area by the usesode standard e total requiired park parking square foot total a y sal retail sales The therefore be 564 spaces. The plan provides for 790 total parking spaces. The parking proposed wou, -' exceed Code minimum standards by 226 parking spaces. This may be important with regard to the need to revise plans so provide for the planter strip between the curb and sidewalk along ('h SW Dartmouth. If the grading plan needs to be revised to accommodate the planter strip, it would be preferable to reduce the size of the parking area rather than create a taller retaining wall. Future development lots 4 and 5 will need to be reviewed for parking adequacy t' dent. Vwr the property owner doeS partition this y he future to provide the five e' in di vid u a.l lots shown on the Site plan, joint and parking a r eement s shoul d be provided amongst all of the p arcel s involved in this development. ,. Code 6.0 up to 25 percent of parking. de Section 15.10�.040.A.1 allows a percent stalls to � compact stalls. PLess than 5 percent of the parking spaces' to pe .kovti�d aC would is ore s ed w ld be compact spaces. atisfie�j«; ;. . ,. L p Th,rs standard is therefore F YD AL ORDVA SDR 9. 3-OOb2 c�s FC3�s/s un�R� � Page 10 , 4 / n v Code Section 18.106.O20.A.c requires developments to provide disabled ?� facilities as required by State of Oregon and federal person parking f ac i 1 a. r q� y � law. According to ADA requirements (Americans with Disabilities Act), a minimum of 16 designated disabled person accessible spaces are required for parking areas which provide between: 750 and 800 parking spaces. The site plan provides for 18 disabled person car ' and van parking spaces in locations convenient to 'che primary 1 building entrances, thereby satisfying this standard. Code Section 18.106.O2O.P requires developments to provide secured bicycle Iparking facilities at a minimum ratio of at least 1 bicycle parking space i; per 15 auto parking spaces. The site plan does not 'provide for any biicjcle a; parking p : arkin spaces. The site plan should be required to be revised to provide . • for at least 53 bicycle parking spaces within conveniently located racks 1 in order to satisfy this standard. The proposed automobile parking spaces and parking lot aisleways ' are appropriately configured to satisfy all applicable Code Section 18,..106.050' a parking area dimensional standards. Proposed loading spaces on the north side of the buildings satisfy Code Sections 18.1.06.080 and ".090 standards for off-street loading spaces. •r Chanter 1,8.108 - Access and Circulation The proposed internal driveway and sidewalk system satisfies the requirement of Code Section 18.108.08O(A) which requires that a commercial development of this size provide at least two access driveways and sidewalk(s) to provide access from adjoining streets. The plan provides for two-way driveways and sidewalks leading from both,streete abutting the site as well as a one-way service driveway from SW 72nd Avenue to the loading areas on the northern side of the proposed buildings. Section 18.108.050.A requires sidewalk connections between the public . sidewalks adjacent the site and the primary entrances to the commercial uses. This is provided by the on-site sidewalks along the driveways from (, SW 72nd and SW Dartmouth connecting to a sidewalk within a landscaped island leading to the sidewalks in front of the buildings. A fifteen-foot, wide sidewalk covered by a ten-foot wide canopy extends across the fronts • of the buildings. The site plan is therefore consistent with all applicable Code Chapter 18.108, access standards. The proposed internal roadway system provides good access for emergency 4 vehicles access as well as all other users throughout the site. Chapter 18.114 Signs_ The applicants' narrative states that wall signs will be installed for each larger er . rercent of building face that these these three of the three major tend building not be 1. 9 than 15 p � for an �of�� i + Ti 1 standards would therefor be consistent with gCode Section' buildings. e . 18.114.C.1.b► ' signage in. the C-G zoning district. >> . ar �.ratite states that an additions: "wail" sign gn will, located on one of the retaining walls in the southwest corner of the site facing Dartmouth. ,,. ' l " g identified . ; rfied on t.the h , rsite f my misston disagrees with applicants that this Sign on the proposed retaining wall l would be wall sign permitted by Section 78«114:G.1.b.� .1» That Section specifically mentions that permit ted wal l sign area is determined by Q of the r mc added) fnshc be mounted. The retaining wall ie learly ta builds ng thereore, the n ';' 93-0002 SSD'P • � � � � FINAL ��'C11�tR 511 ,���-f�OQ� t�T1�3 FC1OI1 �/ ERVALU � � � , � � Page 11 � � � � ' ., r« . 1114 • . • Commission finds that this sign should be considered a. freestanding sign • and will therefore only be permitted if other proposed signage is omitted. ' The applicants' narrative notes that two (other) freestanding signs are proposed; one on the east side of the Dartmouth Street entrance to the development and one on the north side of the main 72nd Avenue entrance. The maximum available increase in sign copy area and sign height have been requested for these freestanding signs through sign exemptions p rovide d i n Section y 1.�n .18•114 x � •30 G 1 c.ii• and Section 18.114.145.A-3. Section n 1114.130.G.1 e c.ii provides for a 50 percent increase in sign copy area wheia, a site contains more than a single tenant and the additional sign area ie ' needed to adequately identify the separate"tenants. Section 114.145.A.C. provides for a 25 percent increase in sign area and height if the increase will not deter from the purpose of the sign code. , , Attached with the narrative are drawings of the two (other) proposed " freestanding signs. The dimensions on these drawings are accurate , r g g , (dimensions indicated on the site plan - Sheet 1 - are incorrect). 1 The applicant has provided proposed findings addressing the approval criteria for the sign code exceptions. Due to the size of the site, topographic differences between the building locations and the two abutting streets, and large amount of frontage on these streets, the Commission concurs with the applicants that special circumstances exist which justify the additional sign area and height requested without compromising Code purposes of limiting sign . clutter. The Commission approves of the • '. requested Sign Code Exceptions and adopts the following findings provided by the applicants. . The applicants state that the two sign code exceptions are requested to .. more adequately identify the multiple tenants in the proposed development. Unlike man y comparable arable' retail centers with many tenants, this center is • designed to accommodate three major tenants. While there will be additional retail users in Retail Space A and on Lots 4 and 5, those uses . will be identified with wall signs only. Since the retail complex is 'designedlto focus on the three major tenants, each.' needs suf f icz.ent identific ation from the � adjacent' roads to ensure customer recognition. In addition, since the elevation of Dartmouth,at the , entry drive is 12 to 14 feet below the parking lot surface, little if any '; of the major retail buildings will be able to be seen from Dartmouth. Given this difference in elevation, it is essential that each of the three major retail users be identified at the. street. i proposed freestanding sign on 72nd Avenue is necessary ce there The Will be no other building identification visible from that street The proposed freestanding gns are with d freestanding of this ' ' anc)i si e' consistent development , size.. The combined sign area for the two propop ng signs IA ;'' 4�, hadg than the combined eight businesses and was lasaifiedaas a shopping�ce center. Idevelopment addition, even with the than the standard CUB foaac signs the proposed. l. be smaller requested sign ece bigns will g used throughout the northwest ' found to be consistent with sign.standards through this review, lsven,though. f g " a separate Sign permit Sys n �e obtained from the Planning Division prior to erecting an y 9 � Sign e� height, and location must be shown o conform with Cod a standards (including ision cle arance) in order for sign permits to be iesued. • `�s • VI 1AL ORDER SDR 93,-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPEi&VA.L I Page 12 • t.' { r.t: Chapter 18.150 Tree Remove Chapter 18:150 will be satisfied in that the applicant will be required to obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing trees over 6 inches in caliper size in preparation for development. Permits will be granted only, if it is found necessary to remove the trees to accommodate structures, ((( . sidewalks, driveways, utilities, I ox other necessary site improvements.rovements, It should be clear from the, review of the site plan and grading plan that this will require the removal of most of the trees on the site due to the "» significant amount of grading which must occur. Nevertheless, trees such 4t, as are located on future lots 4 and 5 should not be removed until such time • I I , as is necessary to allow for development. I .p • Chapter 18.164 - Public Improvement Requirements STREETS 'te. is located immediately to the north of the future Street The site e (Dartmouth St t west Avenue. Both streets are Extension and immediately w t of SW 72nd s 7 Y ' " . classified as major collector streets by the Comprehensive Plan's Transportation Plan Map. Major collector streets have the following j minimum improvement standards imposed by Code Section 18.164.030.E.1.a: I 60-80 feet of right-of-way, 44 feet of pavement, and 2-4 movin g lanes. SW 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site currently has the following improvements:p 40 feet of right-of-way,, 11 - 13 feet of pavement west of • centerline, and no curbs or sidewalks. Typically half-street improvements are required to be a condition of development approval to bring abutting roads up to tli 'minimum standards. The applicants apparently have no problem with su a requirements and have proposed improvements beyond the minimum improvement standards based upon their traffic report's analysis of needed road improvements. Based on the applicants' traffic report, at such time as the entire Tigard Triangle is fully developed, the projected volume on S.W. 72nd Avenuel' adjacent to the site will exceed the level requiring a five lane facility. The applicants state that the traffic report used conservative aS'sumptions on future development of the Triangle. The basis of those assumptions 1.0 the existing land use plan for the area which was utilized even though that • .. I plan is being g reconsidered by the City. While the plan revisions have not yet been adopted, recent decisions by the Planning Commission with regard • primarily •an le Will g d for media zoned for ! i to the Tri g l likely lead to many areas that are p � . y office development to be redesignate "m density 1 ' residential se These charges would tend to reduce future peak-hour traffic volumes f rom the level s co nsidered in the traf fic I, reports '.•i�: .:s Therefore, ba se d on the traffic analysis. p rov i e b athe appl cants and the e proposed changes to the land plan, the applicants are proposing the I • following: (refer to Gordon Davis' 1, 1993 letter to Randy Wooley and the Marc h 1, 1 993 revised site plan) Y ,, .a A. Between the d Avenue intersection to point approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd Avenue driveway,rest zrnate�. 2 �' and iveway, an : ' , Dartmouth/8.W. �2n additional•... which Will create PP feet right-of-way on the west of the centerline. of right-of-Way, � rota]. of 5 g y B. The remaining frontage along S.W. 72nd Ave would have increased right-of-way to a total of 45 feet on the west side of the centerline. FINAL ORDER 5Im 93-0002 CUB pm d7S/SUPER. VAL1 Page 13 • • I i I M I d r • . , C. A total street section between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection and the site driveway on 72nd Avenue will have 51 feet of y paving and will � include: " t - a bike lane on the west side t - a southbound through travel lane I I a southbound left turn I � a northbound left turn lane • - a northbound through travel lane 1` D. A total street section between the 72nd Avenue driveway to a point approximately 200 feet north will include: a bike lane on the west side, - a southbound through travel/right turn (into the site) - a center;merge/left turn. lane -• a northbound travel lane E. From the north property line to a point approximately 200, feet north of the 72nd Avenue drivewa y - a bike a north west and southbound side -- travel lane • -- a continuous left turn lane • G F. Curbs and sidewalks will be constructed along the entire west , frontage of 72nd Avenue. The Planning Commission concur with these proposed improvements along the site's SW 72nd Avenue frontage, except that the Commission points out that the sidewalk will need to be removed from the curb by at least five feet . consistent with Code Section 18.164.070.8. Conditions of approval are specified at the end of this final order to spec ify these street improvements along SW 72nd Avenue. The proposed Dartmouth Street extension will be built under the Dartmouth local improvement district. The local improvement district will construct a three-lane roadway with curbs, and gutter within a 70 foot right-of-way between Pacific Highway and SW 72nd Avenue. Construction is scheduled to occur in summer, 1993. Approval of this development plan will therefore be conditioned upon Dartmouth Street be open for traffic between SW Pacific Highway and SW 68th Avenue prior to occupancy of any of the proposed retail spaces. Access from SW 72nd Ai)enue alone would not provide sufficient access for this size and type of development. The applicants' traffic report indicates that a three-lane Dartmouth Street should function adequately � approximately 20 nears � owth assumptions, b ut that sometime 1 at r a lane facility may be needed. . The analysis also that the d for lane facility does not necessarily come from the development, but from the build-out o f .the entire �I I. , • t Tigard g ar Triangle, again,a in; under r p resent growth owth ass u p io n s• Again,in, the assumptions ons that w ere used in the traffic analysis �e more tha n likely I going to change as the Triangle land-use plan j� rev� such that lesser traffic peaks would be anticipated. As stated Gordon� dorD av` in his • March 1, 1993 letter: In a future of uncertainty, it is nonetheless clear that under 1 present rowth as... . three facility • - will , ft t very adequately the development of those properties and for development within i however Triangle 20 ears. s future decisions are made on other transportation i es yes the impacts " to Da rtmouth Will become clear, and decisions can theen be made on the ap propriate additional im rovements to Dartmouth. I ; FINAL O ER SDR 98-0002 CJi VOODS StkEtVAt P,a�e Y 4 I I I I I I I F . .: a • • f: In. response to the traffic report's findings, the applicant is proposing the following improvements to Dartmouth Street: A In anticipation that a five lane facility may be needed at some time in the future, dedication of an additional amount of right-of-way to bring the total right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline. B. In addition to the improvements provided by the Dartmouth local improvement district, the following would be provided by the > applicants. 1 - A eecond westbound through lane on Dartmouth Street between the 72nd Avenue intersection and the Dartmouth entrance driveway, .,, to the development. • From the Dartmouth driveway west, an acceleration lane on, Dartmouth Street which would transition back to the three-lane roadway. A deceleration right turn lane for vehicles turning right into the site from Dartmouth Street. C. A 6-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the curb. The Planning Commission generally concurs with the need for these proposed. improvements along the site's SW Dartmouth Street frontage, with the following exceptions. Again, the Commission points out that the sidewalk . need to be removed from the curb by at least seven feet to be will nFed c� y consistent with the Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines adopted by the City Council last October as well as with the minimum five foot separation required by Code Section 18.164.070.B. Mr. Davis' letter argues that separation of the sidewalk from the curb along Dartmouth would require that a seven-foot tall retaining wall be built to accommodate the separated sidewalk without affecting the parking lot design. While we agree with°?r. ,, Davis that a seven-foot retaining wall is not in scale with the pedestrian environment which is desired, staff has pointed out that the need for the taller retaining wall could be diminished (or extinguished) by reducing the. size of the extremely large parking lot some. The proposed parking lot would provide o6 a . a n e excess a o Code standards. By reducing g the parking lot b y eleven parking spaces alon g i is southern edge, the sidewalk separation should be able to be provided without an increase in .. the presently p ro p oss e d retaining wall height of four feet. The Planning Commission will require that the sidewalk be separated from the curb by a planter strip of at least seven feet in width,and that and that the grading site to accommodate to more four feet ut and site plans be revised accordingly ccommodate the sidewalk without _ increasing the height of the retaining wall than fou in height: The J Planning Commission differs with the applican of . study pplicants �'r wean d 72t� . F regard need for the heage posed second westbound lane bet.. t e drd tc� the n . ommission' does not find that< the Avenue +and the site entrance.the need for this'additional find report justifies - h" lane and we ind that traff stafaes the additional roadway width"p 3 " ,. the City been l,rx'd development sca a which they City has to . as b to create may be detrimental g and attractive street along Dartmouth Street.^ ppi ants may desire • i p g �nou It is understood that the applicants construct this if additional road future disruption to co' this dddit� lane at this time to odd width is foi.�nd to ' of .access to the development when and t ' anal h p be deeica ble. However, absent a clear prediction cigct io n of ...future ure traffic and absent final land use plan for the Triangle, the Planning Commission fnds th at this additional lane shall be omitted. Th e Commission cono ors, however, with the p ro p osed right-of-way dedication in this area So that ' ORDER -- SI2�t �3_,+OD�l� CUB FOdD Page 18 • FINAL © � ,,���tJPERi�'AT,iJ � Pig' 4r q �'� • s..,...... w...._... ......... .......��.-..J., i.... _ ....-_ ... . -, _..- .,_.._.w...,......,.,,....._ »_.. .,......,...J_e......J...,....n.....w.,..w.....«..... ,...«.»..l.,.....«,.... ..r..,.. .,...+.•.....i ,1.......«„J _._.. ...n,-.» ...« ..+—J..N....N... rr• buildings or other substantial improvements are not constructed upon area .. that may be needed for future road widening., This decision regarding improvements on Dartmouth Street will require roadway improvements sized to handle normal traffic levels for the foreseeable future rather than sized for peak traffic levels or possible future increased traffic levels. This should result in a more pleasing streetscape at all times in exchange for possible additional congestion at peak traffic periods or the possibility of future construction to add an important that the City also consider the quality • Tonal Lane.' It is wfam y Qu y additional Po of tho trip in transportation decisions rather than lacing primary emphasis on'prtviding for maximum quantities of trips. The Planning Commission is theregore hesitant to recommend the scale of improvements proposed by the applicants. Recommended conditions of approval are provided at the end of this report to specify the required improvements to Dartmouth Street. SANITARY SEWER Code Section 18.164.©90 requires'that new developments be adequately served • by sanitary sewerage Icollection facilities developed consistent with Cite of Tigard design standards. '' Currently there is no sanitary sewer serving the site.' As part of the Dartmouth Street local in provement district, an eight-inch diameter sanitary sewer line is being installed within the street.' This line should provide adequate service to the proposed development. ' ` The Dartmouth. Street LID is providing sanitary Sewer stubs to SW ;/2nd Avenue for future extension of sewer to the north. Typically, the 'City would require each development to extend sanitary sewer main lines to the farthest uphill property line. however, in this case there are two additional elements that must, be considered- b Foods/Supervalu will not have any need nita • A. Cu p' �. y eed for the sanitary ry sewer n SW 2nd Avenue; and Line `�. ? enue;e I • B. The Dartmouth 'Street L¢GP shows the sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd 'o the weL.t side of the road's centerline. • Avenue to be lotatecl on s The applicants will presumably be required to provide improvements to the 0. West side of SW 72nd Avenue a condition of development approval. If the as approval. is placed on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue and then sanitary sewer p redevelopment street improvements to get side,acess to t would be necessary to tear then it It is St fs recommendation, 9 pe required determin. up e sewer on the w St s. a ro ose� sanitary line in SW 72 determine where thisp p sewer lindevelo developer be e /2nd E3 tha. the ere air+ to street so as not to later d sazi�.ta Avenue can be shifted • to the east side of the st later interfere with the improved f SW� 2 d Avenue,any �.he applicant�icant should be required ired to remain rovide for its side O 677 n pk � provide installation. STORM SEWER Section that shall on provisions for storm drainage have been be '• erode`issued r�here adequate 18.164.100.A states that de pmt'. q p .' 1 ^ setae n made The applicant is'proposing 'a private on-site storm sewer system to serve this development. I I FINAL �RDEB SD R 93»000.12 CUS I � 3oDS�SJPB� �ACJ Pa g e 16 I , I I I I I I I I " w 1 • • . Part of the proposed wetland 'enhancement' and mitigation program for this `,, . development works in combination , with the proposed stormwater quality ' ' ' treatment and detention plan., In the'large'triangular upland area between ' Dartmouth Street, the parking lot, and the wetland boundary, this area will j ` r be shaped into a' basin and developed as a wetland Marsh. , All stormwater j ''� • from the Project will be discharged into this basin which is designed to meet •the standards for stormwater quality"treatment, prior to entering Red I ' „ , ' Rock Creek. ; i' The Unified Sewerage Agency has established and the City has agreed to j' . J enforce (Resolution and Order :No. , 91-4I) Surface' Water 2ana e m en t ' Regulations requiring the construction of'on-site water 'quality facilities ,, r' or fees '.in-lieu Hof their construction. ' The ',applicant ,is proposing to ' construct on-site 'water quality 'facilities. Based on the preliminary ' plans, the startn'water from the site will be piped into a private system. [ ' It will then be transported to one of several water ,quality facilities prior to being discharged' into Red Rock Creek. ' Red Rock Creek, the identified wetlands,'' and the mitigated wetlands are i' classified as a sensitive areas under Resolution and Order No. 91-47. e f, • Classification as 'a sensitive area requires that an undisturbed corridor '' 1,, . be provided adjacent to the water body. The required corridor must' be a R. , . ; minimum of 25 feet wide, measured horizontally,''from the defined boundaries ' ' of 'the sensitive area. The applicant has defined the sensitive area and �� provided for the 25 foot buffer. Where the applicant has encroached within ' ' ' 1 the minimum 25 foot buffer, an adequate area of compensation has been provided. i OTHER UTILITIES L e .i.. Code Section 18.164.120.A reqUires new ,developments to t provide for the I ' underground placement of utility services such as electric,, telephone,' and i' , natural gas service. The City Council has established a' fee-in-lieu-Of !' / , underground placement of utilities to be assessed where it is found to be ' . ' impractical to place these facilities, underground due to utility provider concerns, limited frontage affected, or other reasons.. The' developer of . , 'this site will be responsible for underground placement of utilities on the i,' sited however review of the final public:' improvement plans with affected i° ' agencies may result in a situation where these , agencies would , resist 'r,' . underground installation. Therefore,^the conditions of approval provide I; 1 for the Engineering Department to review the final' public, improvement plans „ , : With input ,from other utility 'providers anc to''then determine whether the ', utilities ' will need to be , placed underground or if , a, fee , should ' be . . collected 1 ' � J O:•ti Rh...... .•.':.:1T:7,.•:::C..4.^+ yiJ 0:ry•t }Y:•✓�rr Y�,•ri�':.{•.4'Hr'�.•:” K F y; }* ..•'•::wI;?W l y:}}v.✓:I r.V J r J; {r >:::, I NOr JA r i' • r•.:. wkW•, , L.r...:,:n ::!: hvS. ..•. ;J.;•ry :: , :: /{.,M n.... J. r(W.: .. i� : 1�r :' i?:; I J 4 ', 't , AYiSf.%0:T .4.Y 1. e7, Gy 101. /S40 S{ 0Wi't g, ry �yWei { E S R " }}} g y > .X � 40 0 0 rr4TTY � . !�r:Ta :r I %i 0 M+ . � r l tr : T ? T}: arv� � { oN ✓a. a t r: : . v { fNr: v4 S✓ S lr•:1• :}Jr 4SSr3' SV: :.. •J!J t i I■ , { y r t::r 1 4yt "J ? i fW ' ;rS ti ^ y %i ` • r ? }}:::i:•is •:r:r:?•:•:S}}+ ?r ..:if . .•r.?•:•::ti:vi:SX{4:i44.v•v.voV::v::: 4f.,•fi.:,4:{{{?{S?ti'iS{•JSf{ c WiNG dONUDITIQ .. Y SECURED P TO Tk3E IS>aUAI^ _ Mkt OR �'�. �"'IALYy' TAE. S ANCE�OP BUILDING PERMITS UNLESS STATE T_E STAVE C' k ^�� S�LL D ©THERWI t RIaJlEt SD, K3TTxhC7L' IS' CHRIS DAVIES, OP THE FNCINEE .ING DIVIS`.CON 1,' ehallo ? parcels A , e completed' prior line the tianuancer"of� building permits: • n riot to cis Evidence of the ' recording of the lot i ne adjustments shall be �, FINAL OADEA ,,,,,ObA 98.41002 1 CIB VOQDS ,SUPERVAut Ya�e' 17 , is I I I . I I ' I t ■ I. provided to the Planning Division. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, • Planning Division. 2. The site and grading plans shall be revised to accommodate the following: a. Sidewalks shall be separated from the curb by a planter strip no less than five feet in width along SW 72nd Avenue, and no less than seven feet in width along SW Dartmouth Street; b. The revised plans should not necessitate increasing. the J, retaining wall directly north of Dartmouth Street to a height 0 ' of greater than four feet; ' I j c. The proposed Cub Foods sign on the retaining wall shall be omitted, or alternatively, the other freestanding sign along SW dartmouth Street shall be omitted; d. Additional details shall be provided regarding the required ' screening of trash and recycling facilities, as well as the screening of roof-top mechanical equipment. e. The site plan shall be revised to provide for at least 53 bicycle parking spaces within conveniently located bicycle racks. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. • 3. The applicant shall be responsible for the underground installation of utilities along the frontages) of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue, unless the Engineering Department in consultation with Other utility providing agencies determines, that a fee in-lieu of underground installation is justified. 4. The applicant shall investigate the feasibility of relocating the proposed sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd Avenue to the east side of the road's centerline. The applicant shall be responsible for the l installation of any portion of the line that must be installed on the west side of the centerline. The City Engineer Shall have the final ji determination as to the location. • 5. An agreement shall be executed by the applicant, on forms provided by the Ci'ey, which the y oppose remonstrate Against a future local improvement district formed to further improve SW Dartmouth Street, 6. agreement shall be +e executed by the applicant, on forms provided An xec 9 fo p .ded by the City, which waives the property owner's right to oppose or y y against ainst a future local improvement formed to remonstrate re to � .gat district farm �• improve SW 72nd Avenue.' O (2) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile 7. Tw p , construction drawings ehall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Seven (7) sets of approved drawings and one (1) itemized constProfessional Engineer, ruction shall be cost estimate,subiriit d for finl prepared ev'review by o and v approal(NOTE: these la ne ar' in addition to any drawings required by the Buildin g Division and should only include sheetisi relevant to ii public improvements. Ad Dartmouth�g l be dedicated c public 8: Additional right-of-way 5t:,,,eet frontage right-of-way ri ht-of-�iay shat. dic.ated i,o the ' blic along the u , ` be ied to the existing teng ._ from the c � '� " e dcd F' . . tied to �.st�.ng • g o 4 e erate�_�.ne. The description n'shall .'. I FINAL ORDER - SDI 93-0002 CUB CODS 'aUP E,RVA L� I � ' Page 18 • I , I , I I • J , • i t , • right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 9. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the �. . g y SW 72nd Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 51 feet from centerline (from the intersection of SW 72 Avenue/Dartmouth Street r' 0' north to a point that is, at a minimum, 200 feet north of the }. applicants' access on SW 72nd Avenue). The description shall be tied. to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. 10. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the SW 72nd Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline, (from the north property line south to where the right-of-way increases to 51 feet as detailed in #9 above). The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. 11. Standard street improvements, including concrete sidewalk .separated � from the curb, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement, r' storm drainage, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed along the SW 72nd 'Avenue and Dartmouth Street frontages. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to major collector street standards and shall conform to the alignment of existing adjacent, improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering I Department. NOTE: The street improvements shall',be as described in the applicants'° reliminar plan 'submittal dated Uarch 1, 1993,except PP preliminary that sidewalks shall be separated from curbs and the additional ' Dartmouth Street westbound lane from SW 72nd Avenue. to the site entrance shall be omitted. • 12. Building permits will not be issued and construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering' De artmentI has reviewed and approved the public improvement plans and P pP p p- P� �, a s tree t opening P ermit or construction compliance agreement has been executed. A 100 percent performance assurance or letter . of commitment, a developer--engineer agreement, the payment of a permit, fee and a sign installation/streetlight fee are required. • 1.L;� � The proposed privately operated and maintained ined s an ita ry sewer and I storm drainage system plan-profile details shall be provided as part ' of the public improvement plans. 14. The applicant shall d t� drainage runoff can be discharged into the existing drai a eway s without significantly impacting properties downstream. ;} 1S. Sa nitary sewer wer and storm drainage details shall.. be provided as s part d of the public improvement plans. Calculations and a topographic map storm drainage and sanitary service area shall be pr ovule as a Supplement to the public improvement �lan s, ca lculat ions Shall be based on full development of the serviceable area. The location and capacity o f existing, proposed, and future , lines sh all be addressed. 16. puapplicant provide �' � d q P bli ani a ry sewerage system. A connectionP ermitisrequired to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer System, 17. The e applicant Shall 1.. be rec. uired to p..•ro vi de an on-site water,.. quality ty facility as established under the guidelines deli n e� o Unified Sewera ge Agency Resolution and Order No 31..4' E 93,-0 5 .,_.. ORDER �Z�'Ab� Page 19 FINAL L'R SD f,�' 21 CUB �C�Dw�' �7pE �. • ' .,.,.x.. .ur, .,i ...•. _.. ._..._.........._.-..+... .. _,..,......._ µ,..il...,J u. w....-,..4..•....n.w...v...........r..w.«i,i..,. ,..__ .. i 18• The applicant shall provide, as a minimum, a 25 foot buffer (except ` as approved for modification by the Planning Commission's order) which meets the requirements of Section 6.08.3, of USA Resolution and Order No. 91-47. 19. The applicant shall obtain a "Joint Permit" from the City of Tigard. This permit shall meet the requirements of the NPDES and Tualatin Basin Erosion Control Program. 20. The applicant should be aware that the City of Tigard has adopted Chapter 70 of the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code and that the grading plan shall comply with this chapter. 21. The developer shall submit an erosion control plan ensuring compliance with erosion control standards for the Tualatin River Basin. STAFF CONTACT: George Steele, Building Division. 22, A Joint DSL/dorps of Engineers wetlands fill permit shall be obtained • by the applicants, (Authority: Section 404, Clean Water Act, and ORS '� . pa, 541.605 to 64.1.695). A copy of the permit shall be provided to the a I City Eng�.:cneer�:ng��Department by th e applicant. t t. 23. No construction vehicles shall access or depart the site via Baylor �" Street and Clinton"Street except with prior approval of the city . Engineer. Approval for exceptions will be given only if the applicant can show that there is no practical alternative for. access. No construction vehicles ,or equipment may be stored or parked on ,r r Ealrl.or Street and Clinton'Street. Parking of construction vehicles on SW 72nd Avenue shan be limited to the site frontage and shall comply with all existing'regulations as to location and duration of parking. No construction materials shall be stored within the rights , . of way of SW 72nd 'Avenue or Dartmouth Street at any time. , Construction vehicles means the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of the site improvements 1 or proposed buildin s ro, g p p under this application and shall include the vehicles of their suppliers and employees. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Schreindl, Code Enforcement Officer, 639--4171. 24. A tree removal permit must be obtained from. the Planning Division in excese inches diameter. The • before removal of any�trees of' 6 �inchesn in di Planning Division may prescribe protective measures for the trees to • be retained. These� measures the site be remain�TA�T�c�er�.r ©ffert construction activities on ry , Planning t)ivieion. ' ow tNtESS A SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE CE ASSURAN CE XS POSTED, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT: 25 e• Sign permits shall obtained from rom the Planning Division ...prior to the installation any signs which to be seen from th e public right-of-way or other parcels. STAFF CQNTACT. The Planning Divie won: • �� • '26. Pip p osed landscaping a ni n a m..a terials and other proposed site , r y improvements Shall be installed in etbstantial Conformance with the approved site and landscaping g p 1anS. STAFF CONTACT: Jeriy Offer, Planning Division. .' 27. An occupancy permit shall not be granted until Dartmouth is open for traffic between SW Pacific Nig way an - , � Street • p d SW 68th Avenue. staff„Contact t City of Tigard Building Official. 2 FINAL +0]EtDirR: r.�� SbR 900002 CUB lE'dOD�S/�SD'PEt3rV'P.�T3T7 Page 0 • I i • • I . , t ,tV ....+1..J,...1A.M as-.. fit.Y ,.nW.',.......rl....-..n+LAb-i-.rl'x..,.—rt.::.,, • APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE FINAL DECISION DATE. ,, • It is further ordered that the applicant be notified of the entry of this order. PASSED: This day of March, 1993, by the Planning Commission of the City Of Tigard. t, ' J re, Pr i.fi•` Tig.rd Pla. n' g Commission • • • • • . I FINAL O ER SUPEfVA Sb�. 93-0002 FOODS I,U Pace 21 e. �- 9� 00�2 CUB � • 1 SUPER'VALU STORES PAUL SIMMONS PO BOX 12909 SALEM OR. 97309 GORDON E. DAVIS. ' PO BOX 8774 PORTLAND OR 97207 r IP SUPERVALU HOLDINGS, INC.. .11840 VALLEY VIEW RD' ' EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344h. • • GORDON MARTIN PO BOX 740 �;• GLENEDEN BEACH OR 97388 . ..i • . . . .CARL JOHNSON • . ' 8937 SW BUkNHAM ST 1 ' TIGAxtD OR 97223 , , ' i'''''' ''' . . . � . 'i r % . ... .- r r.,... r,. rr.- ..,. .-....,.._...-_..»,.........Y..•, .r.....ra...x...r..,.J.......i."_ 11 ......,.J....at_..,wW.:.Y .....I.-....: ..+..'.-...._..+..>.-»Cu y`.Ytlt -....✓.1-1 ..n Al:t.u......s;la4W..a1x.H.4.4 r.., r.. ._.-.a,..M r.+.a.[r...n 040 ,. / ' AGENDA ITEM 5.2 ' STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISJ'IO HEARING DATE: March 22, 1993 -- 7:30 PM HEARING LOCATION: Tigard City Hall Town, Hall , 13125 SW Hall Blvdvn , Tigard, OR 97223 4 , I. PROPOSAL SUMMARY , ' CASE: CUB FOODS ' SUPERVALU HOLDINGS_IYQC,_ Site Development Review SDR 93-0002 Planned Development Review PDR 93-0001 Sensitive Lands Review S".i.R 93-0002 "°` Sign Code Exception SCE 93-0001 Y REQUEST: A request for Planned Development� Site Development Review approval of plans for development of a 150,000 sq. ft., single-story shopping plaza on a 19.9 acre site. yY Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to o all ow' development (a retaining wall a nd site grading) to intrude 7 y feet into the required 25 foot buffer area adjacent to the wetlands adjacent ,to Red Rock Creek. Community Development , Code Section 18.84.028.A states that land within 25 feet of an identified wetlands is considered as wetlands. 'All development • is normally prohibited within wetland areas unless a Sensitive Lands Review permit is granted. r r f Although not a part of the this a g p application, it is noted that �h.,e applicants have separately applied to the Oregon Division State Lands to fill an approximately 6900 square foot wetland. Sign Code.Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high s,. , freestanding signs on both SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street whereas Community Development Code Chapter 18.114 would • normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exception approval is requested to allow these two suns to j . have a combined sign ar' a of 280 Square feet whereas a combined Sign area of. 210 feet is normally permitted: APPLICANT: Gordon E. Davis for SuperValu Stores P.O. Box 8774 M Portland OR 97207 OWNER: SuperValu Holdings, Inc 11840, Valley View Road' Eden Prairie,i • tier NN 55344 OWNER: (Tax Lots 100 and 101) Gordon R. Martin PO 'Box 740 Gleneden Beach, OR 97308 LOCATION: Northwest corner of SW 72nd Avenue and t- • 'proposed, Der.molxth Street 36DC, tax lot 600 (WOTM 181 DC S1 s1 BA tax lots WCTM 181( 36 , 2500, 2501, s a6CD tax lot 2000. + WCTM 24/shown ton the 100 .. 101. e ► - and.' These parcels are listed as Washington County F REPORT 8DR 93 P STAF �� -0002 CUB FOOD5/ST1PEFtVA.Lt� � � Page 1 C ' ' f I. . I 1 d r I _ ....,.I.., .., .w..... ..,....i.... .,,. _..I., .,. ... ..- _,..{4.:..,.w-_. ...X...,._. .._,...... .....• .. ..r«„... ,. ..s. .,...,.u....i_...I c..i.wa4.............H..,»,...,....._..wrAWl.t... ,--,- ., -,_ _•, a,..a=++•.. 0 1 ''' 1 I I I Assessor's ma ps currently on file l e at the Tigard Community t Y •�, Development Department. The Community Development Department has previously approved several lot line adjustment applications for these parcels so that the actual proposed ( • r . development site after recording the surveys of these approved the de by SW 32nd. Avenue on th 1 be bounded d • lot line adjustments w�l b y east, SW Dartmouth Street on the south, and Red Rock Creek on r the west) . PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial l I 1 d ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G (General Commercial) and C-G (PD) (General . Commercial with the Planned Development overlay zone) See A attached zoning map APPLICABLE LAW: Community Development Code Chapters 18.62, 18.80, 18.84, 18.96, 18.100, 18.1020 18.106, 18.108, 18.114,,°'18.120, 18.150, and 18.164. IF4 . ., STAFF RECOMMENDATION: General a pprov al of all applications listed above I' subject to several modifications and conditions of approval. ; SITE MAP/ZONING MAP: aliji -J1!11,i Ij1!i + °L ' 0 1 G 4 r a \., �,' s.', ATLAS .1 \‘' 'ilk' , ‘ \I , . - . ,„.--°' --'' 1. , i hY�•R 1 4 'rRE ' , .r Oi"lhir .12■\ • — 't 'r--' 1 '' 1 ' . 11 II II F I— IF) ...1 I •.0 ■,'N, ■, 1 1 WW1 L leRECT ricelliF. •■•• 111111 — . , ,.,,,a ,_., , IF __ \',, ir-/-1,- .., 4„, 4 ...., wi • ti � ‘ r- i w ,nr 1' 36 ' =,- u H x„t . _, 0,04„ • 1 ° . „• ' YI, j,h0EII Pi,• ” r �. ''�` a MI I, r.t i / �, 1 I .' a 21? �,� �" � 1 NMI I \ drill fit.. . mil OokOW n , \\ 30, 110v 11 1 —-n 1111 a , M —1-2-1 I ' , , STAFF REPORT w- SDR 930002 CUY FbOt)8/8gPtAvALi Page 2 s' ,. � • I , I I I I II , 1> 4 ;r ISM' "e ' 1 y4 '. + _ , / . I • • ..•..,...-14.1..4 +A:eJ..rl,t_.__..,... _._•. �, ..............._._•._. ,_ _..-r. .-..•.....ra..,... ,...,L.n- 4.....-».J.aa1..Ji-' ar ...An..«,..«......,,.+.L+FH1n.«.......I.rJ......aU.....w- •,.sl:...n...l..rr..e«•.w..••»..rJi.. .wa.l':W4....rrwi..—a:,la'...,N.'...++:.IM •,1....•e.,.,..... .+x..,w-.9.1'..ua..Nwrlaxh.r hi • • y �+ y II. DETAILED APPLICATION DESCRIPTION Planning Division staff reports to the Commission typically include a fairly detailed description of the existing site configuration, zoning, surrounling uses, and a detailed description of the ;proposal culled from staff's review of the development plans. With this application, however, the applicants have provided a very thorough narrative describing the site and surrounding properties, as well as a very detailed description of the proposed development and the necessary applications. Therefore, this staff report will not repeat this information already supplied by the applicants ' but will list the following as the exhibits to be considered as the applicants' statement: 1, ''March 1, 1993 Gordon to Randy letter from Davis Randy Wooley; 2. January 28, 1993 letter from Gordon Davis to the Planning Division along with attached Narrative Description; 3. Site Plan (sheet 1 of 4) and Grading Plan (sheet 2 of 4) dated March 1, 1993 by Alpha Engineering; 4. utility , Plan (sheet 3 of 4) by Alpha Engineering and Priest Engineering; 5. Elevation, (sheet 4 of 4) .by Planmark 6. Landscaping n g Plan (sheet 1 of 1 by Alpha Engineering and Priest ., Engineering) . . 7. Map of Site by Alpha Engineering; 8. T rans ortaticm,. mpIact Study f oY .Cub F oods Commercial Center er by Kittelson & Associates February, 1993; IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE SITE AND GRADING PLANS THAT ARE UNDER REVIEW WERE SUBMITTED AS REPLACEMENT SHEETS SUBSEQUENT TO THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL. AS SUCH, THESE PLANS CONTAIN INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. STAFF CONSIDER THE SITE AND GRADING PLANS TO SUPERSEDE THE EARLIER .,TA�'F WILL CONSID SUBMITTAL. IT IS ADDITIONALLY NOTED THAT THE SITE PLAN REFERS TO FIVE SEPARATE LOTS • WHEREAS THE APPLICATION DOES NOT REFER TO ANY MINOR LAND PARTITION OR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION TO BE MADE AT THIS TIME SO AS TO 'RESULT IN SUCH A APPLICANTS' THAT THE AP RECONFIGURE THE SITE INTO THE �' CONFIGURATION. THE APPL>rGANTS AGENT, GORDON DAVIS, HAS TOLD , •THE APPLICANTS MAY APPLY FOR APPROVAL TO RE THE FIVE LOTS IN THE FUTURE. THIS ANALYSIS CONSIDERS THE SITE AS ONE DEVELOPMENT SITE. In ' ' •" I i staff addition the he following this documents relating t e' ed b y �rio to reviewing a i t have not been included in the Planning C oYmass i n,s packets due to 'len g th and technical nature, these documents are available for review at the Planning Division office. 1 Ge...o' tectnscal Inve..stirati°n_z P�o p osed~ r—�sa rd R C enter by Applied Geotechnology Inc. 2. Joint DSL/Corps of Engineers fill permit application FP #7216 and supporting t r a.n elocu ea't m s s. I STAFF �HPOR T SDR 9 3 O102 CUB FOODw �SUPkRV AL7 Page 3 • ! � I ,♦ �!) 4 • , III. AGENCY AND NPO COMMENTS The pity of Tigard EngLneerninenteTritand the Unified Sewerage Agency have submitted multiple pages of comments on this proposal. Their comments are attached as an appendix to this report. The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal and provides the following comments: a. Finished cut or fill slopes shall have a maximum 2 to 1 slope; b. Erosion control measures shall be maintained throughout construction activities; C. Disabled person parking spaces will need to comply with Oregon State / Statutes with regard to size, number of spaces and signage. The State of Oreg2aliyision of State Lands (DSL) has been notified of this proposal due to the portion of the site which is shown to include possible wetlands area by the National Wetlands Inventory map. The applicants wetland delineation prepared by IES Associates confirms the existence of wetlands on the site. Application has been made for on-site mitigation for the proposed disturbance of a portion of the wetlands. The Division of State Lands ha S commented that a removal/fill perm:Lt is required for this project (comment of February 5, 1993). The applicants have submitted a copy of their application for a Joint DSL/CorpS of Engineers Fill Permit dated February 9, 1993 (DSL Permit #FP 7216) . . • The Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District has commented that all fire hydrant locations are subject to the final approval of the Fire District. The Oregon Department of Transporta'aon has reviewed this proposal and has commented that the traffic study should have included analysis of the proposed development's impacts on the Hwy. 217/SW 72nd AvenUe interchange for both existing conditions and with improvements. ODOT has further commented that they cannot comment on impacts to the interchange until the • analysis is completed. PLANNING DIVISION COMMENT: STAFF CONTACTED ODOT AND TOLD ODOT THAT THE CITY WAS NOT GOING TO REQUIRE THIS ADDITIONAL REVIEW FOR THIS PROJECT AT THIS TIME FOR THE ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS ODOT IS NOW REQUESTING, ODOT HAD BEEN APPRISED OF THIS POTENTIAL DEVELOpMENT FOR SOME TIME AND HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED THIS ANALYSIS. Northwest Natural Gas has commented that a 2 inch diameter as line exists on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue. This line has not been Shown on the preliminary improvement plant:J. The applicants' engineer should contact Scott Palmer at 721-2445 for information on the iodation of this line and responsibilities for relocation of the gas line. Portland General Electric and General Telephone have reviewed the propoSal and have issued no comments or objections, The Tualatin ValLgyWAter21iitrict and NPO #4 were provided with copies of the propoded development plans. As of this date, no commentS have been received from those agencieb. • STAN REPORT - SDR 93-11002 Cu8 FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 4 , t r Iv. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Chapter 18.120 Site Development Review • Code Section 18.120.180.A.1 (Site Development Review - Approval Standards) requires that a commercial development proposal be found to be consistent, with the various standards of other Community, Development Code chapters. The applicable criteria in this case are City of Tigard Community Development Code Chapters 18.62, 18.84, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, 18.150, and 18.164. These Chapters are also listed as approval standards for a planned development review application under Code Section 18.80.120,2. The proposal's consistency with these various Code chapters is reviewed in the following sections of this report. S The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Cede Chapter 18.92, (Residential Density Calculations), Chapter 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), Chapter 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), and Chapter 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) Which' are also listed under ( ide Section 18.120.180.A.1 and Section 18.80.120.A.2•. These chapters are therefore found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Code Section 18.120.180.A.2 (Relationship to the Natural and Physicel Environment) provides other Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of those previously listed Code chapters. These other standards are addressed immediately below. • The proposal is found to comply with the applicable portions of Code Section 18.120.180.A.2 relating to Site Development Review approval standards' for provision of buffering and screening of the proposed development through compliance with the buffering and screening requirements of Code Chapter 18.100 as described under the review of that Chapter. •• Code Section 18.120.180.A.8 ae well as Code Section 18.80.120.A.3 1 states that where development is allowed within and adjacent to the '100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining the floodplain. This area shall include • appropriate portions suitable foe the construction of a. pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted . pedestrian/bicycle The Flood nysur any Rate Ma f y d Tigard prepared by F EMA does not map 100ear floodplain n area f o r R ed ' ( Rock Creek on this site (FIRM Community Panel No 410276 0003B, dated March 1, 1982, although floodplain area is mapped to the south of this site) . Wherefore, no dedication of floodplain area is required, Code Sections 18.120.'180:9 and .10 require consideration of crime prevention y ds da. o .. a p�ern development. the revent��.oz� an'd safet� in the � design of a pre posed it., � TY1 _ Proposed along relatively open development and lan p' g p oposed akin with , e parking lot and building lighting should provide a reasonably, safe site design for future customers and employees of the development. I Chapter 18.80 Planned evelopment Review Cha p 18.80 process. Creating planned env�roi nvents through the application of flexible development standards. The purpose statement notes that it is the intent of this section to preserve to the greatest / ent p existing landscape gd amenities a � uSe of e ite plann ng proc o es tht relatethe type and design a `r Development designation,. e,L general review of�these standards is necessary. 02 CUES `O STAFF REPORT SUTC '93 00 ODS,7SUPEAVAhU Page 5 , w . • y w Mfr Code Section 18.80.120 identifies approval criteria for a, planned , • _ development site plan. Of particular note with regard to the current request is Section 18.80.120.A.3.a which states: ..., streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the s' existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the greatest extent ri... possible." With the underlying zoning district allowing large scale commercial developments, such as has been proposed, and the substantial r t slope of the site that needs to be graded to allow ouch a development, it would be very difficult if not impossible to allow this type of development Without substantially altering the tree cower and existing topography. The application proposes a very substantial amount of site grading and removal of almost ost all existing trees in order to accomplish this development. . However, the application provides for preservation and substantial • enhancement of the wetlands associated with Red Rock Creek. In addition the landscaping plan provides for a significant amount of replacement landscaping and trees to provide a relatively attractive development around 4;. a large commercial box development. Therefore, staff recommends that the 4. Commission find that the development plan makes a reasonable attempt at i satisfying this criterion., Section 18.80.120.A.3.b provides standards relative to buffering and screening a proposed development site :from surrounding uses sand streets. . rt, This criterion is addressed under the discussion of Code Chapter 18.100 , below. Sections 1.8.^8�. .d; and .e refer to residential. F develo tnents that are developed as planned developments. These approval ' � standards are therefore inapplicable. Sections 18.80.120.A.3.f, .c, »i , LiL and »k are essentially references to the requirements of other Code Chapters dealing with access, landscaping, signs, parking, and sensitive lands. Findings relative to these Code Chapters should be considered tantamount to consistency to these: planned development approval standards. • Section ' 18.80.120.A.3.12 allows the a rov'al authority for require the p P developer to provide facilities relative to public transit needs such as ttl' bust turn-outs or shelters, if the proposed development abuts a public transit route ` SW 72nd Avenue abutting the site is not currently served by Tri--Mete bus service, although „Tri-Met'e commente raise the possibility that current service',routes might someday be shifted to directly serve this area. Ti-Met has provided comments on the proposed development plan but has not requested the provision of any transit related facilities. Therefore, staff does not recommend that any transit related facilities be required as conditions of development approval.. Chapter 18.62 �- c-�G' Zonin is Dtrict ;L and general The proposed uses of the site, food and beverage retail a ee retail sales,, are permitted uses in the ,c-c =thing district' (Code Section 18.62.030) . staff =thing ie charged with reviewing future usage of the site ° through the review of business' tax applidations and building permit ' > applications.' Proposed p improvements comply' With the C`O,: zoning district dimensional nal site im rvvements � g o standards (Code Section 18.62 030) for building height (45 foot maximum . . . allowed; ; 26 foot natlm' um height proposed); lot coversg a 85 percent maximm al l we d sits covers g a in the 0 G zon , oose te coverage of leas taan 75 pe de t); ae d 1a ndsca ed area (minimuM landscape cover ag e of 15 p ardent" b l d a p . s vera ge e n a i25 There are no a pp 1adale bu ildi ng setback req ui re ments snce n ne of the site diredtl y abuts a reside�tial �oning d istrict, excep t aorose SW 72nd Arenue from the' site. f'iTJ,FF PORT - SDP :98-0002 duB PbODS/5UP5R M Page , ..:M,.r _,G» ✓..A.n+...n.,1.:....«;...n«Y:..e..wr..:rv.>., -. - r.„n4ue:l,., • ,.Wv..-r-._......._.....,.,e..,1,...,._....rs r.. .. r ... -...a. .,.�..1.. r1L...r..w.,....n.. ..W..,..._.,...u.L.... .- ..,n.w.,....:... a+r- ..r.........._. .....r..a.l_n..t+.......,,.. r+w.ww_ e • N •1 '„ Chapter 18.84 - Sensitive Lands Review The applicants retained IES Associates to conduct a wetland delineation on the site. IES identified two jurisdictional wetlands on the site as indicated on the site plan. The wetlands area that is located within the proposed parking lot area has been proposed to be filled. Under the requirements of Chapter 18.84, the City of Tigard defers to the Oregon Division of State Lands and US Army Corps of Eng ineers permitting processes ` for wetland modifications. The applicants have filed a separate joint permit application with the DSL/Corps for filling of this wetland area. . This area is therefore not subject to City review. The joint DSL/Corps permit application and wetland fill mitigation plan is available for review through the Planning Division although it is not technically part of this development application. Page 8 of the applicants' narrative describes how the proposed wetlands mitigation plan will work in consort with the storrr►water quality treatment and detention plan required by the USA requirements for the Tualatin River Basin. The Planning Division recommends approval of the preliminary plans for this facility subject to the conditions of approval recommended by the Engineering Department. The Engineering Department will consider the ' comments provided by USA in the review of the final facility and storm drainage plans. Contrary to USA's recommendation, however, the City of Tigard typically does not desire dedication of Such aciliti:es to the City with the added maintenance responsibilities. , Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested, however,, to allow modification of the 25 foot buffer area adjacent to the wetlands adjacent . to Red Rock Creek. This area adjacent to the wetlands is not subject to • DSL/Corps review, but is subject to City of Tigard regulations. Community 1I . , Development Code Section 18.84.028.A requires that land within 25 feet of • • an identified wetlands be considered as wetlands. Modifications to any area considered wetlands, not including areas under the DSL/Corps permit requirements, may be permitted subject to the review and approval of the modification plans Consistent with Code Srertion 18,84.040•D. The applicant has addressed these standards on page 8 t'hrougi„ 10 of the applicants' narrative. Staff concurs with the applicants' analysis for this request and recommends approval of the Sensitive: Lands Review Permit for the proposed wetland buf fer modification.n• The f.oL l owi ng is ho p the applicants' narrative as proposed f indings in support o f this request: 1 Section 18.84.040.D outlines the following numbered approval criteria necessary to obtain a Sensitive Lands Permit for a wetland area alteration (in this case la buffer alteration) that does not meet the F jurisdictional definition of other state and federal regulatory II , agencies. The applicant has p +opoSed findingd to this criteria. The 1 City adopts those findings. 1. The proposed l landform alteration or development is neither on wetland in an area`designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan, Floodplain and Wetland Map not is within 25 ,r� feet of such a'wetland. Proposed Finding. The Red Rock Creek wetland ` ' • in this ;aria 'i:s not '.�.denti.fied as Comprehensive significant Plan Wetland d glair aids Wetand identified in the City's entz t r I , I I , 1 I I I ' I 1 STAFF REPORT SDR 98,-0002 CUB 'h0DS/SDPER"VAL[? Page / I I I I I I I I r A , ..r.......... .....r.. ..., .,..,.y ,,..,.r ,. r. ,r'ru... ..x .,,.i,,. .,e. ,., r..., ...-„ .1, n,r.,,r. ... •. ..„r :.,, r .,....I, r. r ...... n r.r ,, I I / , i r..i,,..., . ....._, • .,, .,., . •... a..,.w n.l.mm.•. JN..I..n._s.. ....... k .a,,...«i.. _ .. ..._.w. ..w.._. , ,.—.... .r. .... .,v v.0. .... ,a.,a.a,., ...._.!,r, \, 7 i 2. The extent and nature of the proposed landform alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than than the minimum required for the use. Proposed Finding: i Because of the, meandering nature of the wetland line, the wetland and its buffer extend eastward toward the development area in only one spot. While the parking lot itself will be ` 30 feet away from the actual wetland line, the severe grading requirements of the site force the parking lot to be elevated at the western edge almost 10 feet. In order to minimize intrusion into the wetland and/or buffer areas, retaining walls 1 will be used. However, construction of that wall will intrude an average of approximately 7 feet into the buffer area for this approximately 110 foot area. Of the approximately 800 , lineal feet of wetland edge, only approximately 110 feet will be impacted by the retaining wall within the buffer area. The intrusion area is. approximately 770 square feet. However, in an approximately 200 lineal foot area immediately north of " the intrusion area, the wetland boundary and parking diverge so that the average buffer is approximately 40 feet, equalling ,, approximately 3,000 square feet more buffer than is required. r,� 3. encroachment or d Lange in on-site or off-site drainage • 3 Any'�enCroa age which wo ld adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated. Proposed Finding: The proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention basin and the proposed wetland enhancement/mitigation plan are designed to manage on and off site dra,t.nage: ,, 4. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to landform alteration development, provisions t Surface Water Management p ro g ram of Washington County Y met and areas not covered by ,structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance w ith Chapter 18.100. Proposed Finding: The proposed stormwater, quality treatment and detention basin and the proposed wetland mitigation/enhancement program will .} replace! and substantially enhance the level' of both upland, traneition.al and wetland vegetation within the Red Rock Creek corridor. 5. All other sensitive 1a nds requirements have been met. Proposed Finding: fi No other su bstantve requirements rements are applicable to this proposal . r Chapter' 18.150, Tree Removal �• „ 5: � � �The�provisions of� � Shall be met. F lore os����' inding: , NO trees are to be removed within this area. . • STAFF REPORT SIDR 9 -4002 CUB FJODSJSUPER TALU Page 8 • 7. Other Comprehensive Plan policies are met. , Proposed Finding: ti • The proposal is consistent with Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards (the area is not within a IOU year floodplain . nor contains other physical hazards), Parks, Recreation and :.Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan (the area is not r, a designated park or recreation area and the proposed mitigation plan meets the general open space policies of the plan) . Chapter 18.96 - Additional Yard Area Requirements 4" Cody Section 18.96.020.8.2 requires a minimum 30 foot setback from the centerline of $W 72nd Avenue, beyond any setback required by the underlying zoning district. As ry , previously mentioned, there is applicable setback imposed by the. ,:-G' zoning district. The proposed building would be set back 80 feet from the centerline of SW 72nd Avenue. Therefore, Code Section 18.96.020.8.2 has been satisfied. Chapter 18.100 - LandscapinG Code Section 18.100.030 requires street trees to be planted in accordance ' with certain detailed standards for all developments fronting on a public or private street. Code Section 18.10.0.035.A specifies a minimum caliper size of 2 inches at planting and 20 to 40 foot spacing. The landscaping plan proposes minimum planting sizes for Chancellor Linden street trees of • 3.5 to', 4 inch caliper on 40 foot centers along SW Dartmouth Street thereby satisfying this standard as well as with the Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines approved by the City Council on October 27, 1992. The applicants' landscaping plan also proposes minimum planting sizes for Sweetgtita street trees of 2.5 inch caliper on 40 foot centers along SW 72nd Avenue consistent with the Code's street tree standard. The landscaping plan provides for appropriate low height plantings along the site's frontages on both sides of the sidewalks to reduce the impacts of 7 ', to Satisfy the standards r Section 18.100.110.A.1, ' S . ` e lights on adjacent uses and upon traffic on the abutting streets y rds of Code Se � as well as It is note Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines. noted here that these a the p re comments ate based upon the review of the submitted landscaping plan which calls for a landscaped strip between the curbs and sidewalks The revised ea site plan which is part of the review package does not provide for " sidewalks to be set back from the curbs. The landscaping plan is consistent with both the City Council's adopted landscaping guidelines for Dartmouth Street and also with Code Section 18.164.070:8, whereas the site ply&n is not. This Code section requires that a planter strip separation of at least five feet in width be provided on any collector Street, except - none The in certailt conditions n of whii�h apply to the current situ,.ation; ti DDartmouth S]»J. Therefore, . * '" Street landscaping guidelines call for a minimum seven foot wide planter str`L Therefore the site plan will need to be revised to provide for a seven foot wide planter strip consistent with the Dartmouth, guidelines and the applicants' landscaping plat. landscaping plan also prov' s more than 120 trees relatively erg The land y ide, `v evenly distributed within and adjacent to the parking lot at a ratio in excess of the Code's standard of at least One tree per seven parking s-iaoea (Code Section 18 1 ,0.A.l.:d) _ o and recy l , �' 100: Refuse ycling facilities are required to be screened from views from other prope ties and from streets by Code Section 18.100.110.8 and .D. Staff was unable to Iodate plans for refuse STAFF REPORT SDR 93-0©02 CUB FOODS SUPERVALU /� Page 9 4,0.1 n r ', a ,, ` 1 • - • • and recycling facilities (although it is likely that these will be provided on or adjacent to the loading docks on the north edge of, the buildings). The applicants should be required to provide details on the screening of these facilities. Code Sections 18.100 80 and .130 provide for vegetative buffering and screening between a proposed development and abutting land uses. The Code's buffer matrix does not provide for any specific buffering or screening standards for a commercial use such as las proposed and abutting i. commercial properties. The buffer matrix requires a minimum 20 foot buffer yard between commercial development and single-family residential areas such as is found to the east of this site. However, this buffer standard A,•' does not apply when there is an intervening street. Nevertheless, Code "' Sections 18.80.120.A.3.b (Planned Development approval standards) and 18.120.A.4 Site De elo T meat Review approval standards) provide more or Surrounding uses.. The landscaping plan provides for well landscaped -- standards for l DU new perimeters of the site with a minimum dimension of fifteen feet. Staff finds that these landscaped perimeter areas will provide for sufficient '. landscaped buffering and screening to satisfy the intent of these more j subjective Code buffer sections. Chapter 18.102 -- Visual Clearance Areas Chapter 18.102 specifies vision clearance triangles adjacent to intersections in which the height of plantings, signs, etc. are limited in height to assure safe and adequate eight distance at intersections to reduce potential hazards from vehicular turning movements. The landscaping l plan appears to be consistent with the standards of this Chapter, as long as lower shrubs are kept trimmed below three feet in height and deciduous trees are trimmed so that no branches are lower than eight feet in height. Signs are also subject to this Code section. Chanter 18.106 - Parking, The site plan provides for Substantially more than the Code's required • minimum number of parking spaces for a combined grocery store and, general f retail sales plaza of this size (Code Section 18.106.Q30.0 . 398 parking spaced would be required by the Code standard of 1 spate per 200 square p' feet of gross floor area for the 79,455 square foot food and beverage '• retail sales. 166 spaces' would be required for the proposed 66,295 square foot total area by the Code'Standard of 1 space per r 400 square feet for general retail sales uses. The total required parking would therefore be 564 spaces The site plan piovides for 750 standards parking spaces. The parking proposed would exceed Code minimum s d by wy " plansntos provide for the may lanterpstrip between the sidewalk along parking g p ma be important with regard to the need to • ` wept� �.he curb and ng SW bartmouth. If the grading planter plan needs to big, revised to accommodate the planter believes it be preferabl e t o red uce t h e 1 iarking area ra ther th create that retaining walls. yR, development lots 4 and 5 will need to be reviewed for parking adequacy at the time of property wner does qu y development review. If t3ie °. o. " P artition thiS property in the future to provide th�' five individual lots IH , , sho wn on the site plan, j oi n seaccees and parking agreements should be provided amongst all of the parce10 involved in thi s development. !. &, Code Section 15.106.040.A:1 allows up to 25 percent of parking stalls to .,. be Compact act s ta lls. Less than percent of e parking s p aCen to be provided wou ld be c ompact spaces, This Standard is therefore eat3 �f iedd , STAFF REPORT SbR 98-0002 0U8 FOODS/SUPEAVAL'U Page 10 • •P ';a' \_' \\ ! v I N Y Code Section 18.106„020.A.c requires developments to provide disabled , :- person parking facilities as required by State of Oregon and federal law. According to ADA requirements (Americans with Disabilities Act) , a r minimum of 16 designated disabled person accessible spaces are required for parking areas which provide between 750 and 800 parking spaces. Thelsite plan provides for 18 disabled person car and van parking spaces in ' , locations convenient to the primary building entrances, thereby satisfying this standard. ' Code Section 18.106.020. P requires developments to provide secured bicycle p parking facilities at a''minimun ratio of at least 1 bicycle parking space ., ei per 15 auto parking spaces. The site plan does not provide for any bicycle parking spaces. The site plan should be required to be revised to provide d.•1' for at least 53 bicycle parking spaces within conveniently located racks `” in order to satisfy this standard. The proposed automobile parking spaces and parking lot aisleways are appropriately configured to satisfy all applicable Code Section 18.106 050 parking area dimensional standards. ,Proposed loading spaces on the north I • I side of the buildings satisfy Code Sect ions 18.106.080 and .090 standards for off-street loading spaces. ° I • ' e Chapter 18.108 Access and Circulation ! ; ;4 r ' The proposed internal driveway and sidewalk system satisfies the requirement of Code Section 18.108.080(A) which requires that a commercial 4 development of this size provide at least two access driveways and sidewalks) to provide access from adjoining streets. The plan provides 15-, for two-way driveways and sidewalks leading from both streets abutting the site as well as a one-way Service driveway from SW 72nd Avenue to the loading areas on the northern side of the proposed buildings. II d Section lq.im os0.A requires sidewalk connections' between the public " sidewalks adjacent the site and the prima.;' entrances to the commercial uses. This is provided by the one-site sidewalks along the driveways from 4:' f SW 72nd and SW Dartmouth connecting to a sidewalk within a landscaped ' ` island leading to the sidewalks in front of the buildings. A fifteen-foot , wide sidewalk covered by a ten"'-fret wide canopy extends across the' fronts . of the buildings. The site plan is therefore consistent with all applicable Code Chapter 18.106 access standards. . The proposed internal roadway system provides uood access for emergency vehicles access as well as all other users throtghout the site. 1. b. jl .. Ch^pter 18.114 Signe The applicants' narrative states that wall signs will be installed for each t not be larger than 15 percent of the building face for any of these will tenants on the building e f n in f and that these signsill , g buildings. These signs would therefore be consistent with Code Section S.114.C. .b.i.1 standards f or wall sig na g a in the C-G zoning district. , The narrative States that an additional "wall" sign will located on one of the retaining walls in the southwest cornet of the site, facing Dartmouth. applicants that this is identified d reta�.n�.iY f�Wail would be with the This ''t�iall" si .' _ on the Site plan. Sta disagrees w '^ Sign permitted by Section 18.1.14'.C11�b retaining That Section,s edifa wall ` this sin g g p Y area is determined by g t 'icy .ly " p mentions that permitted wall Sign - etermined b the gross area of the building face (em p has is add ed) on wh ich the sign is to be mounted. The , retaining wall is clearly not a building; therefore, staff finds that this i I r t - PORT - SDR 93-0002 CUD 'OoDS/SUPERvALt7 page' 11 STAFF � I o. t I I I o • 4 � sign sh ould be conside red a freestan di ng sign and should onl y be permitted if other proposed signage is omitted. • The applicants' narrative notes that two (other) freestanding signs are proposed; one on the east side of the Dartmouth Street entrance to the development and one on the north side of the „gain .'72nd Avenue entrance» - , The maximum available increase in sign copy area and sign height have been ; requested for these freestanding signs through sign exemptions provided in Section 18.114.130.G...c.ii. and Section 18.114.145.A.3. Section I • 114.130.G.1.c.ii'provides for a 50 percent increase in sign copy area when � .• a site contains more than a single tenant and the additio nal sig ns area is needed to adequately identify the separate tenants. Section 114.145,A.C. provides for a 25 percent increase iii sign area and height if the increase will not deter from the purpose of the sign code. . Attached with the narrative are drawings of the two (other) proposed {; freestanding signs. The dimensions on these drawings are accurate (dimensions indicated on,the site plan - Sheet 1 - are incorrect). The applicant has provided proposed findings addressing the approva.1 criteria for the sign code exceptions. Due to the size of the sit , J , topographic differences between the building locations and the two abutting , streets, and large amount of frontage on these streets, staff concurs with the applicants that special circumstances exist ' which justify the additional sign area and height:, requested without compromising Code d purposes of limiting sign clutter. Staff recommends approval of the requested Sign Code Exceptions and recommends adoption of the following 1 • proposed findings provided by the applicants. The applicants state that the two -sign code exceptions are requested to more adequately identify the multiple tenants in the proposed development. Unlike many comparable retail centers with many tenants, this center is a, designed to accommodate three major tenants. While there will be . .. additional retail, users in Retail Space A and on Lots 4 and 5, those uses will be identified with wall signe only. Since the retail complex is designed focus complex g to son the three mayor tenants, each needs sufficient identification from the adjacent roads to ensure ' customer recognition. In addition, since the elevation of Dartmouth at the entry drive is 12 to 14 feet below the parking lot surface, little if .any of the major retail buildings will be able to be =seen from Dartmouth. Given this difference in elevation, it is essential that each of the three major retail users be identified at the street._, The proposed freestanding sign on 72nd Avenue is necessary since there ssary si aiil3. ? .\ be no other building identification visible from that street. The proposed freestanding signs are consistent with a development of this Size.than the do+mbin d�sign area would be allowed i f thislC evelap menu e / less had eight an d was classified as a Shopping center. In addition, even with the requested sign e xceptionsq the proposed s��.gn�, wi�l�. be smaller than the standard CAM food signs used throughout the northwest. Even' if found to be �onsi s. t ent with sign standards through thie review, v3ew, a separate sig n permit must be obtained from the Planning Division prior to erecting any sign. 8ign size, height, and location must bj shown to i` conform With Code standards (including vision' clearance) in order for Sigh permits to be issu :i. '. STAPP REPORT - SDR 93-0702 CUB ;COQDS jSUPEF1VAL'tT � � � � �� � �� � � Page 12 • • bti 1 '• ' ✓ h. ! .,.w .-1V.......ri-. n..r.+..,.,r..-r ,. _ .v. ._... _ i. H,..,w.«.. r,r._...«a..._.,..,,..✓,,s..,,r .......rY+,.,-.,_..,k v.._ • • • • • Chapter 18.150 Tree Removal Chapter 1$.150 will be ,satisfied in that the applicant will be required to obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing trees over 6 inches in caliper size in preparation for development. `Permits will be granted only if it is found necessary to remove the trees to accommodate structures, sidewalks, driveways, utilities, or other necessary site improvements. It should be clear from the review of the site plan and grading plan that this will require the removal of most of the trees on the site due to the Significant nifi.a rt amount of grading g whach must occur. Nevertheless, trees such r as are located on future lots 4 and 5 should not 'be removed until such time as is necessary to allow for development. Chapter 18.164 Public Improvement Requirements' STREETS The site is located immediately to the north of the future Dartmouth Street Extension and immediately west of SW 72nd Avenue. Both streets are classified as major collector streets by the Comprehensive Plan's '+ Transportation Plan Map. Major collector streets have the following minimum improvement standards imposed by Code Section 18.164.030.E.1.a: 60-80 feet of right-o;!!--way, 44, feet of pavement, and 2-4 moving lanes. SW 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site currently has the following improvements: 40 feet of right-oar--way, 11 - 13 feet of pavement west of centerline, and no curbs or sidewalks. Typically half-street improvements are required to be a condition of. development approval to bring abutting c�uu: P pp g g roads up to the minimum standards. The applicants apparently have no p roblem with such requirements and have proposed improvements beyond, the minimum im p rovement standards based upon their traffi c report's analysis of needed road improvements. Based on the applicants' traffic report, at such time as the entire Tigard Triangle is fully developed, the projected volume on, S.W. 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site exceeds the level requiring a five lane facility. , The applicant cL ate that the traffic report used conservative assumptions on future development of the Triangle. The basis of those assumptions is the existing land use plan for the area which was utilized even though that plan is being reconsidered by the City. While the plan revisions have not yet been adopted, the present directives from the Planning Commission with regard to the Triangle would require many areas that are now zoned for p eim 'l y Office development to be redesi tnated for medium.. density residential use. These chan a s w ould tend to reduce future peak-hour r traffic volumes from the levels considered in the traffic report. f' Theref o re, b ased on the traffic ic anal sis provided by the a pp licants and the G proposed changes to the land use plan, the applicants are proposing the following: (refer to Gordon Davis' March 1, 1993 letter to 'Dandy Wooley and the March 1, 1993 revised site plan) : . s A. Between rox� .. . ys the Dartmouth/8,W. 72nd Avenue 72nd Avenue and to a , an .. enue intersections a point a 'mate:lwy _20rJ feet north of the 72 .dr {' additional 31 feet of right-of-way, which will create a total of 51 feet of right-of-way ht-of- centerline. 'g ' lway on the west side of the center 'ne. The remaining frontage along S.W4 would have irdreas F3. T � g .. g 7 7 nd Ave � ed right-of-wry to a total of 45 feet '' on the west side of the • centerline. • STAFF TAFF REP©RT � SDR 93-0002 CUB F �Da��C3�ERVAIC Pag...e 13 i • 041. y J/•I i • c. A total street section between theDartmouth/72nd intersection and • • the site driveway on 72nd Avenue will have 51 feet of paving and will include: - a bike lane on the west side -- a southbound through travel lane a southbound left turn lane • -- a northbound left turn lane - a ,northbound through travel lane D. A total street section between the 72nd Avenue driveway to a point • approximately 200 feet north w311 include: - a bike lane on the west side - a southbound through travel/right turn (into the site) a center merge/left turn lane a northbound travel lane E. From the north property line to a point approximately 200 feet north � L of the 72nd Avenue driveway: �• a bike lane on the west side - a north and southbound travel lane - a continuous left turn lane F. Curbs and. sidewalks will be constructed along the entire west frontage of 72nd Avenue. The Planning Division and Engineering Department concur with these proposed improvements along the site's SW 72nd Avenue frontage, except that the Planning Division points out that the sidewalk will need to be removed from the curb by at least five feet consistent with Code Section 18.164.070.8, Recommended conditions of approval are provided at the end of this report.' to specify these street improvements along SW 72nd Avenue. • The proposed Dartmouth Street extension will be built under the Dartmouth l' improvement I iyC ITS,p local improvement district. The local district will construct a three-lane roadway with curbs, and gutter within a 70 foot right-of-way \` between Pacific Highway and SW 72nd Avenue. Construction is scheduled to occur in summer, 1993. It will be necessary that approval of the, • • development plan be. oonditioned upon Dartmouth Street be open for traffic between SW Pacific Highway and SW 68th Avenue prior,to occupancy of any of the proposed retail spaces. Access from SW 72nd Avenue alone would not provide Sufficient access. '• I I • The applicants' traffic report indicates es t at a three-lane Dartmouth Street should functio n adequately for approximately 20 years, under present growth' assumptions, but that sometime later a five lane facility may be needed. .,: necessarily how� facility The scary y from development, hut from the build-out of the entire analysis also shows that the demand for a five lane facility does not esaril come the developm , '� entire Tigard, Triangle, again, under present growth assumptions. Again, the assumptions that were used i the rff caly sis are more likely goin g to change as the Tr. . ng plan land-use s revised Ouch that lesser, traffic peaks would be anticipated. AS stated by Gordon Davis in his March 1, 1093 letter: In a future of uncertainty, it is nonetheless clear 'that . present growth assumptions, the three lane facility will function very development adequately the the Trianv Triangle for the next 20 rears t+i However as • future ecisions are made on o her transportation issues, the impacts to Dartmouth will become clear and decisions can then be made on the appropriate to Da additional ' Dartmouth. , nal ziriprovement's �.i STAF ' REPORT - R SD 93-0002 Chit FOODS ,`SUPER 'U''AxrtT Page 14 • M1 c ter' 1 /' n n x' (7'1" h N V • • • In response to the traffic report's findings, the applicant is proposing the following improvements to Dartmouth Street: rn anticipation that a five lane facility may be needed at some time ; ` \ A. in the future, dedication of an additional amoun e of right-of-way to bring the total right-of--way to 45 feet from the centerline. . B. In addition to the improvements provided by the Dartmouth local improvement district, the following would be provided by the j� applicants: - A second westbound through lane on Dartmouth Street between the 72nd Avenue intersection and the Dartmouth entrance driveway to P the development. ment. - From the Dartmouth driveway west, an acceleration lane on Dartmouth Street which would,transition back to the three-lane roadway. - A deceleration right turn lane for vehicles turning right into the Elite from Dartmouth Street. C. A 6-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the curb. The Planning Division and Engineering Department generally concur with • these proposed improvements along the .bite's SW Dartmouth Street frontage, with the following exceptions. Again, the Planning Division points out that the sidewalk will need to be removed from the curb by at least seven , feet to be consistent with the Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines adopted by the City Council last October as well as with the minimum five p , foot separation required by Code Section 18.164.070.8.1 Mr. Davis' letter argues that separation of the sidewalk from the curb along Dartmouth would . require that a seven-foot tall retaining wall be built to accommodate the separated sidewalk. without affecting the parking lot design. While we agree with Mr. Davis that a seven-foot retaining wall is not in' scale with the pedeetrian environment which is desired, staff points out that the need for the taller retaining wall could be diminished (or extinguished) by 'I proposed reducing the size of the extremely large parking lot some. The p p Byrreducing the would provide lot by eleven parking spaces along its ther parking t ages in excess of ',Code stand T3 reducing�, the asking lat,by� � z1oi�. ` '}� southern , �., edge, the sidewalk separation should be able to be provided without an increase in the presently proposed retaining wall height of four; feet., 1The Planning Division, recommends that the sidewalk be required to be separated from the curb. by a planter strip,. of at l.ea.t seven feet in,width and that j and that the grading x tho g g cormodate and site ,plants be revised accordingly to.�ac the sidewalk without increasing the height of the retaining wall to more than four feet in height. City g r y disagrees h he yeax assumptions of the traffic report. M . Wool b � res that it based a very slow rate '. of growth. for the Triangle. i r. Weoley indicates that that' the traffic w report predicts future''capacity'problems at the Dartmouth driveway Sooner en SSW 72nd and ,the y He .proposed leo indicates that westbound than 20 years, and therefore he advocates the ro osed second westb' changes driveway. the � ,. lane potential zone C g r i.t area ,• r y the dr th otential zon es in th' r will not eliminate potential for these problems: Mr. Wooley feels that the full improvements '.proposed by prev ant 3 applicants are neede d t the to a.rit the pred'�� is ted traffic capacity problem at the driveway. 11 The Planning Division i i the applicants and the Engineering \ Department with regard to the p ro p osed second l ane between S )• STAFF REVORT JW SUR 93-0002 C'UI yOODS/SUPERVALU page 1S .1J d ` f. I .l ' 72nd Avenue and the site entrance. The Planning Division does not find that the traffic report justifies the need for this additional lane and we find that the additional roadway width may be detrimental to the scale of • development and attractive streetscape which the City has been attempting 'F to create along Dartmouth Street. It is understood that the applicants may desire to construct this additional lane at this time to avoid future ' ,, • disruption of access to the development when and if additional road width is found to be desirable. However, absent a clear prediction of future traffic and absent a final land use plan for the Triangle, the Planning .. • Division recommends that this additional lane be omitted. The Planning ; , Division concurs, however, with the proposed right-of-way dedication in s I,• r this area so that buildings or other substantial improvements are not ., constructed upon area that may be needed for future road widening. Clearly, the Planning Division recommendation is a departure from past City :' practice of requiring roadway improvements to respond to predicted peak y--,f traffic levels. The approach recommended by the Planning Division would f be to instead limit roadway improvements to handle normal traffic levels • rather than peak traffic levels. This should result in a more pleasing streetscape at all times in exchange for possible additional congestion at , . peak traffic periods. It is time that the City change directions to consider the quality of the trip in transportation decisions rather than placing primary emphasis on providing for quantities of trips. The Planning Division is therefore hesitant to recommend the scale of ,, improvements suggested by the City Engineer and the applicant. This, • therefore, is probably the most significant issue for the Commission to • decide with regard to this application,. Substantial testimony on this issue should be anticipated at the hearing. Recommended conditions of approval are provided at the end of this report to specify the Planning Division's r�;commendations for street improvements to Dartmouth Street. j SANITARY SEWER Code Section 18.164.090 requires that new developments be adequately served • by sanitary sewerage collection facilities developed consistent with City t �' of Tigard design standards. ;;•, Currently there is no sanitary sewer serving the site. As part of the ',� Dartmouth Street local improvement district, an eight-inch diameter • sanitary sewer line is being installed within the street, This line should provide adequate service to the proposed development. •', The Dartmouth Street LID is providing sanitary sewer stubs to SW 72nd Avenue for future extension of sewer to the north. Typically, the City • would require each development to e<trt +.nd sanitary sewer main lines to the farthest uphill property line. However, in this Case there are two ' �• additional elements that must be considered: �r1r',;4 ,u' A. Cub Foods,7Supervalu will not have any need for the sanitary sewer ;aajt' ` line in SW 72nd Avenue; and '• B. The Dartmouth Street LID shots the sanitary newer line' in SW 72nd Avenue to be located on the west side of the road's centerline. ' `' The appl.i:cants Will presumably asabconda�tiori of development provide � ar.o approval. If the � ' , the sanitary sewer is laced on the West side of ' and then west side of SW 72nd Avenue pp h do y p � � SW r 2nd� Avenue a - � � � 1 • • red,.veloprnent ocCur' on the east side, then it Would tear up the Street improvements s to get addess to th e sewer on the west t side. �, • ` SIATI REPORT - SAF 93 3a02 D �COT 05 tgD��AL L Page 16 W I I. 1 It is staff's recommendation, that the developer be required to determine where this proposed sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd Avenue can be shifted to the east side of the street so as not to later interfere with the ' improved street. For any portion of the line that must remain on the went side of SW 72nd Avenue, the applicant should be required to provide for its , installation. 1 • 1.. STORM S SEWER Code Section 1 18.164.100.A states' that development permits shall only 'be , ---ee issued. where adequate provisions for storm drainage have been made. The ' • applicant is proposing a private on-site storm sewer system to serve this development. Part of the proposed wetlan d enhancement and mitigation program this ry development, works in combination with the proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention plan. In the large',.triangular upland area between Dartmouth Street, the parking lot, and the wetland boundary, this area will be shaped into a basin and developed as a wetland marsh. All stormwater 'i from the project will be discharged into this basin which is designed to meet the standards for stormwater quality treatment, prior to entering Red ,, Rock Creek. The Unified Sewerage Agency has established and the City has agreed to enforce (Resolution and Order No. 91-47) Surface Water Management Regulations requiring the cox �truc on �o f on water quality facilities s , or fees in-lieu of their construction The applicant is proposing to construct on-site water quality fadLlit,ies. Based on the preliminary plans, the storm water from the site will be piped into a private system. It will then be 'transported to. one of several water quality facilities prior to being discharged into Red Rock Creek. Red Rock Creek, the identified wetlands, and the mitigated wetlands are Classified as a sensitive areas under Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Classification as a sensitive area requires that an undisturbed corridor be provided adjacent to the water body. The required corridor must be a minimum of 25 feet wide, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries ve rev. and. the s�ensa.ta, area of the seinsa.tive area. The applicant has defined provided for the 2S foot buffer. Where the applicant has encroached within "74 the minimum 25 foot buffer, an adequate area of compensation has been provided. OTHER UTILITIES Code Section 18.1644120.A requires p provide •; underground placement of utility servide0 sdach as electric, telephone, and • natural gas service. The City Council has established a fee-in-lieu-of • ` - to be to be assessed where it x:s found o • •', underground placement of utilities o b a impractical to place these facilities underground due to utility provider concerns, limited frontage affected, or other reasons. Staff recommends that the developer of this Site be responsible for underground placement of utilities on the 'site;) however review of the final,public improvement plans with affected agencies may result in a situation where these agencies g installation. Therefore, the recommended would.� �resist underground instal.!. ` � , , • / conditions of approval provide for the Engineering Department to review the i fina l Public improvement plans with input from oth e r utilit y p roviders and to then determine whet her the utilities will need to be p lac ed underground or if a fee Should be collected. • M1 I STAFF REPORT SDA 98-0002 CUB F+G7©DS/SUPERVALLT Page 11 • • • I i ' I I I I. ; d • . • ' � :'r •.vr r:. r.• t� J.. J l.. ., . ,.. .':.;•,•:r.;:.y: :.•.w:•:ti'r'•rr'•':'r:':; .•,•.•'S;'r;:;:;y;::;:;:,;�};�;�;•{;;.;�;.•:.;.;.}r.;r.;,;:''':�:{;:;r::v'r:.. ................ n. .��. n ' I , ii%.% tt ;�4i� : ' r:�� ii;i ;g: � 1*�ii :fit r. ' i . %% . ,.., ,�..... .. ./.f• . 1 :. i m` si K r f .,.n'. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET OR"FINANCIALLY 'SECURED PRIOR TO THE . ISSUANCE OF 'BUILDING PERMITS. UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE, THE 'STAFF CONTACT IS CHRIS DAVIES OF THE ENGINEERING DIVISION: , ' ' , r 4 1. Previously approved lot line adjustments for the involved parcels 1 shall, be completed „prior to the issuance of building ,,,permits. L Evidence of the recording of the lot line adjustments shall be 1 ' provided to the Planning 'Dlvision. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry''Offer, 1 I+ . ' Planning Division. 2'.' The site and grading plans' shall be revised to accommodate the .4 ' following: 1• .' . a. Sidewalks shall be separated from the 'curb'by'a planter strip no less than five' feet in width along'SW 72nd Avenue, and no , . less than 'seven feet in width along SW Dartmouth° Street; ' ' ,' . ' b. The revised plans should not necessitate increasing the retaining Wall directly north' of Dartmouth Street to a height of greater than four feet; 1 ' " • C. The proposed Cub Foods sign on on retaining wall Shall be r '.1,' omitted, or alternatively, the other freestanding; sign along SW dartmouth Street shall be omitted; . d. Additional details shall be provided regarding the required' , ' C screening of trash and recycling 'facilities,. as 'well ' as the ' screening of roof-top: mechanical equipment, , . , e. The Site plan shall be revised to provide for at 'least 53 . • bicycle •parking spaces ' within conveniently located bicycle ' racks. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. ' 3. The applicant shall be responsible for the underground s.nstal.latis�n of utilities along the frontages of. SW Dartmouth' Street and 'SW 72nd, ;, 1 `.- Avenue, unless the Engineering Department in cons ultation with other Hr, . • , utility providing ;agencies determines that a fee' in-lieu: Of ' ' t . ''. underground installation is justified. 4. The applicant: Shall investigate the feasibility of relocating the ' ' • 7' ro os�ed sanitary newer' line in SW 72nd v P p 7 Avenue, to the east side of installation aion of e The nt that imust be'installed on the ! rl'ine'd e applida� responsible for ' .' '» any po�tLori of the 'line it" Engineer the final west side of the centerline The pity g r shall have determination as to the location. 5 An agreement ohali be exe a. licant on forms id by the Cit ` which waives the by th ty owner y s right to p se or ' c pp r'' prov e rclmonstrdte against , y� property p ove ct formed to » g t a future' local a.m. r . . nt di ' me sera. further improve SW Dartmouth Street. � I •• 5 AFB REPORT W S DR 9S� 0®2 CUB FOOD S�SUP�R�AtC , Page PY t on forma • .. 5. An agreement shall be executed by the applicant, n provided by the City, which waives the property owner's right to oppose or remonstrate against a: .future local improvement district formed to' improve SW 72nd Avenue. 7. Two (2) seta of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to , . the Engineering Department. Seven (7) seto of approved drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, all prepared by a ; • Professional Engineer, shall be submitted for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required , by the Building Divisi:an and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. B. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the SW Dartmouth Street frontage to increase the right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerlines'. The description shall be tied to the existing ' right-of--way centerline. The dedication documnent shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. right-of-way shall, be dedicated to the public along the �» Additional g y , � j SW 72nd Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 51 feet from centerline (from the intersection of SW.72 Avenue Dartmouth Street' north to a point that is, at a minimum, 200 feet north of the applicants' access on SW 72nd Avenue). The description shall be tied to the existing right--of-way' centerline. The dedication document ' shall be on city forms. • ' ' { 10. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public: along the SW 72nd Avenue frontage to, increase the right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline, (from the north property line, south to where the right-of-way increases to 51 feet ae detailed in #9 above). The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. 11. Standard street improvements, including concrete sidewalk, separated from the curb, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement, b . storm drainage, streetlights, and underground ',utilities shall be ' installed along the SW 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street frontages. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to major collector " :r street ;standards and shall conform to the alignment of existing . i.,.. adjacent improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering Department. NOTE: The street improvements shall be as described in - the applicants' preliminary plan submittal dated March 1, 1993 except aE ;: • that sidewalks shall be separated from curbs and the additional Dartmouth Street westbound lane from W 72nd Avenue to the site , entrance shall be omitted. 12. Building permits rmita wall not b e issued and construction u ctaon of proposed d public improvements Shall not commence after the Engineer in g De p artment has reviewed and approved the public improvement plans and a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement has been executed. A 101.10 percent p� ma agreement,assurance e oletterrtnof i, commitment, .a n inee pert er ox' n fee and a sign insta 1ation/etreetlight fee+a-e payment 13. proposed The p rivately operated and maintained sanitary sewer and . I storm drainage System plan p rofil e details shall be provided as part, •, • ,. of the public improvement 'plans: � � � � � � � � � � ' � �T��� ������ SDR �� a0ez ��� FOODS/s� ���v�� Page L I1 • F .' ,., .., .:v_ «_... .«:.. .. d. ,,..,-w. ,I....,AU ux.l..,....0...................«...... ..n,...,-...w.A...«...i-4J:...r........,aL:..,»..r ...w..:ua..«.. ......A.....,F... _.. ,w,..r...—Aa.....+..wx. 1•.--, .«.n+. »..14..,..n.L I � 1 , i • 1 14. The applicant shall demonstrate that storm drainage runoff can be discharged into the existing drainageways without significantly impacting properties downstream. v 15. Sanitary newer and storm drainage details shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. Calculations and a topographic map 4 of the storm drainage basin and sanitary sewer service area shall be • provided as a supplement to the public improvement plans. Calculations shall be based on full development of the serviceable area. The location and capacity of existing, proposed, and future lines shall be addressed. 16. The applicant shall provide connection of proposed buildings to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. 17. The applicant shall be required to provide an on-site water quality facility as established under the guidelines of Unified Sewerage ; y Agency Revolution and Order No, 91-47. 18. The applicant shall provide, as a minimum, a 25 foot buffer (except as approved for modification by the Planning Commission's order) which meets the requirements 6.08 ' w rements of Section 6.08.3, of USA Resolution and I , Carder No. 91-47. I I 19. The applicant shall obtain a °Joint Permit from the City of Tigard. This permit shall meet the requirements of the NPDES and Tualatin , �I. Basin Erosion Control Program. ,r , 20. The applicant should be aware that the City of Tigard has adopted Chapter 70 of the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code and that the grading plan shall comply with this chapter. 21. The developer shall submit an erosion control plan ensuring compliance with erosion control standards; fcr the Tualatin River Basin. STAFF CONTACT: George Steele, Building Division. 22. A Joint DSO;/Corps of Engineers wetlands fill permit shall be obtained • • ' by the applicants, (Authority:uthority Section 404, Glean Water Act, and ORS • '' • 541.605 to 641.695) . A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department by the applicants . I I • 23. No construction vehicles Shall accesa or depart the site via Baylor k, Street' and Clinton Street except with prior approval of the City Engineer. ' Approval for exceptions will be given only if the that there practical alternative for access. . applicant can.show the here is no ractieal altern.ativ No construction vehicles) or equipment may be stored or parked on Baylor. Street and Clinton Street. Parking of construction vehicles on SW 72nd Avenue shall be limited to the mite frontage and Shall. comply wi. cli+nstrta ion materials and duration of with all e regulations as to. location a parking. No erials shall be stored within the rights of way of SW 72nd Avenue or Dartmouth Street " at any time. Construction vehicles means the vehicles l of any contractor or , subcontractor involved in the construction of the site improvements or buildings l ro p osed under hie application and shall include the veh icles of their suppliers and employees. STAFF CONTACT "ten Schreindl r Code Enforcement Officer, 639-4171. . 24. A tree removal permit must be o b tained from the Planning DiviSion befo re removal of an y trees exce ss of 6 inches in diameter, The • Planning Division, may prescribe protective measures for the trees to ' STAFF' REPORT SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERV U Page 20 . II I I I I • J II I I • I I 1 . , ,.., ,. ,,1..,. _,..,,,......:.. ..w.,, ................... ....1.,.•,.w.,..,.._.w.,•w.. ,..+.... a-.... M...........,...aawu.._...."..k..+..,...wJ.....rw..,.,«A........,,4....!-4., ,».....w,. w.»..L,.........-..+..-.uei.Y..a uv 1 m, ,,,..u.+W,:ra be retained. These measures must be remain in place throughout construction activities on the site. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. ' UNLESS A SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE ASSURANCE IS POSTED, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT: 25. Sign permits shall be obtained from the Planning Division prior tu. the installation of any signs on the site which are intended to be seen from the public right-of-way or other parcels. STAFF CONTACT: a The Planning Division., 26. The proposed landscaping materials and other proposed site improvements shall be installed in substantial conformance with the / approved site and landscaping plans. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. 27. An occupancy permit shall not be granted until SW Dartmouth St is open fov traffic between SW Pacific Highway and SW 68th AveY„M.;» Staff Contact: City of Tigard Building Official. • APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE FINAL DECISION DATE. PREPARED BY: 'erry Offer, Development Review Planner APPROVED BY: Dick Be sdorff, Senior Planner • STAFF REPORT - SDR 93--0002 CUB VOObS/SUPERVALtS Page 21 » i o . ,47 X11 ;wt.b , 1q1 1 . .K r 1 j • r ,1 ..,«. _J''. raw-..n •..... ,.Y.+1- .0..wu. �......_l r wJ--... l.(.... +,-rG4e �1. .,..x.+n.. wn-,..« . ..,r] r.,—.. 1J, �w11'.r'1V..Il+.+. n•.1,+."». .»r nr�..Y. ,,-,j..,..—w ,41.___..... . u ...d ' Ka ,,,.1 4 . , L''' I I. ti AFFIDAVIT OP 'MAILING r 1 STATE OF OREGON I . County of Washington ) ss, ,,. • City of Tigard ) I, 1 k, , i, 1r-:: , being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath •. depose and say: (Please print) That I am a ' ( -4" for 1, The City of Tigard, Oregon. 4i That I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: • ., • , .e 1 •. ', That I served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: f • -,City of Tigard Planning Director r:Tigard Planning Commission Tigard Hearings Officer i. � .... iTigard City Council 1, • A copy (Public Hearing Notice/Notice of Decision) of which is attached (Marked • Exhibit "A") was mailed to each named persons at the address= shown on the attached list marked exhibit "Dye on the I( day of i i if 40 ' 21.9_./. /...—, said notice NOTICE OF DECISION as hero at dhed, was posted on an appropriate b zlletin board on the `Z' day of `e.Uv , .9 3 ,, and depo ited , , in the United States Mail on the w day of 11 , 19 .. , ., . postage prepaid. ..j /tiff 1,..--," Prepared Notice • }m. Subapra.bed :and 'sworn/affirm to'me �oh the :.�.:r_.�. day of r 1 1 c rd ,• v w N ( j '• , i, a � 1 'd�' ♦• 1 !w ( '.. 5 ,'',. .. , ": ',','l''' , 01! --- ,'"' el **.i/J....-2-g' al,...-...... ' i,, ' , ��: NOTARY' PUBLIC OP OREGON ' , C• ra J," N. ..,,r My Coaninieaion Eaxpires• , " ' `'. 'jet e ' i ' ' r •i Z o p �. m 0 r» w y k"1,A i,. m ,,t Auk CITY OF TIGARD , Washington, County NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Concerning Case Number(s) : SDR 93-002 PDR 93-0001 2. Name of Owner: SuperV'a1.0 'ioldings, Inc. 'Name of Applicant: City of Titer and ___________ : . 3 Address 131 : ss 5 SW Hall Blvd. City Tigard State OR Zip 97223 . 4. Address of Property: 7500 SW Dartmouth Blvd. Tax Map and Lot Nos . : 151 36D C tax ax Zot 6 � 600 2500 an d 2501 a ' ,,, portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000;, and a portion of 2S1 1B41 tax lots 100 and 100 l 5. Request: To amend condition Of a pp rov al' #: l in the March 25, 1993 Planning Commission Final Order, thereby allowing the ., r westbound lane of SW Dartmouth Street from 72nd to the site • entrance to be constructed by the develcper. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18..62, 18.80,' 18.100, 18.102, 18.106,° 18.108, and 18.120. ZONE: C-G and C-G (PD) (General Commercial, Planned f Development) The C-G zoning designation allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, ,\ . • financial., insurance, and real estate services, business • • support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single-family residential units among other uses. • 6. Action: Approval as requested X Approval with conditions Denial - 7. Notice: Notice was ublxshed in the newspaper,P p , posted at City Hall, , and mailed to: X The applicant ' 1. and owner s Owners of record within the re . of .red distance . X The affected Citizen Involvement Team .o. Facilitator X Affected governmental agencies • g 8, Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON December 6, 1593_ .,' UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED, I The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW / . Hall, P.O, Box 23397,. Tigard, Oregon 97223: 5. Appeal Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in t;' accordance with 18.32.29O(B) and Section 18,32.370 which provides that • a Written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee ($315.00) and transcript costs, (varies up to a maximum� um of $500.00) : W The deadline for filing of an appeal' is 3:30 p.m. December g) 1993 10. ,Quelstions: If you have any questions, please call the. City of Tigard Planning Department, 639-4171, ii? • , • CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL, ORDER NO. 93-.1 PC I A FINAL,ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS WHICH APPROVES AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, IMPOSED UPON THE CUB FOODS SHOPPING PLAZA. (SDR93-0002) The Tigard Planning Commission has reviewed the above application at a public hearing on November 15, 1993. The Commission has based its decision on the facts, findings, and • conclusions noted below. DETAILED APPLICATION DESCRIPTION On March 22nd, 1993 the Planning Commission approved the Final Order for the proposed Costco site development plan.Condition#11 of that approval stated contained the following '. note: "The street improvements shall be as described in the applicants' preliminary plan submittal dated March 1, 1993 except that sidewalks shall be separated from the curbs and the additional Dartmouth Street westbound lane from SW 72nd Avenue to the site entrance shall be omitted". Page 19 of the Final Order on which condition #11 is found, along with the section of the final order dealing with the street width of Dartmouth, is attached as exhibit A. .. At that time, the City was in the process of conducting a transportation and land use analysis of the Triangle, working with OTA , and DKS consultants. It was thought, at that time, that a full five lanes may not be needed for several years, or not at all, and particularly if the land uses were to be changed. In addition, since the Planning Commission and City Council had indicated support for introducing a significant number of residential units into • the Triangle, it seemed appropriate to try to keep the street width to the minimum necessary in order to foster a more pedestrian oriented environment. So at the least, it seemed P remature to allow the street to be built with another westbound lane from 72nd to the site entrance. March, additional analysis has been completed,and it is now Since that decision in Ma additional apparent that with the build out of the Triangle, Dartmouth will need to be widened to five lanes between 72nd and 99W to be able to handle the traffic, Further, the five lane,width was shown changed to be I to g necessary r` ... more 1.. with o be ne �ssary even if the land uses were chi d "n accordance frith • the land use "Concept Flail or the "Specific Plan"ideas. The key factors were not so much vol traffic, but th weaving turning traffic movements between different the unae of traffic, the weavin and , g . d� properties in this area, and the cus ilinear nature of Dartmouth Street. (See Exhibit "B"). FINAL ORDER 93m1 PC - CUB FOODS SHOPPING PLAZA PAGE'1 p I r '�. :I a t y' ,r l w r 'r• ri` s 4 ,d♦ ' M. LYN• -r At' ...... ........I..,....._1:..,.,iu ....,...,:.....,,.._._........I............_._y...Ms..�...,.._..._....,_..u...,wx..:1.,._M,.,....+.__.,,,._...._U....... ,...:vJ. i.w......-............__..,..+wl.: ..«.__I., ,..I!u.w ,.,_._...,_.,... ,..._.�_ , H...:..J.,+.:A_.. ......._._...._.....—_.....w....»..,.. ._.._..—.,....w....-...,,.... t • Meanwhile,construction of a three lane Dartmouth commenced under a Local Improvement District.The LID was building a street three lanes wide,with curbs and street lights,but not sidewalks. Further, the Dartmouth landscaping plan called for the sidewalks to be set back seven feet from the curb, with street trees planted between the curb and the sidewalk. It became apparent that what was being built by the LID would not only be inadequate, but that the curbs, street lighting, sidewalks, storm drainage system and landscaping would have l be rebuilt or relocated or otherwise disrupted in order to widen the street, An obvious better choice would be to allow the street to be widened now, and the curbs, sidewalks, i street trees etc. be placed where they ultimately would be when the entire road section was a widened. A plan was devised,therefore,to widen Dartmouth between 72nd and the the entrance with an additional westbound lane, doing so through a change to the contract. The extra cost f would be charged directly to SuperValue, outside of the LID project. (At the same time, Costco asked, and the City, agreed, to allow an additional lane along much of the frontage of their property through the same mechanism). ' For the rest of the frontage of Cub Foods, the sidewalk and landscaping will be located to accommodate a future widening,which will most likely be constructed under a separate LID. (Cub Foods has already signed a non-remonstrance agreement guaranteeing their participation in a future LID). 1 The landscaping strip will still be seven (7') feet wide, thanks to an additional two (2') foot easement granted to the City by SuperValu. I � r The only problem with that approach was the condition,of approval noted above, Condition I '. #11 specifically omitted the westbound lane. The timing was such that the City staff could not schedule a public hearing or otherwise involve the Planning Commission,Therefore, the Staff decided to allow the widening, and then request that the Planning Commission amend the condition to reflect what has actually been built, •.4 PROCEDURE; • 14 1 open uyY,,, In order to amend the final order,the Planning Commission nee ds to the hearing, hear � , testimony,if any, and make a decision on whether or not to amend the condition in the f;seal order. Then the Chairperson will sign an amended final order, I I I RECOMMENDATION; it is recommended that the condition be amended to read: "11. Standard street improvements,including concrete sidewalk',separated from the curb, driveway aprons,curbs,asphaltic concrete pavement,storm drainage,streetlights,and •;;; FINAL ORDER 93=1,6 PC - CUB FOODS Sli0 �I�� PLAZA A PA : d I i I c '1 C . .+»....:....,r.,...,_H_..-m. .,,.......tF.,,,..J I I' I «...,.t'- ..... _.....u..,.,,....,.+,...,....o.,«..-w-.,:..,..,-`......................."...--..ti.l.....�.,-,-.w..«.,.,....-_..__-.m...«_...,.. .......H._..,....a.... ._... ..,_.....-.,.}..y...,.1.,.......a.i, . _ ,. underground utilities shall be installed along the SW 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth ' i Street frontages. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to major collector street standards and shall conform I to the alignment of existing adjacent i I. t improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering Department. NOTE: The street improvements shall be as described in the applicants' preliminary plan submittal dated March 1, 1993 except that sidewalks shall be separated from curbs "• and the additional Dartmouth Street westbound lane west of the site entrance shall ' be omitted at this time In the future, additional widening of or other improvements to Dartmouth may be required. It is further ordered that the applicant be notified of the entry of this order. �, s PASSED: This 7 4 day of November, 1993, by the Planning Commission of the City of ' Tigard. ,•I f—/( X.Harry Saport , Acting President Tigard Planning Commission :� !.' 11ILL)„. k\ vf • i_i_r ,,... ,„ , "")17,j7-C,\I\ V 10 / �. sw. A7LAUTI J Sr. Z.S\, 's, ,---- I , C. f- pMA ` Y 5W, . 9.1.1.•• stRE.Eti Y' �-�7 �� 1 1 S.kY LWVYLC gIJJ �� r. , - t r1EI T n L, ,' 1` / ctiNTON IT ' �, tlY17H �,., EXTinMStON• 01.5‘'°° a 4 i ',cam o ..°1111111E i i -7-7- . ', . ,„ ,,,.....,,, ,i,.,,,, in _ '`i -,-,,-, S.tY bEVIrY AN as--- . ' liiim E Al , FINAL ORDER 93-1 PC - CUB FOODS SHOPPING PLAYA PAGE 3 I I P , +"+ yyy ' ■ P jr yir 1. M IM,41.' V 4 I PAUL SIMMONS . SUPERVALU STORES PO BOX 12909 , SALEM OR 97309 GORDON� D [E��7DAVIS PO BOX 8 I /4 r,� • PORTLAND CR 97207 SUPERVALU L INC E V P R AL U HO DI NCS 11840 SW VALLEY VIEW RD' EDEN PRAIRIE ' MN , 55344 1 • GORDON MARTIN PO BOX 740 GLENEDEN BEACH OR 97388 • OEL STEVENS , , . TEVENS .. 9660 SW VENTURA CT I'IGAP.n OR 97223 .;his r. • • I i i i • I (/ A 111.;,, ., Lill . , . 4., , % .,,,j ' 0,. 4 . . . n ••tii, f"'•p. , .. Division of State Lands Permit i o.: 721 775 Sunner Street NE Permit Typ e: Removal Will . Salem., OR 97310 Waterway: Red Rock Creek Wetland iv 378-3805 County: Washington County ,i 378-3059 Expiration Date: April 20. 1994 • PN 93-00109 , SUPER VALU STORES IS AUMORIZED IN ACCORDANCE 'H ORS 196.800 TO 196.990 TO PERFORM T' OPERATIONS DESCRIBED TN T ATTACHED COPY OF 'IRE APPLICATION, ,.. , SUBJECT TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS LISTED ON ATTACHMENT A. AND TO THE FOLLOWING GENERA',CONDITIONS; ` L This permit does not authorize trespass on the lands of others. The permit holder shall 1 : obtain all necessary access permits or rights-of--way before entering lands owned by another � 2, This permit does not authorize any work that is not in compliance with local zoning or other local, state, or federal regulation pertaining to the operations authorized by this .. ,•. • permit. The permit holder is responsible for obtaining the necessary approvals and permits before proceeding under this permit/ t,, 3.3 All work done under this permit must comply with Oregon Administrative Rules, . Chapter 340; Standards of Quality for Public Waters of Oregon. Specific water quality !' provisions for this project are set forth on Attachment A. .: 4. Violations of the terms and conditions of this permit are subject to administrative and/or ••• legal action which may result in revocation of the permit or damages. The permit holder is responsible for the adi-vities of all contractors or other operators involved in work done i, v. , at the site or under this permit, . 5. A copy of the permit shall be available at the work site whenever operations authorized by th.e permit are being conducted, 6. Employees of the Division of State Lands and all duly authorized representatives of the Director shall be permitted access to the project area at all reasonable times for the T ', purpose of inspecting work performed under this permit. . 7. Any permit holder who objects to the conditions of this permit may request a hearing � ••, from the Director, in writing, within 10 days of the date this permit was issued. � If removal is from state-owned submerged and Sub sib the r ~ �-owned le land, e' applicant .I. must comply with leasing and royalty provisions of ORS 274,530. If the project involves crew ion of new lands by - to-o, or submersible ands, you mtist at� y filling on, state-owned submerged � �' �,-lands, ,. comply with ORS 274,905 274,940. �,, of n ��; p This permit does not relieve permittee obligation to secure appropriate leases from the Division of State Lands, to conduct activities, ' on state-owned submerged or submersible lands, Failure to comply yvith these requirements ,;~ may result in civil or criminal liability. For more information about these requirements, please contact the Division of State Lands, Waterway Leasing.Office„ 378-3805. ,4 RI,. Gustafson, ireck;or e c4 r f . r Gary eta s , � �.'r' i' `'" " Oregon Division of State Lands .,iii ,sr, c« ter' , ., Aua. � Signature Date,issued • y , r. . ,Ij 'I w'. .(i i' , . . • :Y.: I .I ATTACHMENT Special Conditions for Material Removal/Fill Permit No. 7216 `' • 1. This permit authorizes the placement of up to 2,600 cubic yards of fill material . in Section 36, T1S, R1W (Red Rock Creek wetland)to develop site f ri, a ' shopping center complex as outlined in the attached permit application, map .. and drawings, This permit alto authorizes tl3 e removal of material necessary for wetland i creation as specified in special condition 7 below. iti 2. Work in the waterway shall be done so as to minimize turbidity increases in k', the water that would degrade water quality and damage aquatic life. Turbidity I shall not exceed 10% above natural stream turbidities, ':. tcept as allowed by OAR 340-41. 3. Petroleum products, chemicals, or other deleterious materials shall not be i allowed to enter the water, ,' . 4, Waste materials and spoils shall be placed at an approved upland disposal site and not in any unauthorized wetland areas. ,, 1', 5. In-stream.work shall be conducted between dune 1 and October 1. • q, • . 6. Removal of existing woody vegetation shall be minimal. NITRATION CONDITIONS_ • • 7. The following conditions apply to the replacement wetland as described in the • Wetlands Mitigation and Compensation Plan and as depicted on Figure igure 1 of ' • ,,, ' permit drawings. . , a. The wetland shall be constructed prior to or concurrently with the fl' ' construction projects b. The wetland shall be excavated and the hydrology maintained as outlined •• , in the Mitigation Concept Section. I. �' seeded or planted with grass an.d/or ., cy The shoreline of wetland shall be gee shrubs and trees Trees and shrubs shall be of the size `'' legumes, native sbru n and .•, , + number outlined in t he an•tin g plan, an irrigation system ste• n s� be • ,anstalled to insure survival. ro lowin g planting of the a , the vegetation tatxon s1a l be allowed to establish a natural characte r with minimal, maintenance. The criteria for success shall be 80% survi.val for a period'. • of three years d�, The newly created wetland shall be fenced with a vinyl coated fence to': protect the area from human impacts. . The issuance of this ermit is conditional upon establishment e. Tkae ' �.�o.nal�xp b1,i.shmen.t of replacement wetlands s of approua,atelY 0.08 acres for'.loss of 0.15 acres of ' •, wetland habitat " -page one , .,ti M.M ....-,«m ,....,.w ,. ��,l» ,. ,.,,„.... ..... _,.,........,I:,,i:.,..-....,,.--...,.k,.. i.. ....:..a,,.._,.,.,....,,..::J«.iM,t- ......,,.... a._....,. :.......... ..+,. i.,;.l.:...s..«..,..,_....., ' '' - _„i..........t...........Y-.i_,. • • • i.4 !f • I .Attachment A RF 7215 Page two MONITORING CONDITIONS 8. To insure a successful habitat replacement the permittee shall, for a eriod of three years,maintain the wetland until vegetation has become established and the area is functioning as designed. t. • 9. The applicant shall. establish fixed photo points. Photos shall be taken annually from the established points for monitoring purposes. A monitoring report shall be submitted annually to the Division of State Lands for a period j. • of three years after wetland construction. CONTINGENCY CONDITIONS 10. The issuance of this ermit is conditional upon acquisition of the required ,. Development Permit from the City of Tigard. > k 11, The Division of State Lands retains the authority o re uire appropriate corrective actions to the mitigation site in the event the newly created wetlands are not functioning as designed within a period of three years. I I 12. The Division of State Lands retains the authority to temporarily halt or modify y p the project in case of excessive turbidity or damage to,natural resources: � April 20, 1993 • • p ; II I 1 I I I I I I I I I I » , I I I I I I I I ' I , I , I + � 1 •?' . _ '. 1 .,.-.:....._..r.+..F,•.,..,r r..�:.'..M.. ..u.. .. .n.'M,..r. ti;r ..„.__......,, ...t_v w.«.,rnv L,-... .r.w... ..L•..x.+..........t....._n...... nl....... ,.........✓_.r..........w...«r..r.r..•..r..r.r...».•.w,._.....,. .r..•.w........n.....nr...,_......r....«...w.r. ...,1v.......«w«...•..._. 1 1 ri' . - JOINT , .4..-- AT,,,,,,'" ‘1),e't i?p!yp Army QC, PERMIT APPLICATION FORM - * .a ,, 1 ', of Engineers THIS APPLICATION WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS of BOTH AGENCIES "/J ;� • '''".n" .•fir.. � .• . ; Portland and District AGENCIES•Will''S5IGN UM : Corps Action iD Number ' 00/07 Oregon Division of State Lands Number ,P/° 7.2/6 A Date Received I Date Received . '•', District Engineer State of Oregon • 1 ATrN CENPP-PE-PP Division of State Lands . P 4 Box 2946 775 Summer Street NE Portland,OR 97208-2946 Salem OR 97310 503/326-7730 503/378.3805•0 ApplicantName,q.7 pQki: Fmk, Zioit4t 5 businessphon© �"b3� 1-',+C p and Address P.6.atOX sD1 3/Lit it�d> ,� x'7 9 he phone . Authorized'Agent + ©i M E ;PM's business phone�#5a� 446-1185 0 Contractor MA fah. €77 • Name and Address ,pe4mormoieNz.q7zo home phone Property Owner business phone# (If different than applicant) , Name and Address home phone • a _ PROJECT LOCATION ����� or other Street,Road er descriptive location t.?55;t''1P ' C�-- Les�al Description n AVE, t00-8 or Ni m j APi71Xt Quarter Section Township Range '' . _4_ t. -7 _ � 54 J5 /W ' . . In or Near(City or Town) County Tax Map# Tax Lot# ' J. 71( r Q t 4,'14- a?t ;6,Pc is s Waterway River Mile i Latitude Longitude ' . ?I6i1 it Al ut), c _ • Is consent to enter ro e p p hY granted to the Corps and the Division of State Lands'? 3 Yes 0 No . ' C ' PRoPOsED PROJECT INFORMATiON' '• Activity Type; 0 Fill 0 Excavation(removal) 0 I"1-Water,Structure 0 M1dintainf i epair an 5xisting Sfruc ' wr Brief Descriptiorn ' • Fill will Involve va ye cubic yards annually Y an d/c _� cubic yards for the total project o)ec t Fill will be 0 Riprdp 0 Rock 0 Grdvei 0 Sand 0 Nit 0 Clay 0 Organics 0 Other • Fill Impact Area is L Acres: ,_ length; A :.j i width; ib r. depth '.,.. ., Removal will involve cubic Yards annually in dlorr. w._.W cubic yards for the total project Rdmoval will be 0 Rlprap 0 Rock' 0 Gravel 0 Sand 0,Silt ' 0 clay 0 Orgdnids 0 Other . _,• • Perm:Mal Impact Area _.,_, � ;�Acres; � length; �� � i� � � � width; depth Is Acres ' Estimated Strut Date JI Estimated Comp letian bate et". ' e Will do k., .I, � � i i {.r..w i ter y++; moterldl construe et a 41 . � tir�h debris,'runoff, �i enter wetland or waterway? 0 Yes tiO No If yes,describe the type o f discharge and show the discharge�ced on o on the site plad • s;'. ..- ..........-,.w...._:.L aG:+r,,.i.-,....... 4.. ,.��...~,,. •.�..nm"`•..a._.,,. ..�.,.aC»...,.. ,.....•x�_ ,..,..,..�..............m...- .•.......... ,,...,.,..,_..n.........-...,....a..,, .. .....�:.«.,._„...,..,,...,�.�I.. .«...a-...i6 .... ,M.4'«.1X...,..:1..»�....,x_...,�M.a....I,i.J Mw.�,..,....1!b.. ,,....ti.,._,...,u,a,�....e.,...: , '11.:1 i �• { � ;POSED PROJECT PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION L' tV Project Purpose and Need: < Project Description: • i k j,! 4 many project drawing she 1 application? How ) awin ets are included with this app� 7 >I ' NOTE:A complete application!must Include drawings and a location map submitted on separate 81/2 X 11 sheets, I • C) PROJECT IMPACTS AND ALTERNATIVES Describe altemative sites and project designs that were considered to avoid impacts to the waterway or wetland, , t', • • kh Describe what measures you will use (before and after construction)to minimize Impacts to the water‘ ny or wetland. •r. • I E • i • n MOTE: If neces,sary,use additional sheets t' MIscELLANEoUS IN Their F Pr ti� 1`I N . Adjoining Property Owners and Their Addresses and Phone Numbers I is Litt dli other approvals Or certificates received,applied for,or denied that are related to this application, ,/ Issuing Agency Type of Approval Identification Number bates of application / Approval /Denial , g g y • a m,.nw++.+i.:..,..r..r:... i, i 0 0. y ;!" .. .. ' ...,, ...' .....a.....,.._.. ..mom ...w..,.t,.._.,.w...».............._._.,:..,......_.„......_........W,ra..a...a......a'..........,..._.il..,•_ __....e.._.. ..._.._..•...,_..._.-..._.,..•._...—........._,.F.........,..,.=—al. l.. ,c Caurmr PLANNING DEPARTMENT ��1c aT (to be completed by local planning official) OThis project is not regulated by the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance, OThis project has been reviewed and is consistent with the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance, °This project has been reviewed and is not consistent with the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. • Consistency of this project with the local planning ordinance cannot be determined until the following local ' • ' approval(s)'are obtained: g • 0 Conditional Use Approval Qre1�evelopment Permit / ®Phan Amendment. OZone Change 9' 0 Other •., +pplicatioa 0 has 0 has not been made for local approvals checked above, , MP.' ' f lir / 1 r,. ,,,�„ "`�.,4►P d �. 02-..././--9 .: I Signature (of local,planning o;idol) Title city/County Date — ; i ® COASTAL ZONE CERTIFICATION . If the,proposed activity described In your permit application is within the Oregon coastal zone, the following certification is required before your application can be processed, A public notice will be issued with the certification : statement which will be forwarded to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development for its concurrence . ' ' ' • or objection, For additional information on the Oregon CoastalZoneManagementPr ogram,contactthe department cat1175 .- : Court Street NE,Salem,Oregon 97310 or call 503/373.00; Certification Statement certify that,to the best of my knowledge and belief,the proposed activity described in this application complies — with the approved Oregon Coastal Zone Management Program and will be completed in a manner consistent with the , • program, Applicant Signature Date - ATt1RE FOR JoIfI t APPUCAT1C�P . � Si��t f r (RQWIREb) ion is hereby made for the activities described heroin. I certify that I am familiar with the Information contained In Application orrriation eon the application,and,to the best of my knowledge and belief,this information is true,complete,and accurate, I further certify . . ,, that I possess ss the authori to undertake the proposed s ed I activities,'I Understand that the granting of other permits by local, to or federal agencies does not release me from the requirement of obtaining the permits requested before commencing the pY project, I ur�aerst required state pro cessing fe may het guarantee' e�r'iit issuance,removal-fill permit 1 payment of the req nd that to ermi�rri " be re uirged before the state re rmlt I issued I.. understand that. a me p Applicant Sig turd Date I ce,r:',, that I e act.i v4-,duly authorized agent of the applicant, „ • . Authored Age tSJglure I pate , I ......—.4,...,....,,..rwIw.,,.....i.,......I—,, +r..,...,—,..-,-,..—...m,.........—,'.....,.4,,,,,,,it....1,,-4.,.Ht;w...c4,F»1,...4,,k......,..Jar—,...:4.4.:...4,,,.,.....,4•a,,......1,,..«.mf(.,..n.n ' ■ Irt'. MCI,+ ..F. . 3 4 S-,)' WETLAND IMPACT INFORMATION C (FOR WETLAND F01S ONLY' Site Conditions of impact area . Impact area is 0 Ocean 0 Estuary 0 River 0 Lake 0 Stream ca,Fresnwater Wetland Note: Estuarian Resource Replacement is required by state law for projects involving intertidal or tidal marsh alterations, A separate Wetlands Resource Compensation Plan may be appended to the application, Has a wetland delineation been completed for this site? ' Yes 0 No If yes, by whom: I ES Asst 1 wre5 , 150- It)I R? 'rt7 Avt 5., &C. 01PiAt LOA qq i Describe the existing Physical and biological character of the wetland/waterway site by area and type of resource(use separate sheets and photos,if necessary) • 5 UY�1 t pi,uS fit ; ' .- -oo Petll 31-m, J�". v41,1.04,410-1.3 Ava ihelPfforS AkiAVist5 flP " 0 .4 " eaceprwirt, }II rriepferitvJ VLAN 0E5 At- ii/r11-t=5 1 V#c'*PlOrit.iqqz) , ■ I, ' : Resrce Replacement Mitigatiota, Describe measures to be taken to replace unavoidably impacted wetland resources e 5 4 P4-414i 65-5 Sca -f it %f 1113) . ti • • • , o thIS ireformd may submit sheet r�r`, other}ion l hot�ne� h:• ° �eccfus wessary,�for d complete application,you i�ri�� �`�� �it this�� d r envir� . hiehfdl Information utter submiffirig your application i • p . . 4 1. • ' .....4s..J«'...,.w.........'.»,m.:4.:...;w:,i41n....„....,,.-..........w.....„,..,,,. MM..__ ,_._ .......,.. .......... +,.....i...r.a,,..:r Z.,....Lr..,.....::,.»,,,„,,„a,.. ._...d.u;,,..,.w...,.`.,...,d'1.,,_;w...Mw..,,......,...M,..R+....ww..+a.,...«..,.az 7 . M * w A ay y� ,pa. n ,, .„,, S+t .fu .,� nn,o 3� sr I ;� w ia,r IIIN RrSf � yti _ 1 , �I r1�MM ;1 d �� ( rr I 1 _91 •r ' 0 y24pii!1/41 .I51 �" - gi., , A�INI, .5,! , ' : f '�ti�i .l_-iii r. _ ..(0....e4°°9 ryTbb� § " '�M It YEN/ (, l p\ '.,+,�+, q }} r 1 ,.," c,r u'rwr r _,.. w Via, r , ^ �A i x Y N �''' Y 1 i ,' i' �' � �. t!!:7x:� rr : t1 ,.,.,, i iii f t 1',,r,,, ,' 51i r 3t LroaU I '_ .4 �.. I -irr i`I' 5+' 1.�r A _ �,w (•,-,"4,, r R•rialrvi , S,1411 w it X1 i , �I w.id u d. r , ' .1,.1w1.I.� !.ix'._.^ .-.�.. , , mr,e 4 1 ,r . a ( . . t SN t !..1 ti at� ' .0 :. y A ,l Au■so%i a•S•44. F. ---0! PIN( 7".a~r rL1' C ' r t 1i : t ,. Y y' ,1 'Ai' 1 MI .' • . �' � t �' 1__ '` �i r E..., :t.. j i 53 + , ., ( . i, tq4 L.,tti:i 1114 '* ':. 'R' 8 �� 5At o,r 1 r ,}i ' ' ,A'1)+ 1R • � CI prt�fYIL y' ` � ; �) Q�iu'tc• ,� -. s: ... Win � ' b,�,r '�� � 1, • 2.„,,,-4 N'� 11 . ,a` , rk„ ', Ii I 1 I �rT , 4w `�' /Y,, r •.i"' "�rm�1 �. `y�i ♦,� nN" �,r'' ,1 "1-,'LZ ",yR. �,i ` ,/ �� Y�w,4 0 . ' , e r •, , E171f\� •1 1 LL ,w 1 1 ;r ,S{ •��tr', . $Ito V ,sr ;.,.� , ,?�i 'fib "°`� � '�: '•r ���°• � Si�u.uuii i�4,,r1" ���. •++,4, ,�w ; • i.,,...,'t�• '� ` r� � C, fib y , +��"? A 1 i. Ma t �, Sii 1''11 rJ..p ,1,, ,; »t 4Y f rn^,Mt Pi; Em,i ti, s+ a l fR41 '•N r ,,t,> ` r w� . „ ' ,. 0;A ^. lig— BTI sr �., y 1 •,I 'i tY Ik'fH� . .,e.4 . yi. 01. ., si.t.!C Y r-lAP i I rioRTi4 w * 1, , . 1,' I , ' .. 1. l 'e r ' • _....4''': ,,..',......,. {.,.4.,:,.e_,._,.-.. .1..,.+M -,.._I ............. .:L..,„..,..,.M ..,I..,,,,,, :-,. M,-„ .,� .-..,r,.ia..: .4.+.,1,. ' ....., .l,.i,wl,,.. .,.._,-,,11.„,,2«_R..:...1....:,...4,......,.. .......,.kt.•...,,c.e,,.... .»..1.,i,.,L1....,.,..L.�..:,,.... ..',._«..«,.....,1....ui_..,...«..�_..:�....:i:A' ss pl , WCTLANCI PLANTING L�GEr�ID , ``'.: lltt,��,�:'A /7/'_ . �y rs �� cSLllIxll,t]1L SI]L1i110cJ1u1K 4L1 +UlIIAIY eatlLO ®��� �►� 1 sb�AusN UN a1A rrtvsl,s 1:�n lA' 12 1'1 I I (2 t4CANUl 5ft,C•( tM11 dWua1A lt0] IA' 11 pp •Jf AAA SfnG1 Aklfll3 INYIOIN7S ISIt) ill. '� )))� 1712.'��(2? SIlA11-1R1 0ULn115N SI:IflI'US 4iCNI1CAl11'US 1'Ih0 IA' 2. y+�,, WAr+Aat bAGrrAAIA 17,,'1A lOt:9 ''12' 1(./ ilAlilI .tTU IIInN11YA1 tl]flhp'ACl1O1S 100 ID• ,-- 1'{ AS ® -���10. �t . •. 1: •,AWI 1''wtl.rU ni)IALICh*llkl 1'LLf1NAlu3 IRW 17' �"/-'"' / Q( 1"••. , • Q AIV1 MILO" EAllt Y1dlCII:JA 1 0µ.'1A It) ]0 A{(. \�' (`` � {�=J� �' ' / �n • . O�` ,f►►u1►►M _ MOO*,most nosA,r,UrNANA 2 t?L 'lea ]rt 1 (� 7 Y: " 4, ULAIX.AWYIlt]na ' CRAIACCUS Off=AS,1 t rr to IS rt ' I�Oate0 10 2 TO (6 ,�y i (7) Attl•l�u1a aanutU atwln,s stuBNULDA 2,Al Ao b r) SCALE' 1" 20e 4' WoY t�'0 I In$. �, {' ®MNMAAY LO,NL'p1A IN40111{lIAIA• 7 GAL to. ', Io rr , G •7 ///At' 1'• �, , (,:...6,1' ✓ 3..94,1004 SLn41CCBCRY :::::IrIttLU, ,4 rr 6 t� •/ 1� ff ' _ \i ),l'if 4�RIr 1 7] / C •• yo��s L`..1�' L O•fLOKAINU.8.,44r a ION.. 13 ,4 r, „ f1 W lCV]11(t[trr } `�1,16'® AO•tl I • UCN4trDCApY RRUNUS NAAINAIIA e h W b CL ) ,1ófr/rb:,j,. XISjITEES i J d) h11dy `too` ��;�'�)�i' j•Asa i,roa+AsN V~ ��� !�'��{ , d �► �' leis/ ' 81'1 1. . •NAW1hp1 0l1lCN NAMtN(>tlll N WI{OW ,IA,J7It'.,A,LOWi. �� I/ ,t,� • \� �'.' GN SITS PLANTING l,E(JLND �1 �" ' ', ' • i6 ASH! s s�esf[ua/��'�RSfd1L /' Us CidltfC6.bAd., <nrNan NA.ur ,ryLL SLdOttG ' aIRLt . n1,AVtlo as1 rRAY1NUS oxrcanrs NArWOtAtIO 2'CALi eae ]d tla 7 �{ �ft ty' QIly nrd su.4,rt UARLL Acra duadtu'PLO s rStr '!`Vt..our', '1A'-a"o,e, C./ / /�7.�� p-'�}, i� `•s Y'.(� IY Ur,LL hfXR IMGIANU Y-Id,eM,'2 lTDI IIY b,C �/',��"•'�`/ �' t;/ II 7 .. al K4n.kn si0 cLDM N1Ud'1 PLICAIA d'.d'!eM Ir at. '•t / l'�•�1� Q �,�,o.i� y-' ' %),Ud,eUnt(noixonAt WRUAku11 PUCAILRI'UAJiL , t4•.20• 1'OC. " 16'ASH''' "��,/J���!;;JJJ, N g ,ale;i�f ., UPANCSt 110.Lr 'Kit cRCNAIL'0p1KYA' 2 CAL, ' 4'0,0. ' ,4,'7 Q A%., t� I ,. 1 ,,, , IIUGNII NINC P 4US WOO V .UUco le`-21'•sAlt[AO .11-e'Or. 'IR t • *0 O:GICGNI rirAVc YAVNJInA AIXIIroIILAI , ' S c. /'0.C, 8 •..' N a',,, / ., '\ - ' I• e YI OI AI' PN u a A ^Otto LOWER' 1e'-2A• ]'o0. ' II I 4+ ,z.,! l!''. • , ohro w LN.IRLL m s LAun tN w4 N \' Q� ,•; •p ��:*' e aAP11LY to,.,CAs,t,, Cdttt,CA,rtn utlClls I 2 01L :,0,C. � 7'Q O A. ♦ \t,. I I , ,A.'' 1,�rt , , t'''' • o-ACOfMC 0Pt•,.d0 CItINUi ltao rtRA-tlAItLYI S oAl.. d O. / .✓'� O�a Af �'I��. y'IA + 4MY 0.GV!OANBLRPY NtNNINI!fHUNdCRW nOS'f t4.O$( S CAI, ]'O.4/ ��\ �O - 1/" i r/ SS 7a4•,1UUNO SwPCS „ SN.NCA dWrLOA sNC4A)04ND' 2 OALi ]'0 c fr_' 0. e 1.,\ ' (�'.1 r��'.,'• ""� ��HBB.) dC1AOCa:�9'!!'NC/SiCN GOtGICAtiCN OALU1,Nl ■CAL 10' C I �, h-- ' y .yy l k �' trf� I,r Puorri 4a:t AbsA hU1.1,A t tit ' :-i -4.. r dk + A e0 ; I 16 A / e A a tti. yiQll ��n 1 ' L ir' N'0' tXISTING RUSHES 4,' HArcA" Ild�1,: / /',..‘.1f,f j' +J,'•n �,.N ' d.:6 as/kil tits,44 ;,' rAUUtrountrt / `yl�.�i 1 1 �' c ter. 11 \ \ ` ';•/'`r ASH •• El* A ♦' b j 1.54•fir) ,I . ' I d / A ♦ i sBe 19+ Cam t d !� > •j C eA / ' / �� �s� #4. 4 \'\ r ` 6H � / .e: ' gi)4 i it: . , , iA � .e i�-`"y «a� �,f . . !lr linwi IR ✓ . , ' %''' ''• 1' \ '\ \' ,'' • ///' - 01. . ' , , A: , ' . '7, . , yr ' ,.' 4;i1 '40 .." l\-• I\ ' ,'. ' • 1!1., ` ,,I , r .�1 ' ' v •10 ' 1 . ! .�47 •i'. . ,rifJ rs �»r ✓`l t�. + wa !b N il,+ �/1 u {'S�iiI JI yam, ry�' ' + L'J • y/ a,1i hw t+.•4 . Y t�C";�y`�sl,�;e. '.--' \ ` ,,N4'.. �4 t.l1�+ s,Ily.q :,y t' ---rte"" �`�. A� `b + $ ,err �'..--- .1 ��.,�•����1j 1 .\\' , �k ``�, .' '',*4t4.1 4161? ;-= '`r y� ,sAy �� I, � r �,,. '•fit,` +-••.. J.l , .\\,,'�. y�, , ,1�"�►'( r,,,,, 0 ., kw:4!.t.w4."` + �.1k I Q i, ,a% ,,,, °"`� ,,,a,c/t"�' WATER QUALITY FACILITY 4 * 1\, D 11,, s,` :.�',a,,d .� SINGLE CELL TTREAT1�ENT' WCtLANO) fit; 1 c 1d Yti• 1 ,-is ry.. ,'r^, roi 1 1 `� � ,au bl !LII 't ^. HAWK • r K t WR .4' •? 'A` - ^.,-w . . yI L ti - • 1 �,r J M , ,, ' , 11 ..�'1Ji./V• .4 , 10, 11 ______ 16 IA-afraid AY A�1JJ ' A�soak,�� _ ��a�i� J 'J`L �tsA �h��•� i�bAri7 �.► 1�171.A ,�1. tiomo L WA Irani' 500,OTATE 11 t SAWA,'OREGON,ar4w k�J d•i'1it1A`1'Jgl�l A PLA'A171t1it PLAN ';Lw tti,...ra9...Y , m (20 7 uYlc1»d Ntl,u�isiuwA": .i'.ra: ; ' 7. ,, / ar m.,,,'A.,:.a:u.:,.....a.l...,,.._r.. i-J...�..+..L . u.�:- M ..w.. ...,. .Wnrr,. Ia.r. .4t........,+,.;r..-•........,.w'..>;.A„ur..,...Md...a.,...r,'« 1.....a r„«r-.,.......,...-',_.....'.a'...r.—.«..ua.+...,o..,l».u.,-..-1•4:1Ifr:aw...,.....,..r • A • i a rrl {r Supplemental Information Permit Application Proposed Wetland Fill SuperValu Stores • Tigard, Oregon ITEM 4: PROPOSED PROJECT PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION Project Purpose and Need: SuperValu Stores is proposing to build a commercial center on its 19.9 acre site that will contain a CUB Food Store along with three additional retail stores and their associated parking and servicing areas. • IES & Associates; was retained to conduct a wetland delineation of the site. The 1ES • report, which is included with this permit application, concluded that there are two areas of jurisdictional wetlands. One wetland area is directly associated with Red Rock Creek . I which borders the northwestern property line. A second area is classified as an isolated Jurisdictional wetland and encompasses an area of approximately 6,000 square feet. �.. I I 1 After acquiring the property, SuperValu removed 18 homes, utilities, underground fuel tanks, septic' tanks, fencing associated g and buildings that were located on the property. In the course'of that work, the isolated wetland area was disturbed. In any case, p plans require the filling of the Isolated wetland area in order to •SuperValu's development cans re uire g accommodate the needed parking and on=sit e traffic movement to and from the stores. F' Project Description: T he filled area will consist of approximately 10 vertical feet of engineered fill on top of i constructed a par ing with approximately, 3 which will � be cons parking lot � inohe:5 of asphaltic concrete. .• r,..r...n..,,.."r..:..,.,..,,,......., ...,.n...."....Iy.,,.,,r ru ...,r:r.,r.,.,......r.til,..... ,..r...,..,.- ., „ ,. ... ., .. ,... ., i ., $r. -�.C . • , nl,w r III p I I , • • • • Supplemental Inform,:, an r February 9, 1993 e r I . I I ITEM 5 PROJECT IMPACTS AND ALTERNATWES Alternative sites and project designs that were considered to avoid impacts to the waterway and wetland, The City of Tigard, through its present adopted Comprehensive Plan, has designated ' • this property and the surrounding properties for comm m merci al development.elopnent. The City is currently considering'a revision to its Comprehensive Plan for the entire Tigard Triangle j . area including this property. In that proposed revision, this property continues to be designated for commercial use. Development of this property and others in the immediate area has been forestalled because of a city policy which states: yP y In the Tigard Triangle:. , those parcels designated for any commercial development shall not develop for such use...unless a major collector, connecting the area on Pacific Highway at approximately 78th Avenue and the westerly portion of Haines Road Interchange at Interstate 5 freeway (at . approximately 68th at Dartmouth) be constructed, be guaranteed within one year for construction by a public agency, or be approved for construction as part of a local improvement district... : (Section 11,4.2, Tigard Comprehensive Plan) • . The City is now proceeding with the construction of the Dartmouth Collector street as anticipated in this policy. As part of that project, the City has 'submitted a wetland fill permit application (Corps Permit #92-687 [Nationwide Section 26]; DSL'Permit #RP 6866) for necessary fills associated with that project. As of the date of this application, a draft permit has been issued and the final permit is expected ecte immediately. aft p d 1 , The'City y h as angl an anticipated the d evelop men t of property for corm erc ia.l urp asp: and, while not y et formally y ao. adopted by the Tigard City Council,1, their current planning process is reaffirming their expectation that commercial use of this property is the I , - . preferred alternative to other possibilities that were considered:I'l'l•I n • f 1 • .....1. w.....1...' e..,....U, ,...,.m.... .....•,.;h ,...n.y......., x a_,-.M.s r' ..,.»......_t....' M.. ,......nu • • .... _.e. .H,...F.n..F . ,.,...e...x. ,.va..»...u.„.,.r..rL,w,.........,,... ,......_,.. N.,.-.n.. .«...awn...w. r..M... ..w........—...w.....r.....aY»..-r ...n.N. 11......,n......-{.,.6arN-.u.n,.. Supplemental Ilnforrnak...Ard February 9, 1993 ' SuperValu has ,considered alternative development plans for the property that would . lessen or eliminate the impact to the 6,900 square foot isolated wetlands. • . • Two o al ter n A t� ve designs were considered,de r a d both preserving n g the isolated wetlands along with a 25 foot buffer. The first alternative attempted to protect the wetlands within the , parking area with as little impact to the parking area as possible. However, given the , location of the wetlands in relation to the parking area, need to create a fill l slo e ,r location area the ne slope ' • from the parking area to the edge of the buffer, and that the westernmost arkin drive p 9 aisle also serves as the exit aisle for all service trucks leaving the rear of the stores, the impacts to parking and traffic flow on the site are substantial and highly disruptive. In addition to the loss of, approximately 30,900 square feet of parking area and the loss , of approximately 117 parking stalls, all service trucks would be required to either drive along the front of the retail stores or meander through the parking lot to the exit • driveways. I n either case, these truck moveme nts would create c ongestion with � �'� pedestrian and auto customers and a generally unsafe condition, This alternative also creates a very inefficient and inconvenient parking area along the western side of the project w hich will result in few people actually using the a r ea for p arkin g. The loss of this number of parking stalls would also require that the actual available retail space be reduced by 19,500 square feet. Such a reduction represents an annual loss in rental revenues in excess of$250,000 making the project uneconomic. • A second, alternative was considered to preserve the 6,900,square foot wetland area arid its buffer. However, in this case the parking lot was fully redesigned to make sure that all parking is efficient and convenient and that traffic flow is maintained on site in • ways that insure smooth and safe movement of customer cars and service trucks: This alternative esults in the loss of 69,12 square feet of parking area and the loss ative ,5 s s of 184 a g stalls Without the necessary parking, the actual retail space must parking hlo+lth th p then be reduced by 30,650 square feet, This reduction in the project size results in a n annual reduction in rental revenues of almost $400,000, again making the project uneconomic.i • g g � • � � �� � �� �� The result square 'wetlands� . , p g het Is� � ..._ ��� of � . an overall preserving 6',9Qt� square feet �of �Isolated � I reduction In the size of the project by 21 percent • • Supplemental Informat...sn , February 9, 1993 Measures that will be used to minimize impacts to the waterway or wetland. Erosion control measures such as silt fences and other measures consistent with standards adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) of Washington County (F10 91-47) and the City of Tigard will be used throughout the construction process. In fact, such measures have already been installed, on the property to minimize erosion and siltation of Red Rock Creek and its associated wetlands from site disturbance resulting . from the removal of the homes. In addition, utility plans for the project include storm water control measures and storm water quality treatment systems consistent with USA and City adopted standards. SUPPLEMENTAL VVETLAND IMPACT INFORMATION General Description of Wetlands: , There are two wetland areas identified in the IES Wetland Delineation. The main wetland associated with Red Rock Creek (Wetland #1 - IES Report) will not be impacted by the proposed fill, A second wetland (Wetland #2- IES Report) will be filled as a result of this proposed fill, This is an isolated wetland (depression) located east of Red Rock Creek in the bottom of a linear swale and extends westerly into a small depression that is perched on the slope above the stream corridor that separates this depression from the overflow creek corridor. Water is trapped in this depression for long enough periods of time to create hydric soil conditions. Vegetation is primarily a grass meadow including field horsetail and creeping bentgrass, Hydric soils in both the NA" and "B" • '" horizons, soil texture, cracking soils and time of year of the evaluation were used as , indicators of assumed positive hydrology. Resource Replacement Mitigation A three-celled emergent marsh/shrub scrub wetland system will be constructed along the east bank of ked Rock Creek, near the point where the new Dartmouth Road will cross the creek, The proposed Mitigation site is located west of the proposed water quality treatment pond, which is to be constructed as part of the commercial development. • " A ,. -..._..........1..;.M,..,.»..-...._..,,_«,,..,.J 1,«,:+...«,..,.,....t......a :' ...,...,..., ...., ,,,,.._.....L..._dl.tr«......--. ...., 5........,.«„.r.,....au.,,.,, «.>..._.-..,........_A.,.,...,.+..-,+. .u.iiL,'...r.w....,.u..,.w.A., ..... ..I.rA' ....1 '4r...,.....1......«-,..,._....:..,Ji.:..r.. ..+ .,» , ,,.... i • Infr pp r�onto I o an „.,Jn February 9, 1993 • The Mitigation Plan will utilize surface waters from the water quality treatment facility • and seep waters from an underdrain system under the commercial center to provide • necessary water to create hydric conditions and support the wetland plantings. As water overflows a berm and outlet structure from the water quality treatment pond, it will sheet-flow across an apron, enter into a swale between two of the new wetland ponds and flow into the lower two ponds. Water from the underdrain seepage system will flow • into the upper of the three ponds and during high water conditions, will eventually flow through all three ponds. n The movement of water through the three ponds is designed to go through a mix of rush and sedge plants and wet tolerant grasses. With berms separating one pond from another, water will flow across a shrub/scrub, emergent marsh/grass area, bio-filtering . the water creating a tertiary polishing effect to already treated surface water. Water on the berms, because of the elevation and length of saturation, will support a mix of marginally wet to wet shrub plants with a wet grass ground cover. , As water enters each pond, it is trapped in the lower elevations of the excavated areas, creating an emergent marsh habitat, with p ockets of deeper op en water along both ' P p P g l.• • ends. Overflowing water eventually flows through some intensified shrub/scrub , vegetation until it reaches Red Rock Creek. }5 The areas between the new emergent ponds and Dartmouth Road will be planted with r. . mixed shrub/scrub plants. The area to the far north will be planted with wet-tolerant shrub/tree communities to create an additional wetland habitat type and provide a j' , • physical and visual separation between the wetland area, Red Rock and the development area to the east The combined mitigation features will encompass ass'o. feet)g P 0.68 acres (29,629 square f qr an • area 4.3 times larger than the area impacted . a.a,,...,.M,,,...•...+.„... ... „,w..,«....», .:.t.:a..,.. .....„..,.,..1�_, ..,....w.«.-.,....:,_....,••:.++r-«.,.+....1..•+ .....•.I.,.-...,L.,.. .,, ....,,,L..,..,..:.4....•d J,..........•....,....,..u.,...,.«.w:......_1..»4:..i.aW.».l.+w4.,,h,.,.,,,-.:r....w,V,,;,-,_.....,,...:._•.,..u:...:uur.'...,,,,,,,,..,::*..1..,.....-......,...i:................b:w-.r, w..wN....-.....:.4.uWni..,... r 6 Stn, Wetlands Mitigation. and Compere anon Plan For • CUB Foods Market Site • . SW 72nd Avenue . Tigard, Oregon For Super Valu Stores, Inc. 3601 State Street Salem, Oregon 97309 . by IES Associates • 1514 Muirhead Avenue tJlymaa, WA 98502 (20 6) 943-0127 FAX (206) 943-2791 February 5, 1993 ■ ■ • ro or . , ....,r..........-.W. .i' . X,...A.,........-..M-.,,,,,,„..._. ...,.•...µ.....,..._.—..,._„„...in.,.-.. ...,_. .,n .,,,L,L..+.Ii.n..nM-. ....... 4,, nm.,....... ,...-a--...a.«-....u.,...+.x.... -.,..nK._s,∎,-..» ...+ ,.4.n.-rl.......,,,,...........--..-,,a.,-.,-..,,,.I:JJ.k....5.::,,,,.-_....,..,,,,,.....,,„,,-.,„ 6 Table of Contents 1' Introduction 1, 1.0 m • • e . • • • • • .. • x • • • . . 1 �1 i'. 2.0 Mitigation Concept 2 2,1 Component 1 • . • • • . • 3 • 2.1.1 Grading Plan . . . . . . . . . . 3 i' 2.2 Component 2 • o 3 ;`;` 2.2.1 Grading Plan • . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3 Component 3 6 • • o • . .' . . . . . . • • . 6 3.0 Planting Pla�� . . 6 3.1 Components 1 and 2 • . • • . • . . . • 6 Table 1 - Emergent Marsh Plant Species • 8 Table 2 Component 3 Plant Species . . 10 ■ 4.0 Monitoring and Contingency Plan •" . • , 12 4. 1 Monitoring Plan 12 4.1.1 Monitoring Schedule 14 4. 1.2 Monitoring Reporting d . . . . . . . . 16 ; 4.2 Contingency Plan . . . . . . • . . . . 1.7 I I t { , i I , +' ' I rr 1. j II I If I 1 ,' a ?, I, , . . n I ,1 , a ... f.«.. ._.. ._.„.,,.J.M........+.mow.1 .......... r,......... ......I.w.i ,.......-.._.-., ..., ,...,.a,.n.._.,.....+.. »..........,•,......n... ,r.,t..,.i.n ll ,.m.. f ,.,....v n._.-....«, ,, (7- Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ FF Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site • February 5, 1993 . f•. {{ t1 1.0 Introduction Based on field studies conducted by IES Associates, two wetland areas were identified on the proposed CUB Foods Market site located west of 72nd Avenue and east of�' Red Rock Creek in } Tigard, Oregon. The larger of the two wetlands associated with Red Rock Creek is to be left undeveloped in' the construction plans for the property. • The second wetland is a small, 6,900 square foot, isolated wetland in the west-central portion of the site, that was cleared during the initial clearing of the site and would �. be filled during the proposed development. (See Wetlands Delineation, Evaluation and Impact Analysis Report, IES Associates, 10/26/92) . To compensate for the losses associated with this wetland, a Wetland Compensation./Enhancement Plan has been designed within the high reaches of the overflow area, along • the east side of the creek. The proposal is to incorporate u, a two water sources into a series of three small pond/emergent marsh areas within the wetland boundary. The compensation/enhancement area is divided into Three yy segments: (1) an overflow emergent marsh curtain between, the water quality treatment pond and Component of the mitigation era 2 n excavated plan, r�� . d �emergent � p� �� (2) a Series of three� linear gent mars � � � 6y 1 • ,-,_:,:a.........,.,.....—....«....,...,...-..w-3..,......,.:sip..«I...«Mik:«,.....,..n..... „ «..r,:-•«,w.n.+...y, ..w..i..+.:«M,.»4w.,w....._, Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ (• FFnhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 ponds located parallel to Red Rock Creek, between the development site and Red Rock Creek; and (3) an area to be planted to a wetland shrub/scrub community to increase habitat diversity. Components 1 and 2 would be 0.38 acre or 2. 5 times larger than the isolated wetland to be filled with the development of the site. Component 3 consists of 0.3 acres of an area that will be planted with shrubs and small trees with no grading, tilling or disturbance of the existing system, other than the holes dug for the plants. The combined systems of these three components will encompass' 0.68 acres (29, 620 sq. ft. ) or an area 4.3 times larger than the area to be impacted. 2.0 Mitigation Concept The mitigation plan is divided into three components, each with a significantly different design. Components 1 and 2 will., include grading, berm creation and re-vegetation, with +' emergent marsh plants and a hydrological connection between the surface water run-off treatment system and an overflow connection with Red Rock Creek The design of Component 3 is strictly a planting plan showing the placement of different species and the size, number and spacing of each. 2 '' ...+.-..:A... r.r..r.n...a..Y...r4r........r..........,.rx. .r.._ ...-.+r...« .....-.-w,�,...,.....�.._..,.....v..a 4..r.._..lra....l..11«.....4....14.:. +..,.r...N..................w�....— .v......A,«. .......ar._.i.1.1..,1..n.......1..w r ....n ,.u..,,..rm..r ..+.r1 ....nl-�vw.....+w ..k...«.r ._ .............,.� «. .--..1 r.r..µ.�.IrL...r..t.:-.n.r�.w.. { • • .r •' . { , , I X11 • WETLAND PLANTING LEGEND ''''' }'°"� GI nu:fir — Ir' ur ccuuctuioue 51> w�aduc :i2r ouennix sehrutc I '-.., 11.® 2 •• • (2 'orT r+u H uNws arusys : ,s.tl ta' �12 12 c ' • uauCH s ucE CAREx.w�urtA _ IsoD to ®��® t �1, p -.. SICnRA szca JUHCIS NEYAOEnoS - 1300 le' �/ /�� !rr 1-2 S∎%-r'T euu'u N SCflPUS uN7,OC ris 1500 te ■V/ • MAPATO 'SACTTAn1A UTIFgJA 1000 12 e�i• ��� ('9 NARD-S1EN OIh/iU91 5CRrUS ACUlUS 500 IO', 4 ASN• A �,� •• ``/ 5AG0 PCNDA[EO POYAf10GETOH P[CTNAtUS » 1000 {3' t".,1,�i�/e '� 51E<A IMLL0IV SHUN 5 T 4EN95 i CAI,(S IT.) 30 d r/: {`� `V -� • tJONOQT A ROSE AOSA lNTNAHA 2 CAL. 100 )rt' - + � �1) �,�� %' 1D,4u�► gyp} t ®nUar HA.11101N CIATAE.aJS DoecLA01 4 Ft n 15 TT. ♦�t � , ORCD-OJLR..cw000 comlus staaRfpla 2 cu as 6 rr, SCALE: 1 u = 20' © �� 1 l.' • ®TMNnERRY I.ONICIC1IA .0 L TA 2 GAL to ' to i'T. 1 OSAwArocv svonEOLnRY AUEV 4a AU■IrcRUA ,4 r(, e to rr. ' 6 O O 1,0 • '�+ 1 'AHE uARLL ACLa CRCHATUU 4 TT 25 a rr. 6 O 1v '� q 11 nCDk:FLOwE NC rJJRnAHr Rion,•ANCUw000 2 CAL 15 4 rT, ( 1 argt, f r tl 10 M '. 12 CHCKEDERRY PWUU3 A1aGN1AHA a rr. to err, '�'.l Q�'r�`r ��L �D� EXISTING TREE. LEGEND y ��4D(� m�1`�� C' I... • a Ic =M AX ul \�/ _I 1 .�' I' f As, r. A ' rr HA,mlac wcR ♦ ,� �•r rrII m NAwMOltN �C2L r t#Uhlt•n •gut ON—SITE PLANTING LEGEND 16 ASH' �fl • / +�,a^����0,0 � 7 Dtg' • at,u,tgtw,ur, sc+�amaantAC � Iyat � seenna � '/�^��' � � a;n'i'r4DO�-' f1�• 1 �- � ' RAY1wco ASH' raAlotAlS ONYCMPS'FAYf+DOt500 '2'CAL.OM .b'as 4./..i t. 1 '� 1 .It/ik• -1 /111)0 RED SUNSET UAPLY .cat Ruo•ULI'RID SUNst1 X•CAL,Dd0 35•,•0.O.L. 'W, (���} I�I�e1`. �r w UA•U LCdt CNCUTAtJU e'-tD,did,$S1Va ,0.D.r. !l `/ ' II �°q . `./. 6 kESRAN RCD CCDM'' U /'-� I to A JA NOT. �0'»M.en 12'O.C. Vld 'i� � ,s , :t`�DOVBI.C,'al,WURfRIU 'ti10UPfNL1 PLICATUU'UAaICStt' 24'-30• o'0,0. 16 ASH' �G \ I II��0.'5 ''r ' '�11� ,1 ✓ • `�•JArAH[SE HOLLY Ilt><CR[NAR'f;a1LE7IA' �' S GA. ''/'O,a ,/,l�r '„"�it J, uuGND MNE rwue WG.vna.auto te'-21'sw1EAD )'-a'Ora -\•1:�� 4 y 4� �:JalECON CRAPE UA14 A Aa.YTOUW J CAL 4'O, Vlir �� 1 a z, o - (Dori.LUYRCN LAUREL rRtuUS LtuROCERASUS WTTD LUT,a'H• 16•_24' )'Qa \ I 9 4.1 2- I• E PARNEY CUrtlNEAS RR C0T04CAS1zn UCRUS 2 a 5'0,C. \•�7 A A p # OR '-I"ARK Gam,.. ' RO aE01'wC OOC'nOOb DWIAIS S1blCi11TE11R'BAILEII' S CA4 6..4, 4 O� ! 11.i ,'�AR -e-RGSY c.Cw DAROCivir , gAROER15,TIUNOERCf'ROSY GLOW S CAL )'OTC. 7 i 12' ,. f` ' �e�55�YIOriODUHO.�iP,FC9 +r1RLA WuAIDA'Sfltl''AldJfn)' 2 ON_' )'O.0 A � �' A. ; a '>4/^ Z `Ii' 0CAR9CRRY C011kIEASTCq COrOIVCASTC{DAIWCRII CAI. ,1tl' 11.��. RSODDDfi' J 1 r-. I I 4 ;,/ . Q HDoo A non a05A RUTrtANA I 2 CAL 3' �S'•, • A A. A A. i (1, • • A A A a B ' �.r • 16 ASH. A �, 'd °„ �, ^ Cs , r / r/" C• I >�14-i 1- r I EXISTING RUSHES / x 1' 1 ASH s HART awn h�,�" 1 1 ' 1► 4, 'dt/•''M•I' 01CC /r A 10 HAWTHQR• a1 e ° n 11,/ v� " .p{ ' •/ / Tr��Ifr4 r ✓ '� '5-6 -H 2 ���L�� Grp+` a9,.'�� ,, lb HAWTHOR O �LL'�tiC �a �'D?, ��. 124'ASH • a,w '•,.., a a' l� F•� ( ii ✓,» L. I,, 16 5H Arai'.,,,,•,,'-�� e "� ^n. Ta 9y 5-6 �+ j. 1 �` r . '1'v ,'eat /" ,, �. /.lam Q �. wF �� '" ` `�, , �. Q 2 8 ASH A't•r y4 " ii,14� I "'' ' I �' f N ,. ` W" 9 � "'111J ,r'"�' ll`7,P'' • li4y1 1 'QL— -�✓4-5 ASH, , 9%HlW&t 8 ,,. /4r> �� / A dsv,, 1 ail i ,'t - { `LsS N?r ��•5 ,�' 1 �s�Rs �� , . gg ��,/i'/ -y `` A A5H9H8► \ 3e JH Ki; �' r^v . ,lo;41 1 f / A1V ••ll•Cfa as `�O • AH A4 , Z� 17-*:Mli' `'- ' � 'b r * 2 ' ,Ct,•4 Gh r \ • -, .A5H64 ' „rip� 865 , ,*:, ";'‘1.4N,%41,,A11111 •• tgill,:k" * '`----.. ' •...—_,----"'' * ‘"N„..'`.''''ZI:.1:, .--4:.:--, ,.. . . 1862 ,� '`'�, Ica i��,t• �JATh QUALITY FACILITY e'3's�� ''`/ ',..1C., sINGLE CELL TREATMENT WETLAND) ( Il1" D a k. Z 1 I 'I •HAW 1„�\\\"V/,�,`�,/'�'1 ,V ' ��'`"►Vi,, ,K J v �fAf•SM'`\t�jrs!�«�� 0 J♦ ii I j Y 'M 1�' f�`- ay A" 4. ' • � �W1..,. V , ry. + V w . r he , , , '\C7)444"."'‘'.4.....'4.••1*;44dic-i.„,34,,,"--'7,-,...„. 'L . • i � 1 L, it AesocLAtt� ,A1.5.1.LANdiiigILANti atIPPF1 " � �no1 arMTe a»� +�+ �. xl.�1j�'r►�JA:r1�rl PLAN '�' alp e ArJ mt� � tc 12tf:Q?L1r7lIfIL~Trfl), C.2biif 04-011 alealriW:4lRmtrwrt sc trei+reYtme PLAN'r1"J PLAN � I»rgi w..ui.t�e.. ilAU f er suR.e>yA.+z .Ir.raetTA a i.ili ' iM ,'. ._,+._..+.o-a wa.,....,...i, .,,....»..,w . -.,..... .„,.,_....+....r.. ..,•M.w.,....... r.................. +.,..... n v...-..,.r..,.... ..,«...«».. ..,........,..,�...,.. I r Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site {1 , February 5, 199 k . 2.1 Component 1 Component 1 consists of the integration of the sub- surface and surface water collection area to Component 2. w' Water leaving the water quality treatment facility will discharge from a point near the north end of the facility onto i ` - a flat, wet emergent marsh/grass ' area, extending for approximately 210 feet, from north to south along the west I' side of the water quality pond berm. A wet grass/emergent m r marsh combin ation will be densely plante d in this area tt o ,, stabilize the area and reduce erosion. The planting scheme for this area is the same as designed for the area directly west of the water quality ponds and east of the surface water , . swage, connecting the, northern-most pond to the two southern- most ponds of Component 2. 2.1.1 Grading Plan i The Grading and Planting Plan exhibit is provided by is Alpha Engineering, Portland, Oregon (Exhibit 1 and back ° sleeve) . 2.2 Component 2 Component ert 2 is the main emergent marsh portion of the mitigation/compensation plan. It consists of three isolated depressions, paralleling the east side of Red Rock Creek. q M Pond 1, the northern-most pond, lies north of the retained emergent marsh (softrush) wetland and due west of the • i ( I I • ki i Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ � � Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site. February 5, 1993 retaining wall. It has a deep water component at elevation 168, grading up to elevation 174. It is connected to Pond 2 through a linear swale leaving the south end at elevation 173 and extending along the west face of the development site and the water quality treatment pond dike. Pond 2 is linear from northeast to southwest, with its deepest elevation at elevation 167, �.e. r 5 feet below surrounding ndin g surface elevation.` Water collects in this pond and then flows westerly Into Pond 3, which is a similar depression with a bottom elevation of 165 for a maximum depth of 5 feet. The water leaves Pond 3 in a linear pond/ depression that extends , westerly to Red Rock Creek. Pond 1 is fed by an 8-inch pipe that flows continuously, draining the groundwater seeps (that exist on the project site) to the east. This flow runs continuously year-round and runs near full during the winter months. Water will fill Pond 1 and maintain an open water component in the center that has an approximate surface area of 1 600 sq. feet. As water ,` w elevation rises, water will flow southerly. The slopes of f, •u•d Pond 1 are 8:1 to provide a gradual slope and growing area for emergent marsh plants. During high storm periods, water may G. overflow the pond, directly to the west, w where it will sheet r, flow through Component 3 in an existing grass wetland area into Red Rock Creek. The water, as it discharges to the south le will overflow in a gradual sheet- , the grass lined swale, overfl. gra et- I' f low across the existing rush wetland area. This water will r g replace the seep water that historically fed, this area from the east. There will be an increase in frequency, duration and volume of flooding into this area over what existed r I II 1'I .,..1...' a w.... ,... ......,. - ,.. .. i,..... • I1,.,,,, ,Mr ..4,..4........_. 4,,, 4.6 ,, r+.+...r5+..1r.,,J., ..“, . ,,o, .a «,..wr«.-.44.rf...-.4..rJ�..,-w .+.—w v e.4 .w .w.k,.=n�...7M...+L.W4 .0 4e.....n...I—....4L1,,,,... ,,...Jw 41-r:w,,,,,,,J,,..4.,...14r-r«.M.,,,,,..J7+r1..:..,f1:.. I,..., 4.— ,,,,,+44 .∎..K1. .,•,,,n u'y Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site , February 5, 1993 previously. This should modify the area slightly and increase the potential for the wetter tolerant species that are mixed . with the softrush, to expand and provide greater habitat diversity. ' When water reaches Pond 2 it will form a small open-water pond of approximately- 1200 sq. ft. surface area and 4 foot depth. With the dense clay soils on site, water should stay , in both Pond 1 and Pond 2 for significant periods of time. �, , When water reaches elevation 171, it will overflow to the east into Pond 3. As the water flows into Pond 3, it will fill a small depression with an approximate 800 sq. ft. surface area to a ,. 'y depth of 4 feet, befola it will start to overflow. During peak flows, when the ponds reach their maximum depth prior to discharge, Pond 3 will exceed 4 feet in depth. When water stops �� p ilo���ing �in the spring, or the level of � p , water decreases to the point where discharges from the water quality treatment pond and from Pond 1 are no long reaching g g • Ponds 2 and 3, the ponds will drop in elevation to the deep water areas, which will Maintain open water or wet emergent marsh areas for signif icant periods of time, because of the den:.4e clay soils and high water table, t j .e a ' I r z V 7 • n... ,,..:ft.... ......-.,._ 1.....,,.,_ ._._.«.. ._.«.-._-. ..,,...•.. ,..., ....,,...,_ _...,.k„_.,. ..• .. ..A•,...... r.-m.,..i,.,. •.n...., .,.,. ..._ ..,., .,..w.,,,,!' a._.....•...'.+-..--,.,....•..:. .........._....w 'M..... n.........-,.—... C:..v.... ,+...A...:...»I ..,-_ Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan . CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 • 2.2.1 Grading Plan Wetland Mitigation Grading and Planting Plan exhibit is • provided by Alpha Engineering, Portland, Oregon (See Exhibit 1 and back sleeve) . 2.3 Component 3 Component 3 consists of shrub/scrub plants surrounding Component 2 wetland ponds.. The purpose is to provide diversity, cover and a physical/visual separation between the wetland pond units and Dartmouth Road to the south, and alsr ., between the ponds and the development to the north and east. c I • .0 Planting Plan • 3.1 Components 1 and 2 The entire;, area Will be over-seeded with a grass mix as f soon as grading iS completed. T�Che intent is to stabilize the n area and create a dense enough root mass to compete with the expected invasion of reed canarygrass �Pha1ari 8 arundinacea) and creeping buttercup u Rarzunctzl u will include species have, The grass ��� � .. � diversity g , of growth patterns„ being able to survi ve extended flooding for durations, as we ll as extended periods of drynes s , Species common to the area, even though not necessarily native 1 i • fl n . ......«,.............' w.:.,al.....+l.,rn.........,. ' .r..r,...... ....'_..I.M.,,-I:...1 s:.. .,t.,.........nl.,-1.....,.. .,'. .i.«.,. .......,-.-.,....,..._..,.»F:4:.....,.,J.:._. _.u1..,.....i.JH G.. - Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 to western Oregon, are incorporated to provide that growth. r I The grass mix will include: Redtop Agrostis alba 25% Red fescue Festuca rubs 25% Oregon bentgrass Agrostis oregonensis 25% Meadow foxtail Alopecurus pratensis 10% Common velvet grass, Holcus lanatus 10% Perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne 5% The entire area will be seeded at a rate of 100 pounds to the acre. The site will be fertilized with a 10-10-10 organic fertilizer mix and over-planted with Annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) at 20 'pounds to the acre. '. n I Depending upon the time of construction, the area may be required to have intermittent irrigation to stimulate growth of the grass species. If the work is completed late in the fall, a single watering', shortly after construction (using a w ater tru ck) , may be sufficient to for ce the grasses to germinate. If an irrigation system is to be installed, the emergent marsh planting will occur during grass seeding. However, if it is late in the season, the planting will wait until the beginning of y marsh plan . the rainy season. Emergent -t s will be planted on 12 to 18-inch 'I centers. A mix of sun tolerant I I species, wi th high biofiltration and micro-organism habitat values, have been sale c ted. These are indigenous to the area, , . I I with po rtio ns h�i�g hardy invaders in wet areas. The species I , mix is included in Table 1 A I I I 7 I I � I I I , • I F Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement, Plan CUB F Dods Market February 5 1993 Table 1 - Emergent Marsh Plant Species . , LP� Common Name Scientific en t�fic Name Number ' �acinq . 1' (Soft rush Juncus effuses 1500 18" (Slough sedge Carex obnupta 1500 18" rush Juncus nevadensis 1500 18" 2 L Small-frt bulrush Scirpus microcarpus 1500 18" (Wapato Sagittaria latifolia 1000 12" (Hard-stem bulrush Scirpus acutus 500 18" ; (Saga pondweed Potamogeton pectinatus 1000 12" Small-fruit bulrush, Wapato and slough sedge will be, ` planted into Pond 1 along with the grass mix. Soft rush, slough sedge and Sierra rush will be planted into Pond 2 and 3. Hard-stem bulrush will be planted near the p outlet of Pond 3 and in the, over-flow channel that leads to Red Rock Creek. The outer periphery r e along the west� y g� t edge o f Pond � and the south, edge of Ponds 1 and 3 will be planted with a shrub community to provide a shrub/scrub wetland component. Wet slow growing shrubs have been to the possibility f; of the plants over-taking and 'eliminating the potential of the emergent marsh vegetation to thrive and function as proposed. The g composition n along the creek, both e�istin vegetative o through the property and to the south of the property, were Iry examined to identify those species which were functioning � readily in this area and t i to determine their growth patterns. 'a \ ,n4`• 11 Oi (47 i e • ^ ..,,.,..,,., ......r...,-r.m,�a..,.,.,..«.e,....,.�,,.,«.a...n.i.:._,..«...�n.�.o:.._....,•...,......,_._.�,..�....., ,..^..,,....u.....;.�»..r.....«+.^.....:t_:....�.,.�.-..,,r.«,a._tM._....,,+.,-_.•_+.a_.:-. .,....:rr..:+. ,..,.,....,....I�..:....,..,...-... .,......i..,,...............w,-....,...,..i..._»...,....r.r...,....,..a., r_..U..,.,..�:,.,,,.»w:W«...�..�.L:r,;.�•_.w-'.«»I.:.c...:..:.-'nl at.,..:;•1:-a,rua.;l:—u.'.a..a.., Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUD Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 it Based on this analysis, the following plant species were selected for this area: fir. • ID # Common .Name Scientific Name Size Number Spacing 4 Sitka willow Salix sitchensis 1 gal 30 6 ft 5 Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 2 gal 180 3 ft The combination of the plants will be mixed to provide a rr dense, low hedge effect along the edge of the wetland/ponds. 3.2 Component 3 Component 3 consists of a shrub/tree/plant combination to buffer the wetland from the proposed Dartmouth Road, from the north end of the development and to provide a transition from the creek into the emergent marsh mitigation/ compensation area. D ue to road height and visibility constraints, specie composition consiats of plants that are lower growing growing trees or medium--toi-low growing shrubs. The list of plants is included • as Table 2 • rr� r s 1• 9 �, ...I ...r..... _.�_.....' � .....,,..1-., -.r.^v ..,i'.'•. '..'.. ., i,� .. I �,. .�,.i_.,.rl.. ......r ...'.11 4.,.... ..... .. .....r...iii.... 1 .,.«.i.,.,.0,_+.,.ti,.«.....:..,;...na,..,..,1......,-.wr..4 .u4 ._.... .-4.u.iv..�».....w...w..m...,. a.alt..,...:.ar.«.;-.m..rJ:...,,,.»»..«»I,,...._.....-L..+r.....p:.+,.... JAA. .....+'........-..,.s... .�..,..«_,.,..._.-«�....,�� •�+:,.,,�......4:i Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site • February 5, 1993 Table 2 - Component 3 Plant Species i.t ID # Common Name Scientific Name Size Number Specing 6 Black hawthorn Crataegus douglasii 4 ft 20 15 ft. 4 Sitka willow Salix sitchensis 5 ft 20 10 ft. 7 Red-osier dogwood Cornus stolonifera 2 gal 60 6 ft. . � 8 Twinbe rr� Lonicera znu o lucxa to 2 g al 10 10 ft. � I . Y r , 9 Saskatoon �.mel.ancha.e r serviceberry alnifolia 4 ft 6 10 ft. 10 Vine maple Acer circinatum 4 ft 25 6 ft. 11 Red-flowering currant Ribes sanguineum 2 gal 15 4 ft. 12 Chokecherry Prunus Virginiana 6 ft 10 6 ft 10 I , SS Ir, rr •K .,.-.,.•.._,,..._m.......,... .................a...,_....,..,._,,,,+».......-..,.._.._.i<a._.,= ,i..._.........,+,..-.. .IS ..... a..,..._..M..—..,....:,.,.«_..__._..F......i.,..,..... .,.,«.., _.+.r-w...a,...,..-•.,� .«.. ,c..... ...,,.., .,.,-•-•....1 N.•..,....„,__..S:L.i.. ...,w:-....-..-a,.....+.A',,.......:,.rN...«•»...,.,.....»_........M......,.,+,_ , • .4 tl Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 All plant species will be multi-stextmed. Potted plants will a.' have been potted for a minimum of 6 months prior to planting. All plants will be subject to inspection by an agency inspector and a property owners consultant. Shrub plants will be planted in the i' winter, when the plants are dormant, to reduce shock. Shrub ,' planting will occur after grading, seeding and marsh specie plantings are completed. The area between the south end of the } I' . emergent marsh wetland and Dartmouth Road will not be planted until Dartmouth Road construction is completed. This will reduce the potential for destruction of the planted material during the construction of Dartmouth Road. • 4 ' ff t . 11 1 ' .J....:.....,.. ..,«:.....,:.,...w..........w.e:.. .:.,y...,.,....n...a..',........: a.u.i»... w.., ,,.,„„ ,e',4.._.._. '.-......-.....,......i-,..«M. -. - ,...,JI...»...r c.:«..,,.,...ba..,. .,.1...wr,. ,,. .. .. ...-...x ...... ..k...........,.,v.a+w...,.,.»u...., *,a- ..,+..-n.,...a...i..ah.,l....r...,. ,w..._.emu.., .n..J.. Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/` Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 4 0 Monitoring and Contingency Plan 4.1 Monitor ing Plan A three year monitoring program will be established for the mitigation site. It will be i nitiated when the grading and first 1.`, year planting are completed. At the completion of construction and planting, a Time-Zero Report will be completed by the contractor and the wetlands ;- consultant, i.e. , design biologist. The Time-Zero Report will identif y problems i n obtaining materials; differences of sizes s of materials than were originally called for; replacement materials, if necessary and any other conditions that varied from the . restoration plan. At - G' t the initiation f o the Time-Zero Zi....Lo Report, a series of • permanent photo points and vegetation measurement plots will be established. The photo . points will be designed to give a representation of the entire site during each stage of the monitoring program. points will be established` program. � � Photo p�� �� � s With permanently ly marked stakes, An instruction sheet, with rmanent takes urti �� ���the - direction and number of photographs to be taken, will be provided ,. allow continuity if the monitor changes over years. , to the .. Vegetation plots will be established in each one of the habitat types to provide consistency 'in the quantitative easu.rang 'co `st �m of each plant. Plot s in the emergent marsh areas will be five feet (4 , in diameter, with all plants measured and counted within the five- • I I ` I 1 ' w..,l..::...+,..,:-_.....« .4..r ..r. ♦.,n..x..n»..,,.... ,.....,.. .u..,..1......,.............. w......._I..„.,S.a.,...•r4x ., w.,.r..J.:„,..N...w.,_,,,..JA.. «:.Jl.x.r'e...» .�-..,....,.......1:« .tiM.xe.,.....J I.._I....,..-..,,.,r_,.,..._+—..,..k.:.,.....r.J+.+.r,,.:.«.-.•i...«w.... a! rdxrwti.r.'lna . rv, Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site :..... February 5, 1993 foot plot and identification of general conditions in an area 30 feet in diameter surrounding the plot. z' Thirty foot diameter plots will be established in the y p shrub/tree area. Species composition and percent of total cover and canopy cover will be measured at each point. In addition, invader species that were not planted will be noted and their density recorded, Records will be kept of non-native invader species, particularly reed canarygrass. At the point where a r, • noxious invader species becomes dominant, a contingency plan will • be initiated to take this into consideration. i Planting locations of species proposed in the mitigation plan have been selected based on anticipated pond and groundwater ' ,'' levels. The success of plantings Will be dependent upon the I I maintenance of these anticipated water levels and limited r disturbance in the maintenance of the retention/detention pond. �1- Monitoring of hydrologic conditions�' ink the created wetland I• will consist of observations of pond elevations and seasonal l • �a inundation of the wetland plantings. This be accomplished by the es tablishment of a 'monitoring schedu le that allows the monitor to be on site during the no n growang season. • • I r, I , • I i I I 13 F it :, Il r' • ' 11 Y 1.n r. '.. .,._.. I.:..._..0.................. .x, _ ..,. __....,. ,._., .,,i...,._.,...,......_ ,.,.-.W..-...,.._....„....«....+.m....,.i..,«._......,..._,...........-._....,.....,.,... ...,......_.. .,_........_.,....-..,.•_....._ .w,..,.,._`q_;.«,-.w,« .,_, .......,.,,.. r y N o Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ , Enhancemert Plan uum vooas marKez mice February 5, 1993 - 41.1 Monitoring ,Schedule � �' • Year 1: Year 1 consists o f the growing season following the , first year of construction. The first site visit will be conducted at green-up, ,'" approximately mid-May, to determine the initial survival of the site. It will include shrubs and trees on the s t w c lude a plant-by-plant inspection with a notation of any species which appear to be (, stressed, dead or delayed in initial growth. Photos will be taken . ,. of the site per the established photo schedule, which will be created at the initiation of the Time-Zero Report. 1 , A second site visit will be in approximately mid-June to check ' ' germination growth of the grass and sedges and to evaluate the need ' for first year `emergency irrigation. If at that time, it is determined by the monitor that the area is not receiving sufficient water to provide adequate germination and initial growth, a temporary irrigation system will be established. The irrigation ' system could be a temporary pipe system from a well or a community water system or water brought in by tank truck, depending on the estimated amount and frequency of wate'., e,ng required and the resources available. Photos and plant plot surveys will also be f` completed at, this time. in early to ,mid .August, ;• hied , The third site visit wa�l�. occur depending on weather conditions.ns. 1f the summer is extremely hot, io ext tr . t t earlier in the Seas if i the nisi ar- on° whereas i is a coC7a. � will occur e d whey it f . summer, the visit will occur towards the end of August.g ust. The ' l ' purpose of this will to evaluate the ability of the new os visit wi �., be Y � ; 14 - . , ., pp, Wetland Mitigation and Compensation,/ 1 . Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site 1: February 5, 1993 vegetation to adjust to first year stress and summer heat conditions. Site visit 4 will be completed at the end of the growing season. This visit will determine the success or failure of the plants at the end of the first year. At this time, all dead plants will be noted and e n n recorded. This information will be supplied d to the planting contractor for revegetation during the dormant winter period. � b •A last site visit will be conducted toward the latter part of December, or at the end of a major storm event, if one should , occur, to evaluate the hydrology and the relationship of the high 1{ . • . water to the vegetative communities. It is anticipated that it will not be possible to take certain photographs at this time; ° however, these will be supplemented with water level photographs Y. •, and general photographic coverage to, document conditions during the visit a,. Year., 2; Year 2 will consist of three site visits. The first site visit w ill be du rin g the spring, i.e. , du rin g � green-up, to eval uate over wi nter succ ess an d to inspect plants that were re-planted during the dormant winter part of ori�ant winter season as pa.t the revegetation construction contract. A second site visit - om ted in mid-summer m will be c p�.e �:ri toy., to evaluate summer g ro wt h.. characteristics e ristics, and revegetation h and to . monitor t he groundcover and canopy Cover p er the performance standards. ..,.W,.. .,- ,._._r. ir. .,,... .. .r ...,--, r..,.....,,, ._. ......_. ....,..,.. .,........,r...,.,s,.4, .,,,,.-.. ._,,..,. ....... ,....., +...,....i.............,.....,r+..+...._-....I„.,,,„ ",+ ,...». ,.,..«.,»t-11.,4....mw..,...s..,... ..., ....,,,..,...._.,a.._:u.,.a.,. • i, r Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan f', • CUB Foods Market Site February 5 , Y 5, 1993 •• A final site visit will be completed at the end of the growing M1M1 { season to determine summer success. d'r Year Year 3. Y ar 3 will include three site visits. Site visits 1 and 2 will be the same as those outline in Years 2. The third visit will be the final. visit. At this time, it b the monitor, with assistance from the will. be determined y , appropriate regulatory agency, whether the site is meeting the , P erformance standards and goals as identified in the Mitigation ation has met the goals, no Plan. If it is determined that the site g r i' additional work will be donee If it is determined that the site has not yet met the goals, a contingency plan meeting will be - established between the developer, wetland consultant, contractor, • monitor and appropriate regulatory agency, to modify the project so it will can the performance standards This could include additional plantings, replacement t of plant species and/or or an extension of the monitoring period. 4.1.2 Monitoring T1 Reporting ttt Annual nitor reports will be submitted to the developer and a pp ro pr iate regulatory agency by November 15th. The mo nitoring reports will include photographic documentation for each site te , visit, with photo descriptions' and a plot-by-plot analysis of the 1' vegetation plots. The r eport will generalize the overal l conditions and address ctiv ness Mitigation Plan in on toss the of fe e of the M���. anon Pl meeting the performance standards. 16 • I, r } a... ,• -.,. ,,.. ,.w,.,.,._...,.,G. .,..,. ...... ._.,.....� u...•..,.,._.._... .a ,., ,.,. r, µ•.,.._....w, .d4.., w«.» ... .......... :.,: _..4. •a u,tti as.»b xW_ ..w4 e... • pf 4t1 Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ g Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February, 5, 1993 A final report will be completed by December 15th of final year and will include a summation and final analysis. If at that time, the performance standards have not been fully satisfied, but the monitor believes that the site is viable and growing and that the standards will be met, it should be noted. The final report will be the determination of whether the site is a success and whether the construction bond can be released. • 4.2 Contingency Plan, If the created wetland and upland buffer plantings do not meet established performance goals for vegetative cover, plant survival, drainage and water quality controls, revisions to the plan will be • made and implemented. Depending on the problems addressed, activities could include changes in soil or hydrologic conditions and/or the replanting of wetland or upland buffer vegetation. This constitutes a Wetland Compensation/Enhancement Plan by IES Associates for the Super Valu Market project located on 72nd Street, Tigard, Oregon. R. L. Van Wormer Senior Biologist IES Associates {{ 17 . ,,,. .. .•...,,•,.,...,.,....•{.,-.....,.,,.,...•.,.....».,.»a..,..,_-..,...._i,..... ........... ...c..,..-_... .,....,r .'.a..,._..__.. u..ai,... ...-.,.♦..,r ,.,..,,.,..,ri.l,...-,+:,{......._w,,..,»•,4........-.......,... ..,,.i, .,.. .» ...,4..-.......,- ,,.,1.,:,......,,.....,.«., .•-......a....:.i:..,,» ,....,.....».,....,,,M...,..,.w.+,..... • 684?29? P.01 • MRR-22.1993 16:4? FROM Gordon Davis TO • • GORDON E. DAVIS 1020 TAYLOR BUILDING,SUI'rE.555 POSE'OFFICE BOX 8774 PORTLAND,OREGON 97207 • 503-248,1185 - + A' twesiglitesigoies a1/4%w,inesi.0011111, 111111111111111111alingliamialinisiair ° PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTING r STRATEGIC PLANNING March 2 , "i9 TO: Jerry Offer 'z Planning Department City of liga.rd ; FROM: Gordon Davis • RE: CUB Conditions; Cor p s/DSL permit • FAX TRANSMITTAL (Pleas0 Transmit to Addressee Immediately) With regard to Condition 22 of your staff report as you know, we have applied fdr a DSL/Corps ,. p+arrnit for our proposed wetland fill and mitigation�iThe�uliv,notice/comment period was ` concluded v nMa rh 7t arid as yet have ciy received one comment. This was from the Water.Resources people on the possible need for a water rights permit We have already resolved that issue with them and expect their sign-off within days. I GtM unaware of any other issues and am not expecting any surprises since we got a preliminary sign-off ��{�S�} and Herb � ���t��atpt�s� ���e�ully it should now r be just matter processing. H e , you w, c rab n time. We certainly have no difficulty with the idea that we must have that at p rmit k hand before we get a building permit. However, we �� +��toget our grading permit as soon Obviously until the SLtCa rp s p dt s i ued, we cannot not work in the proposed wetland till area or the mitigation and so woul d expect t� flag flag/construction�n fe �ee�hie areas off. However { . " we could do at least two months of work or more in other ar ass lt s site if we an begin our • grading and site work before we get the,tfnal DL/Corps permit. we d this today, „oul concurred that this appeared be a good app' +roach but was �� sse�this tvc�a d to � • this � ,g pro something that could be worked trying ps n �� out at the staff level rather than t en to complicate the Planning 9 Cornnnission's deliberations tonight. This memo is intended ! . {Add "� and�. only to confirm my understanding, I r I w ■ the recommendations in the staff report . • Commissioner Castile moved and Commissioner Holland seconded to approve the application and to forward a recommendation to City Council for approval of CPA ,93-0009/ZCA 9:--0009, SDR 93- 0014, CUP 93-0002, and MLP '93-0013 per staff recommendations subject to the following changes to some conditions as follows: C.2 . a. (1) A driveway access with a right out and left turn design between the site and SW Northview Drive with a right-out and left-in design. * * (3) A proposed sidewalk/stairway from the grocery store shall connect with SW Northview Drive at the SW I , " Stardust intersection and shall be combined with the applicant' s proposed ramp. * * e. Conceptual building design details shall be provided for the entire development . Of key importance will be consistent size and scale of buildings and signs . • * * q. An access plan for vehicular and pedestrian traffic shall be r submitted for the proposed 3 . 95 acre parcel . Prior to approval of the final site plan and/or minor land partition, the City, County, and Fire District shall be satisfied that a suitable option(s) is available for providing future access to this parcel. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present . 5 .2 AMENDME1gT OF CONDITION DEVELOPMENT RE T �._ 0001/SENSIT SDR 9 w._._._ � � REVIEW �IO� OF APPROVAL FOR SITE DE,�E' 93- 0002/PLANNED 0 0 2,/�'r.�Al'�1VED D��IELO PNl�L�1'�'� � PDR 9 3- 1VE LANDS ' SLR 93-0002/SIGN CODE EXCEPTION .. SCE 930001 CUE Page 4 _. Planning Commission Minutes November 15, 1993 • . .., .. .,._..... ............_ _... .. ...._ ...., .. ... ... ,.. ,. _ ....... ,,... .., .,«.... ..,....._. ..,. _ .. ..,. ,,.._., a...... ... ......,a. � ........,. _.. .., , .,,..... .. • • u..,,...»—,+-._.,......,....C„....i.,s....-..,w......u_..-._.,+......_«:-.:w...,a...,-.1:. .....,..,.,...,...,.,.s..,..m.............M.». Mf.o-«.,....a•.1.:.-x. ....�.,.,, - ...II.m,t.....u,= ,.wJ,..�....wJ......« .."M✓:..«N;-t,.,.,:...it...»,u.,,,-1-..,.,..:-:,.,-,,,....»,.....,.w.,,..,,..:.t...»w:..:.v.;,afi.u,-....,w.4.».:.a4,,,..i.+i.iw..,,.:aua....u..:-as,,..,».,+-.' ., FOODS/SUPERVALU LOCATION: 7500 SW Dartmouth Street (WCTM 151 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; a portion of WCTM 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; and a portion of WCTM 251 1BA, tax lots 100 and " 101) . To amend condition of approval #11 in the March 25, 1993 Planning Commission Final Order, thereby allowing the westbound lane of SW Dartmouth Street from 72nd to the site entrance to be constructed by the developer. APPLICABLE ° ' REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18 .32, 18. 62, 18.80, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, and 18.120 . ZONE: C-G and C-G (PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C-G zoning designation allows public agency 0 and adminiptrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single-family cesidential units among other uses . • Director of Community Development, Ed Murphy, reviewed the staff report regarding request for an amendlient to the conditions of approval imposed upon the Cub Foods shopping plaza. Ed Murphy said that staff recommends approval of a modification of Condition #11 of the Final Order, to allow the construction of an additional westbound lane on Dartmouth Street . Commissioner Schweitz asked if ODOT had commented, He also raised concern about installing a median • l • • Commissioner Holland moved and Commissioner Castile seconded to approve Amendment of Condition of Approval for Site Development Review SDR 93-0002/Planned Development PDR 93- 0001/Sensitive Lands SLR 93-0002/Sign Code Exception SCE 93- a 0001 Cub Foods/Supervalue. 7 , OTHER BUSINESS 8 . ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9 :45 PA f Lorraine Campbell �...._ -� Planning Commission Secretary . A=''TEST: L ,rA. . , Commis, , e one' Saporta • Pa ge 5 Plannin g Commission Minutes - November 15, 1993 • • GORDO N I E. DAVIS y 102U,IAYLOR BIJlILU SLJIII.5.57 .v,. I RECEIVED p►n y\Y NIN G I �� r�r I � C C ICI.. a�JX 87/1 1 "1993 POP r1ANID,ORE , al`1 9720? 503.2/18-1185 • • f.p r C' "I'11 11' I'F VI"I()I1Iv1I I;II`�I PM( I S eptember 17,1993 I;1jlitlf,:ACC°AIRb S yI i\II( .,I(, lal.AP••1I\llNG Ed Murphy, Manning Director City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd � Oregon 3 Ti and Ore on 9722' g • RE: CUB Foods, Condition #2d I I I Dear Ed: • This letter is a follow-up to our conversation regarding the above referenced condition. ' I I I I Since the question of what is the best form of screening for trash areas and rooftop mechanical g p , equipment is not easy to judge from plans we would like to request that the final satisfaction of this condition be deferred until a time later than the issuance of the building permit. while the next logical time would be at the issuance of Occupancy Permit, we would nonetheless like to • resolve this question considerably prior to that time. • I I I have asked the architects to prepare some materials to help us evaluate this and within the next few weeks, when the building is further along with construction, I will call you to set a time when we can meet on the site to visually consider the best approach to take, Thank you for your help on this. I Sincerely /!"* ✓° v I Gordon E. D. ,, .r Waremart, Inc. c: Paul Simmons Ipick 1/andc.rlindcri I I I John Shaw, P'lanMark 1fi1Goodwin, City ofl`rigard • I , I I I I I I L I I , I I II° I , 7 ,y r j eon, April 28, 1993 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL • Gary Gustafson, Director ,, .L o QUALITY Division of State Lands .._._ .�.�... ; �.. 775 Summer Street NE Salem, Oregon 97310 • Re: Corps No. : 93-109 (Haslem) DSL No. : FP 7216 Applicant: Supervalu Stores • Dear Mr. Gustafson: The Department of Environmental Quality has reviewed the above • referenced project, which involves placement of fill in 0. 15 acres of isolated emergent wetland near Red Rock Creek in Tigard, Oregon. The purpose of the project is to construct a retail outlet on the property / The applicant has proposed mitigation for the wetland fill, by ,:•, '• creating and enhancing 0. 68 acres of open water, emergent, and shrub scrub wetland on the project site. The buffer area will be planted with woody species to provide visual shielding of the mitigation wetland. The Department finds the mitigation concept , acceptable. The Department believes the proposed action will not violate state water quality regulations and will provide appropriate , replacement of wetlands functions and values, provided the special conditions of the state permit and the certification conditions below are implemented. Special Certification Conditions 1. Turbidity shall not exceed '10% above natural stream turbidities as a result of the project. The turbidity standard may be exceeded for a limited duration, provided all p racticable erosion control measures have been implemented, including but not limited to: ,:, a. use bags, sediment fences, catch basins, or other me sufficient to prevent o ffsite movement of soil, i. use of impervious b: ' �a � p �� material to cover stockpiles during rain event toprevent erosiondof the material, , 0=a� tl 1 has 0, 1, ands v, c. Parking lot catch br,sinS shall be protected from sediment accumulation during grading, �Por ���Sixth t `2 z,t t until the parking lot is paved, , .rk g TDD (503 ) 22941991 k' • • ,1 • Gary Gustafson, Director April 28, 1993 Page 2 2. All areas of soil disturbance shall be seeded and mulched as soon as practicable after construction, to prevent subsequent erosion. 3. An NPDES permit for construction activities shall be obtained from the City of Tigard prior to any construction activity on this site. 4 . Oil and grease separators shall be used to treat all parking lot run off prior to discharge to the water quality pond. 5. Mitigation shall be constructed as outlined in the wetland mitigation plan, pr"ior to or concurrently with construction , activities. ,A buffer' of an average 20 feet shall be • maintained to limit impacts to the mitigation wetland. The Department hereby certifies that, if the above conditions are made part of the Section 404 permit, this project complies with the requirements of the Clean Water Act and state Water quality standards. All water quality conditions of other federal, state, and local permits must be complied with for this certification to be valid. The certificate holder shall notify the Department of all changes in the project subsequent to certification. If you have any questions regarding these certification conditions, please Contact Dana Siegfried at 229-5545. Sincerely, Fred Hansen Director 'H:DS cc: Dale Haslem, Corps of Engineers Gordon Davis Supervalu Stores City of Tigard • . n • l } -ww,....r u.,x, -4 r.w.;,.04, . 11. 40. 0. .06 ,« 40,4 4,40A 0 k.a+r.•0-4 7.«,....J4 r44ui,'„-N.,n,ex 4.-- .rJn.. x....•,.- .,w m • k J CITYOFTIGARD , January 3, 1994 OREGON Gordon E. Davis 1020 Taylor Building, Suite 555 P.O. Box 8774 Portland, Oregon 97207 Dear Gordon: We received your revised landscape plan for the CUB Foods project. wm The plans indicate the addition of 12 trees. Please be advised that the Community Development Director has conditionally approved the revised landscape plan. There is some concern whether the revisions will provide effective screening, given the size of the plantings and, the slope where they will be planted. The only way to make a reasonable judgment of the effectiveness of the screening will be after planting,, Therefore, the revised plan as submitted by your letter of December 27, 1993 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Tree placement for screening purposes should be as near to the upper part of the slope as possible; and i w 2e the Community' Development Director reserves the right to require additional modification and screening after review and inspection of the actual planting. We trust this approval is the best way to judge the effectiveness of the screening and allow you to proceed as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely 3.0.4.34.44 Richard H. Bewersdorff 41( Senior Planner B(Vd„ 13125 8W Tigard, OR 47223 (503) 634-4171 Tad (,503) 6 Na(I 34= 772 r 0 p A �r c�. •'i , ■ ' 0 • ,: ..1,. .w�....w..a_I-.:+.' •{,. ,.,a....,....•«,.xwa iA...... n.«,.-..,.....e ...t.,.M..«.,.. ..m,«.1,.,,_rrd w,7...,-a,...,.«...•,i..,.. ..,,... H.. T • • .r.W lw+.� r.�,. ..error •r•r-.,r.4 n l,... w,k...�.. r n ..(....r„Atiurl ....sx ur ! ', 3 / - �. , I , ,.�.���� a'-.H „F •...,. 1 ..:....... Ma:, ,.;1,;.,...'un.: �lw.»—r,..:db;.-M...., ,' 1 . RECEIVED PLANNING GORDON E. DAVIS 1020 TAYLOR BUILDING,SUITE 555 POST OFFICE BOX 8774 I . PORTLAND,OREGON 97207 503-248-1185 • • r PROPERTY DEVELOPMEN1 SERVICES '-cem..er , +.3 PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTING STRATEGIC PLANNING Richard Brewersdorf City of Tigard P,l a. Box 23397 • Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: CUB Foods Revised Landscape Plan Dear Richard: Enclosed you will find a revised landscape plan for the CUB Foods project. The revisions to note • deal with the addition of12.trees along the 72nd Avenue frontage to "fill in" some of the gaps in . the original plan. I ,• • discussed during ,ussed various ways to more effectively screen roof- °�` You will recall that durin our field visit we , top equipment. We finally agreed on the approach of planting a more dense row of trees along 72nd Avenue, With this change, we should now be in conformance with the requirements of the Planning Commission approval. Your concurrence is requested. Please also note that the Douglas Firs and Western Red Cedars to be planted along that frontage are indicated with a "#1"which specifies a 10-12 foot tree which will give us more initial screening P g g than we were visualizing when we were at the site Teufel anticipates planting during mid to late January and so we should get good spring growth even before the store opens. Thanks for our help. I • Y Sincerely, / . II Davis Gordon E. D I I c: Paul Simmons Dick Vander n r Linden I ,{ . , • V , , + , > • • • -•r..#.F.:.«...Yrhxr..rM..«n.,a4.A-..r.,-rv4...r...lrl4Tlan...� r.,..,-{i ,......,+..w..u........,_.... ..I.... . .....ur..4 r.. ....�„r.,.......:.A�r,�...-.o.n.,F.r,...ry' ,.n..J,..�J...+....,+.r...w.._xi4...,,n,...,..+_vi-k3wFn..rlv.mrv,.1•.r,..w..1..+.-.,..3 +i r....x m u 1 .r $ ■ • ri • ;r• GORDON a DAVIS *.: .. i 1020 TAYLOR BUILDING,SUITE 555 POST OFFICE BOX 8774 . PORTLAND,OREGON 97207 503-248-1185 y h •, + F • m r� ” PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES . PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTING January 28, 1993 , • STRATEGIC PLANNING I City of Tigard . Planning Department 13125 SW HaII Blvd I , Tigard, Oregon 9722 'rr RE: CUB Foods Development Permit • Greetings: . ' , SuperValu Sto re s is pleased to submit this application on far Site Development Review for a 19.9 i , , , acre commercial center in the Tigard Triangle. As you know, this project has taken considerable , , ' time to plan because of the complex assembly of many parcels of land and the physical difficulties ; • . of the site. For these reasons, we are particularly pleased to be able to present this project to the t City at this time. Accompanying this letter are the following materials: • , 0 Completed application form I . a Application Fee I, . • I 0 Preliminary plans including: u O Development site plan r o Preliminary grading plan ,� • Preliminary utilities plan (water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer • Building elevation and perspective 1 • Preliminary landscape plan . u Traffic report* n and 0 Wetland delineation mitigation plan* L I ; . in Narrative description of the project (including sign plans) • *To be submitted within two weeks of this applicator • r �n � , n ln9 this project wt inmore detail and to making a., firr a l/ p resent�tictohePlann g Commission, If there are any q u- ens, or needs for additional , information, please do not hesitate to call Sincerely, i , . Gordon,40:0,-44/4ww/11114:1166....403 , E. Davis, for . SuperVaru stor . , r , y ,... r - 'fit , i i y . II NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION PROPOSED COMMERCIAL CENTER Tigard te r Triangle SuperValu/CUE Stores THE APPLICATION This application is for the following actions: a Site Development Approval a Sensitive)Lands Permit a Sign Code Exceptions The site is zoned CO/PD. The proposed retail center is consistent with the requirements of the CG zone and except for the PD overlay, would otherwise be evaluated through the City's administrative review process. The PD overlay establishes . the requirement that this application be reviewed by the Planning Commission. THE SITE This is a 19:9 acre site bordered by SW 72nd Avenue on the east, the proposed '' Dartmouth Street on the south, the Tigard a nemas complex on the north and Red Rock �I Creek on the west (northwest). I i Included with this property are portions of Tax Lots 100 and 101 which are generally in corner of intersection 72nd Avenue Dartmouth the northwest Dorn the inter of 72n enue and the proposed application,Street: At the time of this ap , these parcels are owned by Gordon R. Martin. . pp SuperValu has entered into a purchase agreement with Mr. Martin to acquire these parcels to include i Final closing on that transaction is expected ted to p with this development. P'in ec � ll occur in mid-March. Mr: Martin has authorized SuperValu to include these parcels l with this application (see attached letter dated January 26, 1993). The site originally included 21 parcels, including 18 single family homes. Many M pf those I were located o n Street. Presently there is a vacant i family located n SW Duvall .. homes war � Pre y single fam • home on Tax Lot 101: This home will be removed during construction of the project. To the north of the property is the Tigard Cinemas complex with the rear ar of that building directly abutting .e po p art y. Ii e: To the west and south is va cant la rd To the east t is SW 72nd Avenue with several single family hom es o n the e ast side of the road. I .I , a .. ,d 6 ores Narrative 1beacp1 do • , . After purchasing the properties, SuperValu moved or demolished the homes, removed utilities, underground tanks, accessory buildings and fences, and with a tree removal permit issued by the City of Tigard, removed the vegetation from the site. . At the request of SuperValu, Washington County has consolidated many of the parcels. Tha Tigard City Council acted on January 26, 1993 to vacate Duvall Street. •,. • , The site is rele,tively uniformly sloped from northeast to southwest with the high point (elevation 232 feet) at the northeast corner of the property at 72nd Avenue. The low point is along Red Rock Creek at an elevation of 165 feet. Red Rock Creek forms the western (northwestern) property line. SuperValu retained IES Associates to conduct a wetland delineation along Red Rock Creek. Two wetland areas were identified in the 1ES work; one directly associated with the creek generally adjacent to and parallel with the creek; the second, an isolated 6,900 square foot • 4, wetland area, unconnected with the creek t,„sdrology. The surveyed wetland lines are , plotted on the plan maps. Other site features are also shown on the plan maps. •- THE SITE PLAN . The site development plan includes approximately 150,250 square feet of retail commercial space along with two separate retail development sites of 27,1B0 square feet and 35,871 square feet. These parcels will accommodate two individual retail uses with a maximum of 20,000 square feet of retail space. The major anchor use for the center is a 79,455 square foot CUB Food Store. The CUB store is a full line, full service grocery with in-store meat and seafood departments, , bakery, deli, and many personal services including video rental and prescription drug center. The store will be open 24 hours a day, A small 5000 square foot retail space is included adjacent to the CUB store. This space will be used for one or more small retail businesses such as a cleaners, hair cutter or other similar stores, This 50 foot store frontage is designed to be available 'ter a possible future expansion of the CUB store if needed. Such an expansion would add as • much as 11,600 square feet to the store, An expanded CUB stare with a total of 91,055 square feet has been used as the basis for the traffic analysis and utility capacity , requirements. At this time, there are no specific plans or timing for that expansion, :1(C Two additional retail stores, identified as "Iletall B" and "Retail O are planned for the • • center. At this time agreements have not been finalized with specific retail users. The businesses; will be complementary to the CUB store and will most likely be a national . • SuperVaki Stores Narrative betcription , , ' • , " • clothing retailer, a national sporting goods retailer, a national pet supply retailer or , . . similar use. Lots 4 and 5 are designed for two individual retail users. The area of the two lots is 1.45 acres. Retail stores on these lots will have their own parking within the lot area but will take their primary access from the east/west internal roadway on the project. An • additional, limited "right turn, in only" access is planned for the main Dartmouth entrance driveway. , Uses for Lots 4 and 5 will most likely be a restaurant, bank or similar use. SITE DEVELOPMENT . Because of the significant difference in elevation across the site, the need to place the very large retail stores on flat surfaces, and the need to maintain relatively flat parking areas so that customer shopping carts don't run away and hit parked cars, excavation • from the existing grade will be done in the northeastern portion of the site and fill will occur in the west/southwest portion of the site , The finish floor elevation of Retail "C" will be at 208 feet, approximately 28 feet lower than the elevation of 72nd Avenue in the northeast corner of the site. Retail "B" is approximately 4 feet lower than Retail "D", and the CUB store is another approximately 4 feet lower yet. • Because of this grade difference between 72nd and the project elevation, the two access driveways--the service drive on the north side of the main buildings and the main . 72nd entrance—will both ramp down into the site. The southern access will ramp down approximately 19 feet in elevation at an average grade of approximately 7 percent while • the northern, service only, one way in driveway will ramp down approximately 28 feet at an average grade of approximately 9 percent, The Dartmouth entrance will rise from Dartmouth approximately 12 feet to the internal intersection with the east-west access road. The entry grade from Dartmouth is approximately 7 percent -, Along the western portion of the project, the parking lot will be an average of 10 feet above the natural grade. This filled area will be structured with a single, approximately 10 foot high retaining wall. As that retaining wall approaches the Dartmouth Street frontage, kt is divided into two, "stepped' retaining walls, each approximately 5 feet,high, The walls will be separated by 15 feet of landscaped area to minimize the visual impact of the fill height and retaining walls from drivers on DartmoUth. • SuperValu Stores Narrative Description • • I \ I V, . I d • CILp T„..:.,..�,.., .-.. . '_.,_..',...-....',,..r..:.„y,.• .....-.,,,O.a:.r........ ...__._,......,. .,1.. _._n.a .........M,,,.,,*..c........__ i•,., ..•.,,..,...»•.....,...1 _, .,.. ,, ,..i. _ , ......._ .. _ PARKING The parking lot in front of the CUB store includes 9.0 foot wide parking stalls to ensure customer ease of unloading shopping carts. Handicap stalls (including Van stalls) are' provided in all parking bays and meet ADA standards for single stalls (14 feet wide) and • double stalls (24 feet). Handicap stalls have been provided in the parking area west of • the CUB store so,that users of these spaces do not have a e t o cross a traffic roadway to ., reach the stores. • b In all, the total project (not including the parking that will be developed with the retail • uses in Lots '4 and 5) includes 790 parking spaces. For the main retail stores, this represents a ratio of 51,2 spaces per 1000 square feet of retail space. ' Development of Lots, 4 and 5 will include dedicated parking for those uses at a ratio consistent with City of Tigard Development Code requirements. VEHICULAR ACCESS (' The .primary customer access is from either the driveway on 72nd Avenue or the . . driveway on Dartmouth. 72nd Access The driveway on 72nd Avenue is 36 feet wide with dedicated left and right turn exit • ' lanes, A single entry lane is provided at this entrance. • r • Because of site grading, this entrance will ramp down into the project at an average ' grade of approximately 7 percent The first access into the parking lot occurs' g pp acre 1 65 feet into the property. There is no traffic signal planned for this access. , • Dartmouth Access } projected entrance the The ro ecte�d nce t access Dartmouth to be th � to proje�.t. , h is the main 22 Th ' .., The on 22"feet with e driveway has a single 18 foot entry feet'w t two, lanes driveway g ntry lane that widens to "� 11 foot lane - where the driveway intersects the main east/west roadway. st,interoe(�road The exit portion of the driveway includes two 12 foot lanes for the entire 190 foot driveway, The two exit lanes are designed to g y 'g be dedicated left and right ht turn lanes. • includes 1 0 feet raised landscaped median.� .� � � The entrance driveway�iri a , p The traffic study ' indi cates that no traffic signal is warrant ed for the Dartmouth driveway cc• es s • ope/ 'air)Stores Narrative Description • p , / I • • • • • I A 175 foot right turn lane is provided on Dartmouth to allow vehicles travelling west on Dartmouth to leave the main travel lane as they approach the entrance to make a right turn into the site. • r Service Access Service access for the main retail stores is provided by a one way, service driveway with access from 72nd Avenue. This 30 foot driveway ramps down into the site almost 360 feet before trucks begin to maneuver into loading docks for the three primary retail • stores. This service access is designed as a one way-in movement. Signs prohibiting public access will be posted at the driveway on 72nd Avenue. In addition, at the bottom of the entry ramp from 72nd, signs will also be posted prohibiting entrance. • Service trucks leaving the stores will travel to the western portion of the site and drive south through the western most parking aisle'which has been widened to accommodate 4 • these movements. Service trucks would then turn east and proceed either to the 72nd or Dartmouth exits. t. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS Sidewalks will be constructed along the frontage of 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street. Sidewalks will enter the site on both sides of the Dartmouth entrance, At the intersection of the Dartmouth entrance with the main internal east/west roadway, crosswalks will allow pedestrians to cross over onto the main internal island where they w' stores on a 15 foot wide landscaped median. will then be able to walk directly to the sto ,finds Pedestrians coming from 72nd Avenue will be able to use a sidewalk on the south side of the 72nd Avenue driveway to enter the project • • 14 The design of foot wide walkway '. is covered g f.the main store frontage includes a �15 w k�ia�v eve , i by a 10 foot overhead extension of the store facade. Pedestrian an access is p rohibit edin the rear of the • LANDSCAPING oa i in � � of 1 tree . pin at a ratio per 7 parking stalls, Tree provided g parking p o �ded Lands the arkiri lot �� o selecti� designed to achieve a "ca .py`" effect In the parking area The principal selection is e "canopy" , parking lot landscaping occurs in the rmedians a t the ends and in the center of the , • r. rl �` a�l�il"'��1,�8.t o��`®,�"e.�' Narrative Description i «. { parking bays. In addition, the long, north/south median, in the center of the parking area, provides a strong landscape corridor, accenting the pedestrian walkway and the principal movement of vehicles toward the stores. Both entrance drives are also lined with trees and ground cover. In addition to this internal landscaping, the perimeter areas of the site are also A landscaped. Landscaping along the Dartmouth street frontage is consistent with recently developed Dartmouth landscape standards. North of the Dartmouth rights-of-way, between the sidewalk and the edge of the parking • • lot,,a landscaped area approximately 30 wide is provided In the area west of the Dartmouth entry drive, the parking lot is approximately 12 higher than the elevation of , • Dartmouth and the sidewalk. The ground is sloped from the sidewalk to the parking lot edge and planted with ground cover, shrubs and mixed trees. In the area east of the Dartmouth entry drive, the elevation difference between Dartmouth and the retail area, of 1 Lot 4 is approximately 14 feet. A series of two, "stepped" retailing walls approximately feet high will be used to accommodate this vertical difference. However, as one moves on Dartmouth toward its intersection with 72nd Avenue, the difference between Dartmouth and the elevation of Lot 5 reduces to zero: The landscape plan for this entry area includes low ground cover, shrubs and selected trees. A row of street trees, low shrubs and ground cover are planned along the 72nd Avenue frontage. In the area immediately east of the Retail "C" building, in addition to the street trees, a dense area.. .. of sight obscuring shrubs are planned to provide more effective visual screening of the buildings from 72nd Avenue, Also along this 72nd Avenue ' frontage, ground covers and shrubs will be planted to maintain bank stabilization since much of this area will be relatively steeply sloped,from 72nd into the parking lot Landscaping along the western portion of the parking lot has two distinct objectives. In i p approximately feet above the natural I • this area, the parking lot is elevated� roxi�atel Ural grade ` g voted pp �0'fe . : n r visible areas, , the more sible a oas, the fill is structured d with two, 5 foot high retailing walls, by 1 b feet of separated landscape area. The upper retaining wall is approximately 10 a feet west of the edge of the parking lot. lot post/steel cable . landscape area adjacent to.the parking barrier fence , a" , p '' g a steel ost/st In the an sc " will be installed to ensure that an out of control vehicle in the parking lot''will be stopped . g ythe first retaining addition, a relatively. arrier type f, wall ' In " ' tort dense,before reaching w . o n y b landscape material will be used to discourage any pedestrian entry into this area. , In the intermediate landscape area between the "steped retaining•I . P PP " walls and in the sloped areas at the based of the retaining walls, landscaping will be placed to establish • Sii iVafu Stores Narrative • a transition between the natural wetland areas along Red Rock Creek and the upland areas of the parking lot. • The 5 foot retaining walls will be made of interlocking, precast concrete blocks that'are specially designed for this type of retaining wall installation. . At the natural grade at the base of the retaining walls, the landscaping objective is to . develop a large, enhanced natural wetland area. This enhanced wetland area is ' designed to significantly increase the overall wetland quality of the Red Rock Creek corridor and in certain areas, to accommodate the City's requirement for water quality treatment and detention of stormwater runoff from the developed areas (also see Wetland discussion). At its narrowest in the northwestern portion of the site, the Red Rock Creek corridor will be 40 feet wide. At its widest, the corridor will be almost 350 feet wide. { Altogether, the enhanced wetland and landscaped Red Rock Creek corridor will encompass an area of approximately 2.6 acres. I k Erosion control measures will be used during construction and in the placement of landscaping that are consistent with Washington County and City of Tigard standards. WETLANDS/SENSITIVE LANDS/WATER QUALITY TREATMENT The site plan shows the delineated wetland boundaries. There are two jurisdictional . • wetlands. The main wetland area is a corridor adjacent to and generally parallel with • . Red Rock Creek, A second, 6,900 square foot isolated wetland was identified slightly east of the Red Rock Creek wetland area. • The proposed development plan requires filling the isolated 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland: In addition, in one approximately 110 foot area, the retaining wall . will intrude feet into the main , f 7 fe 25 foot buffos , �,. to the dean o � ino wetland area (City of Tigard Development Code 18.84.028.,). This buffer intrusion the the s where - of parking,g� 1 comes closes main • occurs west side the arkin lot co t to the "n Red Rock p Creek wetland line While the parking lot itself is 30 feet from the wetland boundary, the ' retaining wall intrudes into the buffer in this one . er area'In thi one section, Sup erVa Associates wetland delineation d evelo � oc we an develop a SuperValu retained l�u ass iat to conduct the d mitigation program o -: r the filling isolated Wetlands and fo n of ,' w . . into a fo ` . the isolate oils for the intrusion i. small portion of the buffer area. The mitigation program was developed in consultation '• the Division State'Lands and the Department p opt of wildlife with officials of ' '�lon of Fish and m` StgoerVaiti stores Narrative Deser ip t6an � ' a7 . • ` /. it I n� A wetland fill permit is being prepared and will be submitted within a week of the submittal of this application. A copy, of that fill permit application will be submitted to the :City and included with the materials of this application. 1 ' Part of the wetland enhancement program works s in combination on wi h the proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention plan. In the large triangular upland area 0• between Dartmouth, the parking lot and the wetland boundary, the grading and utility . plans show an area which will be shaped into a basin and developed as a wetland ' • • marsh. All stormvvater from the project will be discharged into this basin which is • designed to meet City of Tigard (Washington County ISO 91-47) standards for I stormwater quality treatment. The facility has been designed with sufficient capacity to; also accommodate the required stormwater detention requirements. .( Three additional areas will be excavated within the meadow grass wetland areas of the Red Rock Creek corridor and planted with various diverse wetland plants. In southern most of these excavated areas (south of the "area of rushes") two ponds will be created ► ' to receive stormwateirs that are discharged from the water quality treatment and 0 • detention basin, r' , I,w A single pond will,be excavated in the area north of the surveyed "area of rushes". Soil , borings on the site show a high water table under the site. Because of the amount of h excavation required to construct the site, soils engineers have recommended installation . ' of an drain system m to keep the groundwater surface well below the : '� • extensive under to building floor and parking lot levels, That underdrain system will discharge into this ' northernmost excavated area providing a continuous source of water to the pond, which • then c ected the newly ponds a is the connected to a other ne excavated ends via channel that flows to.the'. ' . immediate east of the "area of rushes", In addition, b ecua.se of the high water table, regulatory agencies are confident that the excavated areas will Idevel0p into highly ' • diverse wetland areas • The total area of wetland enhancement equals approximately 24,00 square feet (not i,•. including the water quality treatment basin) or 3.4 times the filled wetland area and I •1 buffer area disturbed. 1 • Sensitive Lands Permit Criteria ! I Since the proposed fill of , 00 square foot isolated wetlands requires a p the 6 9 qu I at d Corps and Division of State Lands Permit, no Sensitive Lands Permit Is required for that action (Tigard Code, Section 18,84,015,0).' I I II I I E` I S r VVal tole x�, Irav Description i " r • • • However, Section 18.84.040.1 outlines the approval criteria necessary to obtain a Sensitive Lands Permit for a wetland area alteration (in this case a buffer alteration) that • does not meet the jurisdictional definition of other state and federal regulatory agencies. 1. The proposed landforrn alteration en or development is neither on wetland in an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain ` and Wetland Map nor is within 25 feet of such a wetland. Cornment. The Red Rock Creek wetland in this area is not identified as a significant wetland or otherwise identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland map. 2. The extent and nature of the proposed landform alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use. " Comment: Because of the meandering nature of the wetland line, the wetland and its buffer extend eastward toward the development area in only one spot. While the parking lot itself is 30 feet away from the actual wetland line, the severe grading requirements of the site force the parking lot to be elevated at the western edge almost 10 feet. In order to minimize intrusion into the wetland and/or buffer areas, • retaining walls will be used. However, construction of that wall will intrude an average of approximately 7 feet into the buffer area for this' approximately 110 foot area, Of the approximately 800 lineal feet of wetland edge, only approximately 110 feet will be impacted by the retaining wall within the buffer area, The intrusion area is approximately 770 square feet. • However, in an approximately 200 lineal foot area • immediately north of the intrustion area, the wetland �►. boundary and parking diverge so that the average buffer is approximately 40 feet, equalling approximately 3,000 square feet more buffer than is required. a Any encroachment or change in ,on-site or off-site drainage which would y enc ge which w adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated. Oortarient� The proposed storrnwa. quality treatment and �cer q y detention basin and proposed op osed wetland enhancement/mitigation plan are designed to manage on and off site drainage to landform alt 4+ Where natural �vegetation has been removed due ndf alteration or ' development, e rosion control provisions of the u rIface Water Management program of Washington �ounty. must be met and areas' notcavered b y SoperValu Stores Narrative Des' ep ion • , R • N • , , . . I , • ' structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in • accordance with Chapter 18.100. Comment: The proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention basin and the proposed wetland mitigation/enhancement program will replace and substantially enhance the level of both upland, transitional • and wetland vegetation within the Red Rock Creek corridor. , • • 5. All other sensitive lands requirements have been met. 17 . Comment: No other substantive requirements are applicable to this proposal. • 6. The provisions of Chapter 18.150, Tree Removal shall be met. Comment: No trees are to be removed within this area. . 7. Other Comprehensive Plan policies are met . Comment:The proposal is consistent with Physical Limitations and natural Hazards (the area is not within a 100 year floodplain nor contains other physical hazards), Parks, Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan (the area is not a designated park or recreation area and the proposed mitigation plan meets the general open space policies of the plan). SIGNS • . . A wall sign will be installed for each of the three major tenants on the building front. • , • These signs will not be larger than 15 percent of the building face for any of these three buildings. An additional wall sign will located on one of the retaining walls in the southwest corner of the site facing Dartmouth. This wall sign is identified on the site plan. Two Freestanding Signs are proposed; one on the east side of the Dartmouth entrance . and one on the north side of the 72nd Avenue entrance. The maximum available • increase in sign copy area and sign height are sought for these freestanding signs through sign exemptions provided in Section 18,114.130.G.1 ac,11, and Section 18114,145.A.3. Section 114.130 :1 ic.ii provides for a 50 percent increase in sign copy area when a site contains more than a single tenant and the additional sign area is needed to adequately identify the separate tenants, Section 114,145.A.C. provides for a 25 percent increase in sign area and height if the increase will not deter from the purpose of the sign code. SuperValti Store Narrative Description . 10. • „ ., „_ ..ti-....:�.'.,. ..,...,.:..u4...,,..._ r,.t.+,,.».dl.....,...— .:.-........r,...- .._., _...T.-. .«t'..,f.:a......+....:f.-..-.....,........ _....:i1.+. . ,,. . w..,.=..W.w...w I ...+, ra "• , .. .,,,«- .I . .... ...... ...,,. ,.. ..,w..w.....u...:r.....,:wl...,+i:r+.�...r.«r.r-. }• Attached with this application are drawings of the two proposed freestanding signs. The signs have been dimensioned to meet the sign code requirements with the requested , exceptions. The dimensions on these drawings are accurate (dimensions indicated on r • • �.,. the site plan - Sheet 1 - are incorrect). The two sig n exceptions are requested to more adequately identify� the multiple tenants in this development. Unlike many comparable retail centers with many tenants, this ,; , center is designed to accommodate three major tenants. While there will be additional retail users in Retail Space A and on Lots 4 and 5, those uses will be identified with wall . sligns only. Since the retail complex is designed to focus on the three major tenants, each needs i • sufficient identification from the adjacent roads to ensure customer recognition. In addition, since the elevation of Dartmouth at the entry drive is 12 to 14 feet below the parking lot surface, little if any of the major retail buildings will be able to be seen from Dartmouth. Given this difference in elevation, it is essential that each of the three major a` retail users be identified at the street. The proposed freestanding sign on 72nd Avenue is necessary since there will be no other building identification visible from that street. li The proposed freestanding signs are consistent with a development of this size. The combined sign area for the two proposed osed feestandin signs is less than the combined ` � � g p p freestanding 9 sign area that would be allowed if this development had eight businesses and was classified as a shopping center, In addition, even with the requested sign exceptions, g throughout • the proposed signs will be smaller than the standard CUB food signs used the northwest: • • i l SuperValii Storey Narrative Description b • DARTMOUTH ROAD SIGN 7- 3,-0", ,3'-0` f f-_ 9l-o �- _ ir - - . ,-. _ ,. ,' FACES, WHITE COY s , , - _ PANt��LE3C SHEET METAL.CABIN -_ #82'0-43 RE) B KGRt .9�tD - - _ - PAVED[SARK BL lE I s #820-59 BROWN DROPSHADE 8fl{i:N1 INTERNAL } 4 _- .'- - 4 0 Ii.i L1AI�� " ---- -- - _ - - -- _ i-•�' -• - - � - -- - - - -_- - - _ _ _ - Piti itiliii I ,--•. I E ANT - ,. ,:::::::.„. , . € PLE 'TENANT FACES COPY AND COLORS = - - ,= _ --- • I iiiiiiii Ii I 1 i:::::::::::: : ,. :t._ AS PER TENANT I ;- :7 .,.a . ,0.. = `3 NlED GRAY CABINETS 1 - - €„ _ ,1 80 INTERN. I s ` _ I . 11 • d e"li FLUORESCENT L1.UM _ ., f - - z €€ :ag. E �t 1 tt c j 2 LINES 10 HIGH = . PLEX GR D .-v---, eq.' ;- _ WITH 2 LANES OF 10 RED - - - - -- - _ _ - �,]sue: _ -' �:��� - `� - •,Iiiiiiiii g 1 itp-: 12-0 1: ::::: . _�� 1----iii:''::1;:::::11 1 ROUND SHEET KE"Al—v 1 UPPC COMB _ l VVI111 MEDIUM GREY I .1-0-1-AL SK3N AREA . - - TE9CTOE �� - _ _ = _ [II L 14925 SQUARE FEET S-`•c i .... :: :.:::::i: ii:::::iiiiig .4 _ ; II E�. == DE DOUBLE FACE PYLON SIGN , &/18', 1-Ds, 3l- • $-,-0° R T _ i� C�i �- : IMAG ®NAL V, DISTINCTIVE ELECTRICAL ADVERTISING I_: CUB FOODS TIGARD, OREGON Slc • TOR rS• cRAPt-ICS S �r SSE3tHo .GENERAL OFFICES.444 #9754-92 1/114./93 X8-346 , GO - -,, • • • rr + , Ru • AGENDA ITEM S . STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: November 15th, 1993 HEARING LOCATION: Tigard City Hall - Town Hall Conference Room 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 I. PROPOSAL SUMMARY , CASE: Cub Foods Su ervalu Holdings, Inc. .p Site Development Review SDR 93-0002 REQUEST: A request for an amendment to the conditions of Q � approval imposed upon the Cub Foods shopping plaza. APPLICANT: Gordon Davis for SuperValu Stores , P.O. Box 8774 . Portland, Oregon 97207 . 7 OWNER: SuperValu Holdings, Inc 11840 Valley View Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 s LOCATION. Nc�rthw..s�. corner of SW '7..nd Avenue and the proposed ose j P p d Dartmouth Street. APPLICABLE LAW: Community Development Code Chapter 18.164 • (Public Improvement Requirements) r STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve a modification of Condition #11 PP r � ., of the Final Order, approved on March 25, 1993, to allow the construction of an additional westbound lane on Dartmouth Street. II. DE'2ATI I D APPLICATION DESCRIPTION March 22nd, 1993 the Planning Commission o . ,d t On approved the Final Order r the propos� d Costco site development plan. lan. Condition #11 of that approval stated contained the following "The street preliminar plan submittal dated March 1,in the Th t �m rovei�tents shah � be as� described � applicants ' itta.:�. �dated � 1993 except that sidewalks shall and l�s the curbs' ha � r�� - . the additional Dar..tmo ith Street wstbound lane from SW 72nd lie Avenue to 'the .site entrance shall be omitted° . Y along with the section of the final order dealing with the ,� is f o1,1..1 Street width of Dartmouth, is attached as exhibit g h� 2t that time,, the city was i n the process f conducting� a transp ortation and land use analysis of the Triangle, working with OZAK an d DKS consultants . It was thought, at that tirie, SDR 93-0002 � D CUB �X70 S%St11'ER"iTALU PAGE .r , «It • that a full .�.a: c : lanes may not be needed f�y�,. several years, or not at all, and particularly if the land uses were to be changed. In addition, since the Planning Commission and City Council had indicated support for introducing a significant number of residential units into the Triangle, it seemed •• appropriate to try to keep the street width to the minimum ; necessary in order to foster a more pedestrian oriented environment. So at the least, it seemed premature to allow the i street to be built with another westbound lane from 72nd to the site entrance • Since that decision in March, additional analysis has been • . completed, and it is now apparent that with the build out of the Triangle, Dartmouth will need to be widened to five lanes between 72nd and 99W to be able', to handle the traffic. Further, the five lane width was shown to be necessary even if , the land uses were changed to be more in accordance with the land use "Concept Plan" or the "Specific Plan" ideas. The key factors were not so much th0 volume of traffic, but the weaving and turning traffic movements between different properties in this area, and the cuvilinear nature of . "r Dartmouth Street. (See Exhibit "B" ) . Meanwhile, construction of a three lane Dartmouth commenced under a Local Improvement District. The LID was building a l ; street three lanes wide, with curbs and street lights, but not r sidewalks. Further, the Dartmouth landscaping plan called for the sidewalks to be set back seven feet from the curb, with street and the sidewalk treat L.rees planted between the, curb It became apparent that what was being built by the LID would not only be inadequate, but that the curbs, street lighting, sidewalks, storm drainage system, and landscaping would have to be rebuilt or relocated or otherwise disrupted in order to widen the street. An obvious better choice would be to allow I the street to be widened now, and the curbs, sidewalks, street trees etc. be placed where they ultimately would be when the , entire road section was widened. A plan was devised, therefore, p , to widen Dartmouth between. 72nd and the site entrance with an additional westbound lane, doing so through a Change to the contract. The extra cost would be charged directly to SuperValu, outside of the LID project. (At t he' same time, Costco Y asked, and the City agreed,reed r to allow an . addition lane along much of the f rontag e of their property through the . mechanism) . For the rest of the frontage of Cub :Foods, the sidewalk and landscaping wi e iodated �o accommodate mm od at� a future widening, which will likely constructed separate LID.Foods has already signed a non-remonstrance agreement guaranteeing their in a future LID) . . . SDR 93 S/St 'VAL�U' PAGE 2 C9 C��r,2 CUB FOC1D PSR (I. o ti r • ' ✓: • VVr The landscaping strip will still be seven (7) feet wide • thanks to an additional two (2) foot easement granted to the City by SuperValu. The only problem with that approach was the condition of approval noted above. Condition #11 specifically omitted the westbound lane. The timing was such that the City staff could I g Y not schedule a public hearing or otherwise involve the i Planning Commission. Therefore, the staff decided to allow the widening, and then request that the Planning Commission amend the condition to reflect what has actually been built. D RE• �'RO E U1 C In order to. amend the final order, the Planning Commission needs to �. open the heal rin g hear testimony, if an y, and make a decision on I whether or not l to amend the condition in the final order. Then the Chairperson will sign an amended final. order. , • RECOMMENDATION: • e e 'read: d. It is recommended that the condition be amended to t I I l " 11. Standard street improvements, including concrete sidewalk separated from the curb, driveway aprons, curbs, `; + asphaltic concrete pavement, storm drainage, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed along the SW 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street frontages . Improvements shall be designed and constructed to major collector street standards and shall . , conform to the alignment of existing adjacent improvements I s an alignment y eEngineering Department. NOTE: The street improvements shall be as described in the applicants° preliminary plan k submittal dated March 1, 1993 except that sidewalks shall be separated from curbs and the additional Dartmouth Street westbound lane hem west o ,� of the Site . entrance shall be omitted'at this time In'the future} additional wicienincr of or other improvements to Dartmout,1 c'�:`�l be required., -� - em ittcd �� ATTACHMENTS . r tl drawing page, Construction 4$cof�the DKSeportartmou!;ha I � Relevant .pages from staff report submitted for the March 25 P g � � r 1993 hearing e jm/Da,rttmcut.he SDR 93-0002 CUTE tiooDS/suPErwAriu PAGE 3 A4-4 3 I I • 1 r t , EXHIBIT t " ` 4 • ter ].$., 5Q free �n Regvl Chapter 11"15.g. will be satisfied in that the applicant will be' requuired to I �.`'; -' ' obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing trees' over 6 inches in �,'. caliper size in preparation for development, Permits will be' granted only if it is found necessary to remove the trees to accommodate structures, ' sidewalks, 'driveways,, utilities, or other necessary site improvements,' It ' should.be clear from the review of the site plan and grading plan that this ' will require the removal of most of the trees on the site due to the ' ' ' significant amount of grading which must occur, ' Nevertheless, trees such as are located'on future lots 4 and 5 should pot be removed until such time ' ' as is necessary to allow for development, • Chp l8 x l64 - Pub1 c Ixpprovement Reouiremen ts, STREETS The site is located immediately to the north of the future Dartmouth Street I Extension and immediately west of SW 72nd Avenue, Both streets, are East n . .! classified as major collector streets by the Comprehensive, Plan',S Transportation Plan Map, Major collector streets have the following ' minimum improvement standards imposed by Code Section 1 ,: 64,0sa E,1:'.a. 60-80 feet of right-of-waY, 44 feet Of pavement, and 2-4,;moving lanes,. SW 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site currently has the following . . improvements: 40 feet of right-of-way, 14 +, 13 feet of 'pavement west of centerline, and no curbs or ,sidewalks, Typically'half street improvements are required to be a condition of development approval to bring abutting toads up to the minimum standards.. 'Thee' applicants :apparently have no problem with such requirements and have proposed improvements beyond the minimum improvement standards based upon their traffic report's„ analysis ' of needed' road improvements. Based on the applicants' traffic report, at such time as the entire Tigard ,. j Triangle is fully developed, the projected volume on S,'W, 72nd„ Avenue adjacent to the site will exceed the level requiring a dive'lane facility, The applicants state that the traffic report used conservative assumptions 1 I on future development of the Triangle. The basis ofIthose assumptions is . the existing land use idered b r the area ea which was utilized even though that p , plan is being reco by ty, While' the plan''revisions have not H 4: Triangle 'wiecent (decisions by the Plann s the a ® i�ow ith regard ,h to the y i yet been adopted,. recent g ion e Tr g will likely lead to Many area zoned for ' primarily offiet development to ri t fot ' medium r residential use� These chang es Would to reduce fu ture p eak,hou traffic volumes from the levels considered in the traffic report I r. . re; based on y . �r v applicants a applicants and the proposed :changes to the land use plan, h ppli nts ar proposing sing the ' following: (refer to Cordon Davis� March 1, 1993 letter to Randy Wooley, .' and the March l; 1993 revised site plan) : A. Between the Dartmouth/S.W. 72nd Avenue intersection; and to a point additional 3l' feet of � ht�of �',a r which 72nd Avenue driveway, an . approximately feet north of the 72n _. I g 3 r Will create a ,total of 51. . feet of rightof-way on the west side of the centerline, . B, The remaining frontage along S,1;�' 72nd, Ave would have increased total right,ofN way to a total ' of, 45 (feet on the west side of the q''''''''' 1. .' centerline FINAL ORDER u' SbR 930002 0013 FOCSDS/SUPERVAIIT I 1 page 13 GIB � iI I, 'I I v . I i S,' i I I i r' U C. A total street section between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection and the site driveway on 72nd Avenue will have 51 feet of paving and will include; - a bike lane on the west side ,..., - a southbound through travel lane - a southbound left turn lane a northbound left turn lane - a northbound through travel lane D, A total street section between the 72nd Avenue driveway to a point approximately 200 feet north will include, ,` - a bike lane on the west side f a southbound through travel/right turn (into the site) k, - a center merge/left turn lane V�,,. - a northbound travel lane E. From the north property line to a point approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd Avenue driveway: - a bike lane on the west side - a north and southbound travel late - a continuous left turn lane F. Curbs and sidewalks will be constructed along the entire west frontage of 72nd Avenue. 1 y The Planning Commission concur with these proposed improvements along the ' . Site' s SW 72nd Avenue frontage, except that the Commission points out that the sidewalk will need to be removed from the curb by at least fiie feet i • �. .7 . Conditions of approval are consistent with Code Section 18,16 0 0 B. ,. . specified at the end of this final order to specify these street �'• improvements along SW 72nd Avenue. The proposed Dartmouth Street extension will be built under the Dartmouth local improvement dietridt. The local improvement district will construct a three-lane roadway with curbs, and gutter within a 70 foot right-of-way �. " between Pacific Highway and SW 72nd Avenue. Constriction is scheduled to i occur in summer, 1993. Approval of this development plan will therefore be conditioned upon Dartmouth Street be open for traffic between SST Pacific Highway and SW 68th Avenue prior to occupancy of any of the proposed retail . spaces, Access from SW 72nd Avenue alone would not provide sufficient access for this size and type of development. The applicants" traffic report indicates that a three-lane Dartmouth Street should function adequately for approximately 20 years, under present growth assumptions, but that sometime :later a five lane facility y Raz be needed, The analysis also shows that the demand for a five lane facility does not necessarily acme from the e 'p , but from the build-out of the entire Tig ard Triangle, agai n, under present growth assumptions, Aga in the assumptions were used the tra ffic analysis are more than x goi g to change as the Triang le land-use plan is revised such that lease y '. traffic peaks would be anticipated. As stated by Cordon Davis in his March 1, 1993 letters q In a future of uncertainty, it is nonethelelo clear that under present growth assumptions,m P Lions , the l facility , will function very adequately for the development of tho se properties and for development Athin the Triangle for the next 20 years, However as futue become on other transportation issues, the impacts to 1 me cicar and decisions can then be,made on the appropriate additional improvements Dartmouth .. • r .:. • F.. INAL ORDER -. S DR 9 -0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Pa Ee 14 I �•' tL; ll I i r I . . I r I I I o. )• i '1 In response to the traffic report's findings, the applicant is proposing the following improvements to Dartmouth Street: I A, In anticipation that a five lane facility may be needed at some time in the future, dedication of an additional amount of right-of-way to bring the total right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline, B. In addition to the improvements provided by the Dartmouth local ' . '...1 ' improvement district, the following would be provided by the ' applicants: - A second westbound through lane on Dartmouth Street between the 72nd Avenue intersection and the Dartmouth entrance driveway to the development. - From the Dartmouth driveway west, an acceleration lane on ! ::: Dartmouth Street which would transition back to the three-lane ' "'; roadway. ' A deceleration right turn lane for vehicles turning right into u;' G. e the site from Dartmouth Street, C. A 6-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the curb. The Planning Commission generally concurs with the need for these proposed improvements along the site's SW Dartmouth Street frontage, with the following exceptions, Again, the Commission points out that the sidewalk will need to be removed from the curb by at least seven feet to be consistent itl the D w � h artmouth Street landscaping guidelines adopted by the City Council last October as well as with the minimum five foot separation required by Code Section 1:81164,070:8, Mr Davis° letter argues that separation of the sidewalk from the curb along Dartmouth would require that " 9 w.; a seven-foot tall retaining wall be built to accommodate the separated , sidewalk without affecting the parking lot design. While we agree with Mr Davis. that a seven-fo•ot retaining wall is not in scale with the pedestrian environment which is desired, staff has pointed out that the need for the oe taller retaining wall could be diminished (or extinguished) by reducin g the size of the extremely large parking lot some, The proposed parking lot would provide 236 parking spaces in excess of Code standards, By reducing . the parking lot by eleven parking spaces along its southern edge, the sidewalk separation should be able to be provided without an increase in . the presently proposed retaining wall height of four feet. The Planning Commission will require that the sidewalk be separated from the curb by a planter strip of at least seven feet in width and that and that the grading ; and site plans be revised accordingly to accommodate t he sidewalk without ut increasing the he ight of the retaining wall to more than four feet in height. ' , The Planning Commission differs with the applicants traffic study tud with regard to the need for the proposed second westbound lane between SW 72nd Avenue and the site entrance. The Commission does not find that the the additional �oadwa width may be additional lane and traffic report ustif.i,,;y.s the need for detrimental to the scale of development that . tra or this and y y attempting an attractive streets City been along Dartmouth Street, It is cunderstood that g p y has erY� Lin to to construct this additional n oval lane at this time to the appli ca�tt� may desire t t avoid future disruption of ass to the development ent wh on and if additional tio nab road oad w f and to o :. be d esiraale. However, absent a clear prediction of future traffic and ,, ab sent a final land the Triangle, the Planning Commission " - finds that this additional lane shall be omitted. The concurs, . ".however with the P ro proposed right-of-way in this area so that FINAL ORDER 9�w OaQ2 CUB r4b D S UIER. %A'L U Page 15 I i `,, X11 1, �' / a ! • 4 • 1 f., buildings or other substantial improvements are not constructed upon area : b that may be needed for future road widening. • This decision regarding improvements on Dartmouth Street will require ' roadway improvements sized to handle normal traffic levels fo the 1 foreseeable future rather than sized for peak traffic levels or possible future increased traffic levels'. This should result in a more pleasing ,. streetscape at 'all times in exchange for possible additional congestion at ' '' • peak traffic periods or the possibility of future construction to add an additional lane, It is important that the City also consider the quality of the trip in transportation decisions rather than lacing primary emphasis : ' on providing for maximum quantities of trips. The Planning Commission'is therefore hesitant to recommend the scale of improvements proposed by the ' r i applicants Recommended conditions of approval are provided at the end of this report j • to specify the required improvements to Dartmouth Street. SANITARY SEWER h s.. Code Section 18.164.090 requires that new developments be adequately served ° by sanitary sewerage collection facilities developed consistent with City of Tigard design standards, 1, • Currently there is no sanitary sewer serving the site. As part of the Dartmouth Street local improvement district, an eight-inch diameter sanitary sewer line is being installed within the street. This line should provide adequate service to the proposed development. • The Dartmouth Street LID is providing sanitary sewer stubs to SW 72nd Avenue for future extension of sewer to the north. Typically, the City would require each development to extend sanitary sewer main lines to the � . farthest uphill property line, However, in this case there are two additional elements that must be considered: A, Cub Foods/Super•va1u will not have any need for the sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd Avenue; and • B. The Dartmouth Street LID shows the sanitary sewer lime in SW 72nd Avenue to ba located on the west side of the road' s centerline. • The applicants will presumably be required to provide improvements to the west side of SW 72nd Avenue as a condition of development approval, If the sanitary sewer is placed on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue and then redevelopment occurs on the east side, then it would be necessary to teat '� It isestaff's� recommendation, get the developer the sewer on the west� aide,• up et access t4 p ro omens to SW be requited to determine, where this proposed sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd Avenue can be shifted • • to the east side of the street so as not to. later interfere with the d t.. o any portion should be required tr.omprovidetfor its improved street. ror any ortion of the line side of �`�W 72nd Avenue the I• installation, it.. STORM SEWER } Code Section 18,164.100.A states that development permits shall only be a• I �� e � � pd off st orm rainag e ve been made. The • applicant is proposing ap r�vate on-site storm sew er system to serve this •; development FINAL ORDER - SDR 93 0002 CUB' EOODS SU V p . ' `' /� PAR ABU � age '16 , • h I ^ I I , • might-of ' ay centerline. Th sedication doc t shall be on City forms. In:`, uctions are availa. from the' Engi ring Department. 9. Additional right , away shall be ded' *.,red to the pub along the SW .d Avenue frontal to increase the : .!_ht-of-way to feet from ceri:- line (from the ' u.tersection of SW ,Avenue/Dartmo Street t` north a point that at a minimum, 10 feet north E the is 4 app1ican..e', access on SW 72 4. Avenue) . The desc-.. ption shall be; tied to the exi r• ng right-of-way' .-nterline, The « . ication docum shall be on Ci forms. 10, :,..itionai right-of- 7 shall be dedic_'. d to the public • .''ng the SW 72i:ewvenue frontage to crease the righ'`" .•f-way to 45 ;feet .om the center"' ,e, (from the nort operty line so el to where the ri_ way incra=.r-'S to 51 feet as 'i-:.tailed in #9 ab. , -), , .' The descrip n shall be tie' .• the existing ri:".. -of-way renter e The dedicat:io document shall on City forms. 11. Standard street improvements, including concrete sidewalk separated 1 from the curb, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement, ;x storm drainage, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed along the SW 72nd Avenue and, Dartmouth Street ,frontages. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to major' collector 0 street standards and shall conform to the alignment of exiating adjacent 'improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering U E: The street improvements shall be as described In 'I, Department, Z� T h p 1 the applicants' preliminary plan submittal dated March 1, 1993 except that sidewalks shall be separated from curbs and the additional Dartmouth Street westbound lane from SW 72nd Avenue to the site • . \ entrance shall be omitted. ' 12, Building perm ,~.s will not be iss ;ed and construction of groposed public improv,. rents shall not co'-m'ence until after the EnItneering Department h reviewed and appr.; ed the public improvement mlans and a street op- ing permit or cons uction compli • • • I!' • \ Associates High Priority Roadway implementation Actions • Dartmouth Street. As commercial development occurs along the frontage of Dartmouth Street, the ., four lane plus median roadway cross section should be implemented by expanding the yet to be built three lane cross section. ' : Turn Lanes. Each development in the Tigard Triangle should set right-of-way aside (through } . dedications) for turning lanes at eact, intersection as.recommended. Pacific I ghwayr Access Roads. As redevelopment and new development occurs along the frontage a of Pacific Highway, cul-de-sacs (with through pedestrian public access) or short through local ", roadways should be built for access to Dartmouth, Tigard Cinema Access Road, 72nd and 68th. �. PROJECT ISSUES • , During the course of the Tigard Triangle Specific Plan study several issues were raised regarding roadway and transportation conditions, The following sections summarize the specific issues and how the plan address these needs, Do the main collector streets (68th, 72nd, Dartmouth) have to be four lanes (two lanes each way) with the plan? S ev e r al past studies have recommended tha t 68 thParkway, 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street tw o turn lanes For the Tigard Triangle detailed traffic lanes in each direction with tu Specific Area Plana � ,> analysis was !formed usin year 2010 future traffic and build out of the Triangle area to determine y P� using year the requirements of each study area roadway: ,To accomplish this task,detailed existing land use plans , were inventoried and developed for the Triangle area: The Metro regional model wad used to forecast year �� 201 0 base . y traffic conditions,and generated by build cut of Triangle area was��projex;ted . . on the stret y' networp k . Based u pen th e intersection evaluation summarized in the previous section, • • each roadway can operate adequately with one lane in each directi o n with so me key exceptions. At intersections, each street will add separate turning l�ne�� (for Heft turns and right turns as needed. Additionally, the segment of Damnohth between 72nd and Pacific Highway would twa lanes in be i each direction due to the substantial increase hi retail land uses accessing Dartmouth in the future. It is important to understand that based upon this analysis, 68� Parkway and 72 nd Avenue could � • remain one lane in each forecast x'20 streets - h traffic,titan forecasted by Metro in their unless these receive greater amounts of through direction should state highways � . . . such a s Pacific 2010 model. This could occur s1�ou9d Highway and ORE 217 become more congested in y y Highway congested the future and improvements are not made to these r • facilities, Nerd TriervIe Specific Are Tiatfik'and Transportations Eikmenl 4 P'9.3O671ug 4spt' • ..o .. . 1 111,'I .ti `' fir. 1 �'.+�'1' I n. '•S" Y ,. , .:' N O3 �: 4ETIAND LAND USE NOTIFICATION Fdi�k r' ;.`� .. Y DIVISION OF STATE LANDS WETLANDS PROGRAM ` ``` ' . N 775 Summer Street NE, Salem, Oregon 97310 ,, v, 503/378-3805 FEB t5u M cl`' 1 . County 1I145f4o0GTO A Co , Local Case File No. : _VA 93-000a et'R. 93-00o 1 '` Ci ty: 77i~,A r) ..l DSL Fi 1 e No.: .1,0A) - ? 3 ~ 6/ �` : 4"2: APPLICANT: 5C Per_. I . / L U 1 R S LANDOWNER: SL! V A L t t 1.-1. JN C 1 4a PAUL. ..•I64 rraO 5, Di+ec<, (Ti E7 IL „DGV Zol �, name , -z X t. _p4 ac 1Re1OCr � �� r ((Q L1 �Va Hey U�c w 20c4 ': street street r- • n �4r c cR- 73o _ D r.. l(; 'l,NOESo-rI4 ST 3 �: . . . , , ,,t city ' state zip city state zip "F+ �`, lot' 1 1.1 r. ,I I, ' �l ( X03 S ,C vtJ ( � ) a `ri S t.. phone phone 3. LOCATION: SE/4 � 5* T ''I R .1_ s _12_ 114 Tax Lot(Is) (2dc0 NWI quad map name ...:'Faav .Tor (attach copy with site indicated) ' :i Attached: >' NWI map , >< Parcel map Site plan Other 4. SITE INFORMATION VENT r NWI Wetland Classification Code(s) PEGIy — ' ... Soil Series Name (optional ) „ Adjacent Waterway (if any) (, c< Go-c` =�C In F1oodplain? Y N ,..A 4k'r (l4*Op7) I Current Land Use V/"cr ,..JT- Zoning C,--( (d-eweAAL. C:allioe.Acoel,L) ', 5. PROPOSED ACTIVITY: :. - , >e site plan approval subdivision grading permit -- planned unit development condi tonal use permit _ public works (specify} __ building permit _ other _ Zone Change to: ,, Project Description: _is , -'-f , reh'( c.em r, 74.ri a 6f00 s ,- ,, Comp l eted by/Contact: l C'` / 01---FL--7/Z-- rlr Date d-`5`- 9 3 Address I ARb Pc., N Ni K:r. r PC 8 cx t3317 7_9 G 4)3 Phone Ali (1111.1 'forni ,Lr to be complatod only by plannlhy department staff for mapped wetieinds) DSL RESPONSE • ' " . Cl A removal-fill permit is required from the Di vi sioh of State Lands . O A removal fi1l permit will be req uired when the development project proceeds, 0 A removal-fill permit may be required. .b 0 Information needed includes: , . �A wetl and d•e ter�inat,or /d' el�iheation report. State per �i ta,� was 1 slued aspen applied d for. O No removal—fill required described project if/because: maval—f�11 x�ermi t� i s �.q red fOr the desrib " I i 0 A permit may be required by the Corps of Engineers (326 .6995) Comments: ' ,• I ' ' � Response n 1 � Date /7 ' 4' If theproj�ct is o�nged to i nvol ve fi l l or removal from the wetlands area, a state removal-fill permit will be required, , I W .. 1.:i • • . `* ANYONE WISHING TO PRES", • WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROP :;D ACTION MAY DO SO IN 't.,... WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT ,' iv THE PUBLIC }EAR/NG. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECD A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER; OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING; AND i ;,, . INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE'THE ; ' PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITION L,.INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE ' PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE .. IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER March 2, 1993. r ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO i REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE . • 1:7„..,),.. HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HE2 R/NG MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN DAIS AFTER THE HEARING. j INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OFA.PPROVIL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST r . .. FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREIE 1SIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE COMMISSION WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS . RELATING TO THE REQUEST.PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. 1 FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME,POINT PRIOR TO TBE CLLOSE ( . OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY TO . ji AFFORD THE DECISION 'MAKER AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN . ' APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. } - i ALL I CDt ME1 TS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR ((' • INSPECTION, AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. .AT LEAST k, ` , '. , SAN DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR ( ' INSPECTION AT NO ,COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER Jerry Offer. AT 639--4171, TIGARD CITY 'HALL,' 13125 SW HALL BLVD., OR CONTACT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD m' . PLANNING ORGANIZATION (NPO) # CHAIRPERSON: Carl Iohai�on _ PHONE NUMBER: 684-5263 • I 1 at t.4 a..1 , . .. - ..:. ' 4.-. no 1 pk . mu . ' 4 ,. - ' 1 — MEI ip -A so 1 -e, 0 -; e ' . . . K;177i4S. - . , 3.11E=AM d60a , N .4. 4-3 › -, . UrAC 5. A _. .... - - E.,.. 4 iii - •.... (' SFd DUVAU..,:S1'Y,tEO Y Is s M I , , ____ , , • a ri, , t :. --- I-. r qy.qxliftrAt t�l�. .. . ‘,€) ''" 1" 'I ..:4'..f., 1111111111111111: 2 1 ig . .Imo E0 P e 6', 146t'rt°1 '' , . ' , dC� .vr t w ; , 0,4 I e , - a„ , ., , r" > l'''`,. ,....... \ Wilt rill II . ' t !PM °Idfr°119 it?°A ito.l741144d) 1 arrn.,.T.T.T..7 11 a 1II �� ti ,1,t r!CA*P tThil'''", ...,, ,, r..., i /> ii 1..... .— _ 4 11111 r LEWIS �' ., ,:o"-'4" 71p , I I EL ENTARY sbt tsbis7r.at sit L"�#r%: Par°1°44't , ‘n \ It r .. r'n Ii i .' 414°it 4.4, IAW"If A i I:5'14 40 14° 4 n kt ' ... • • H; 1 ..r. i1 « 1- I `', V A ' . . A --n 'ti 'e t - .. .ent b) ; - ert-'es ..7, :., ,„,. ..,,,,:l. ,,,, ,. ., .. ,.... t...4 , ! .: ' • "'___,:. ...' • - ' I . • ,,_,f.. ;4. ...I _ _-, . • 10080 North Wolfe Road o Suite 310 0 Cupertino,California 95014-2597 } • "wilco Financial Center eD (408)996-0700 ' FAX:(408)996-3027 } i, , March Q �993 e Mr. Gordon L. l)aviIs (503/227-7221) . . 1020 SW'Taylor, Ste 55: P. 0. 'Box 8774 1 : Portland,OR 97207 I " is ,a . . e, u p er � °alu Stores ore �' r Sate ! Development y R view/plan Development Review c: ' Tigard,Oregon {it` 1)e Gordon ` •. "tr or�+ • r . . 1 r We received the subjcctlNotice of Public Hearing on March 4, 1993 too late to ixnake coi•nments -': iii support to the city, 1 r We have worked We hked closely with you and SuperValu over these last y I years as the owners of 16 acres of property across Dartmouth to the west of SuperValu's parcel, Please accept this letter as our strong support for approval of your site development and planned i;' • . development applications, I am sorry it appears that we received this notice too later to direct our 1 , • stcpi)ort for your application to the Planning Commission, . . Sincerely, . , 1 . ,, I Wi.:�r 1 riRN- .1) ii 1 1, r ti KAU)PARTNERS • • a I 1 ,I Cl~lAw �t � L � 5s , 1r � ,l C:ieneral. Partner- 1 . C1 ,i,1V(r1 ,�n1 . cc: Paul Simmons 1 t 1 . a • '>a 1 .,• w ri 1 1 r r c 1 �mimt Litt. C, i<��trI r _ ' !�1����'iir��;����4 Yt 4r 1a r lrwl � a � ci<i11Zottl l~stattY 1.artnerslirj7s 1' 1 s , A " j` Q .... REQUEST FOR COMMENTS lov"1/4".-0 0- 11/ A(. 5 DATE: Febru ar 19 c9 3 • FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR 93-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 9393-0001 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU (NPO #4) 1) Site Develo, m*nt Review/Planned 4 . Development Review conceptual plan approval�.s requested to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi- tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. ' e. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval ` approximately 6 900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and w pproval x.s reques�.ed to allow filling la.ng of do pp y , � jurisdictional an approximately seven s,'� : a• foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a ^i?� wetland. A. separate a pp 1 ocataon for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) am Code Exception approval is requested ' `' to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exception approval is requested • to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided signs whereas a l combined sig n area of 210 square feet would normally be permitted. . APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development Review: Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Aevelopment Review: Code Section 18.80.120; A Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; Sign„ Code Exception: Code ' Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapters 18.62, ;18.100;,. 118.102, 18.106,' ,, 18.108, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of o ro e S P p s d SW Dartmouth Street ' •;• and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, , 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 2S1 13 ,, tax lots 100 and ; 101) ZONE: C^-G(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative Services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and + , business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single family residential units among other uses. Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From " information suppled' by various departments and agencies , and from other • information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered On the proposal in the near 'future. If you wish to comment on th,,.r application, we need your comments by Feb. 1 , 1993. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If_yclu are unable to resixand Jay the above date, please phone the staff contact noted below with, your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard 1 ' • Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125"SW Nall Blvd., ''Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 1539-4171. I. STAFF CONTACT Jerry Offer q PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: Mk a __ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections f:o it. R' I ', Please contact of our office. &_, Please refer to the enclosed letter. ,,;: ,„�. Written Comments: • Name of Person •Commentin ,r { J , Phone Number r: ,.` S i r , T f 1 .• • • MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Jerry Offer March 10, 1993 - FROM: Chris Davies, Development Review Engineercg> RE: SDR 93-0002 1 ,ion , A The appJ &cant proposes to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150, 000 square foot, multi-tenant retail center with two out lots for future development . A grocery store has been identified as the future orcupant of 79, 000 square feet of the center. Findings : 1 . STREETS : The site is located north and east of the proposed Dartmouth extension, west of S .W. 72nd Avenue and south of the Tigard Cinema Complex. Both Dartmouth and 72nd Ave, are classified as Major Collectors and have the following minimum standards . (all distances are from centerline) : 30 feet of right-of-way, 22 feet of pavement, curb and sidewalk. S .W. 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site currently has the following improvements : 20 feet of right-of-way, 11 - 13 feet of pavement, no curb or sidewalk. Typically half-street improvements are required as development occurs which would bring the road up to the minimum standards . Based on the applicants traffic report at such time as the entire Tigard Triangle is fully developed, the projected volume on Si.W. 72nd avenue adjacent to the site exceeds the level requiring a five , lane facility, '4. The traffic analysis used the most conservative assumptions . A cornerstone of those assumptions is the land use plan for the area Their analysis used the existing land use plan for the Triangle even though that plan is being revised. While that revised plan • has not yet been adopted, if the present recommendation from the ENCIN8ERINO COMMENTS spR 93-02 C138 VOODS/SUPERVALU 1 , ' ' ' •-, P%; • • • .. Planning nan g Commission is ultimately matel Y adopted, many areas that are now office commercial will be redesignated to medium density residential . These proposed zone changes will tend to reduce future peak-hour traffic volumes. ,, .- � I I I r�+ • Y, • Therefore, based on the traffic analysis provided by the applicant and the proposed changes to the land use plan the applicant is proposing the following. A. • Between the Dartmouth/S.W. 72nd Avenue intersection and to a point approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd Avenue driveway, an additional 31 feet of right-of--way,' which will I I create a total of 51 feet of right-of-way on the west side of , the centerline. , B. The remaining frontage along S,,W. 72nd Ave would have , increased right-of-way to a total of 45 feet on the west side of the centerline. C. A total st r eet section between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection and the site driveway on 72nd Avenue will have 51 feet of paving and will include e a bike lane on the west side a southbound through travel lane • a southbound left turn lane •' a northbound left turn lane • a northbound through travel lane is D. A total street section between the 72nd Avenue driveway to (' a point approximately 200 feet north will include: • a bike lane on the west side • a southbound through travel/right turn (into the site) • a center merge/left turn lane I I • a northbound travel lane I , E. From the north property line to a point approximately 200 °', feet north of the 72nd Avenue driveway: • a bike lane on the side d e • a north and southbound travel lane • a continuous left turn lane .•, • V. Curbs and sidewalks will be constructed along the entire ; west frontage of 72nd Avenue. h . The Engineering Department concurs with these proposed improvements , The proposed Dartmouth extension will be built under the, Dartmouth L.I e D e which will conStruct a three lane roadway with curbs, and gutter within a 70 foot right-of-way between HWY 99W and S.W. 12nc Avenue . + I it • G �y • I I {IL i. .. ', I Y :n a •... Ir. r e,yaw' The traffic analysis shows that the three lane facility will be adequate initially but that a five lane facility will be needed ultimately. The analysis also shows that the demand for a five lane facility does not necessarily come from the development, but �. from the build-out of, the entire Tigard Triangle. Again, the assumptions that were used in the traffic analysis are more than likely going to change as the Triangle land-use plan is ` adopted. Other concerns include the improvements to. HWY 99W and the changes being discussed to HWY 217 . . The applicant is proposing the following: A. In anticipation that a five lane facility may be needed at ` some time in the future, dedicate an additional amount of • right-of-way to bring the total to 45 feet from the centerline. • B. In addition to the improvements provided by the Dartmouth LID, the following will be provided: a second westbound through lane between the 72nd Avenue intersection the Dartmouth entrance driveway. b From the Dartmouth driveway west an acceleration lane which w ill transition back to the lane facility. construct a deceleration right turn lane for vehicles turning right into the site from Dartmouth. C. Construct a 6 foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the curb. The Engineering Department concurs with these proposed improvements . Typically, the City would require each development to provide half- street improvements to the ultimate needs when the area is fully developed. However, in this case it is not clear if the 5-lane section will be needed ultimately, since the land-use plan is • changing. The development proposes to dedicate sufficient right- / of-way to accommodate future widening to 5-lanes and the proposed grading plan will accommodate future widening. Therefore, the • Engineering Department is comfortable with deferring additional widening until the Tigard Triangle long-term planning is completed. 2 . SANITAWZ SEWER Currently there is no sanitary sewer to the site. As part of the' Dartmouth Street a 8 inch sanitary sewer line is being installed, This line will provide service to the, site from SW v Dartmouth. ry The Dartmouth Street L. I ,D. is providing sanitary sewer stubs to S .W. 72nd Avenue for future development, Again typically, the City •„: r 1, , • '• • • ty b „, •• X11 ., ,. ' ' , r. ” I ,y , •r. • r + �, t9. • 7ou1d require each, development, to, extend sanitary sewer main lines 10 the far most property line. However, in this case there are two additional elements that must be considered: A. F ds Su ervalu will not have any need A. This �applicant, Cub oo / p o for the sanitary sewer e r 1 ine in S.W. 72nd Avenue; and B. The Dartmouth St , L.J .D. shows the sanitary sewer line in S .W. 72nd Avenue to be located on west side of the centerline. The applicant for this deveiupment is required to t provide improvements to ��the west side of S .W. 72nd Avenue. r S .W. 72nd Avenue ' develops and the • When the east side of r sanitary sewer line is not available, then they would have to ••, y ' go in an tear up some of the improvements installed on the west side Therefore, it is our opinion, that the developer should be required D`O determine where the proposed sa itary sewer line in S .W. 72nd ' avenue can be shifted to the east de so as not to interfere with heir street improvements. For a' portion of the line that must s'emain on the west side of S.W. 72nd Avenue the appilcant should be ,equired to provide for its installation. r: a. : ' : . STORM. SEWER/WET LANDS : • t'he site is bordered by S .W, 72nd Avenue on, the east, S .W. 'artmouth Street on the south, the Tigard Cinemas complex on the �orth, and. Red Rock Creek on the west. The site slopes towards the • • 1Jouthwest. fie site plan shows the delineated wetland boundaries . There are wo jurisdictional wetlands , The main wetland area is a corridor S ,djacent to and generally parallel with Red Rock Creek. A second, I • d, 900 square foot isolated wetland was identified slightly east of • i,h.e Red Rock Creek wetland area. bi ae proposed development plan requires filling the isolated 6, 900 yquare foot wetland: In addition, a retaining wall will intrude alto the 25 foot buffer: The buffer intrusion occurs where the got side of the parking lot comes closest to the main Red Rock . A reek wetland line: aperValu retained IES As8ociates to conduct the wetland and develop a mitigation program or ,filling th p _m f ' the the �l�.neation an -� it i�'at n p�co � f.�l1 g off' olated wetlands and for the intrusion into a small portion of the l.ffer area. The mitigation program was developed in consultation Lth officials of the Division of State Lands and the Department of , ,;.sh and Wildlife: A wetland fill permit°has been prepared and Omitted. Part of the wetland enhancement program works in combination with the proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention plan. In the large triangular upland area between Dartmouth, the parking l ot • and the wetland boundary, this area will be shaped into a basin and developed as a wetland, marsh. All stormwater from the project will be discharged into this basin which is designed to meet the standards for stormwater quality treatment, prior to entering Red - Rock Creek. I The Unified Sewerage Agency has established and the City has agreed to enforce (Resolution and Order No. 91-47) Surface Water Management Regulations requiring the construction of on-site water quality facilities or fees in-lieu of their construction. The applicant is proposing to construct on-site water quality facilities . Based on the preliminary plans, the storm water from ;1 the site will be piped into a private system. It will then be transported to one of several water quality facilities prior to being discharged into Red Rock Creek. ' S.W. Red Rock Creek, the identified wetlands, and the mitigated wetlands are classified as a sensitive areas under Resolution and Order No. 91-47 . Being classified as a sensitive area requires that a undisturbed corridor be provided which is a minimum of 25 feet wide, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area. The applicant has defined the sensitive area and provided for the 25 foot buffer. Where the applicant has encroached within the minimum 25 foot buffer, an area : of compensation has been provided. ', Recommendations : , 1 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED OR FINANCIALLY SECURED; 1 . The applicant shall underground the utilities along the frontages of S .W. nartmouth Street and S . W. 72nd. Avenue Street or may pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding. 2 . Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the S .W, Dartmouth Street frontage to increase the right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline. The description shall, be tied existing right-of-way centerline. ' • on City ,line. The dedication to the g ° �g , - y ente .. document shall be �' 'y forms, Instructions are available • from the Engineering Department 3 . Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the S .W. 72nd Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 51 feet from the Centerline, this shall be from the intersection of S .W, 72 Avenue/Dartmouth north to a point that is at a minimum, 200 feet north of the applicants access On . I S .wb 72nd Avenue, description The he 51 al' be tied ed to the existing right-of-way centerline, The dedication document • 5 I I I � i b ! t • • • shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department 4 . Additional right-of-way shall be ,dedicated to the Public along the S .W. 72nd Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline, this shall be from the north property ,line south to where the right-of-way increases to 51 feet as detailed in #3 above. The description shall be tied 1 to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms . Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 5 . Standard street improvements, including concrete sidewalk, driveway apron, curb, asphaltic concrete pavement, storm drainage, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed along the S.W. 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street frontage. Improvements shall be designed, and constructed to, ' major collector street standards and shall conform to the alignment of existing adjacent improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering Department. NOTE The street improvements shall be as described in the applicants r, preliminary plan submittal dated March 1, 1993. 6. The applicant shall investigate the feasibility, of moving the proposed sanitary sewer line in S.W. 72nd Avenue to the east side of the Centerline. The applicant shall be responsible for the installation of any portion of the line that must be E installed on the west side of the centerline. The City' Engineer shall. have the final determination as to the location'. 7 . An agreement shall be executed by the applicant, on forms provided by the City, which waives the property owner' s right to oppose or remonstrate against a future Local Improvement District formed to improve S .W. Dartmouth Street 8 . An agreement shall be executed by the applicant, on forms • provided by the City, which waives the property owner' s right • to oppose or remonstrate against a future Local Improvement District formed to improve S.W. 72nd. Avenue. • 9 . Two (2) sets of detailed p p ublic improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review' to the Engineering Department . Seven (7) sets, of approved drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost 'i estimate, all prepared by a Professional En ineer shall g r be submitted for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements , 10 . Building permits will not be issued and construction of • proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the public • improvement . �mprovement' plans and a street opening pe rmit or construction a compliance agreement has been executed. A 100 percent performance assurance or letter of commitment, a developer- ; engineer agreement, , the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight fee are required. ' . 11 . The proposed privately operated and maintained sanitary J a e w r and storm drainage system plan-profile details shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. 12 . The applicant shall demonstrate that storm d rainag e runoff can be discharged into the existing drainageways without significantly impacting properties downstream. 13 . Sanitary sewer and storm drainage details shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. Calculations and a topographic p map of the storm drainage basin and sanitary sewer service area shall be provided as a supplement to the public improvement plans . Calculations shall be based', on full a ' development of the,serviceable area. The location and capacity of existin g, proposed, and future lines shall ll be addressed. 14 . The applicant shall provide connection of proposed buildings to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit j is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. 15 . The applicant shall be required to provide an on-site water quality facility, as established under the guidelines of Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47 :' 16 . The applicant shall provide, as a minimum, a 25 foot buffer requirements of Section 6 .08 .3, which meets the rEaquir ec of USA Resolution and Order No. 91-47 . 17 . The applicant shall obtain a "Joint Permit" from the City of Tigard. This permit shall meet the requirements of the NPDES and Tualatin Basin Erosion Control Program. 18 . The applicant should be aware that the City of Tigard has , adopted Chapter 70 of the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code and that the grading plan shall comply with this chapter. IN ADDITION THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS V' OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; IS EXCLUSIVE LIST. nrAN, CODE; THIS IS N EXCL l SECTION . .18 , 120 .060 BOND INC AND ASSURANCES A, On all projects where public improvements are required the Director shall: I' , .4-.0 .>.. ..r.. .........;1,r..,,..w...«..r.,_..n...,......_.....1.c.a.w.........,.. ..r_.r.. . ._..... ,...._M...-....:.v._ ,...,,.,i...M.l.u.. _._ a,,.......re..w_.«.i:.:..:.a,.r'-.s.:..1,..r...rla...:4:;,.,,..-...»e.,,...+.....,.,L..,...-,....w...._.....,..,;a...,:+.«,..-,.....t::.A,:.,.M'w-1.....r...a.a,r..:::....'w...,.:.tt,-'....i.;.«4......a..:.:, h Y sih 1 . Require a bond in an amount not greater than 100 percent of other adequate assurances as a condition of approval of the site development plan in order to ensure the completed project is in conformance with the approved plan; and 2 . Approve and release such bonds. R . B. The bond shall be released when the Director finds the completed project conforms to the approved site. development plan and all conditions of approval are satisfied. 2 . SECTION 18 .164 ` STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS 1. A. 18 .164 . 180 Notice to City Required 1 . Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. 2 . If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. APPROVED: Randall R. Wool44, City Engineer n:\engineer\sdr93-02.cd' • ry 1I I _ . , . . , , . . . . . . REcTIED PLANNING GORDON E. DAVIS 17) ECEIMED 1020 TAYLOR BUILDING,SUITE 555 lial\‘ MAR 0 1 1993 POST OFFICE BOX 8774 MAR 2 1993 .. PORTLAND,OREGON 97207 503248-1185 •, • ., i r .. , . ., • . ,. . . , . 1 . PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTING STRATEGIC PLANNING March 1, 1993 , 1 Randy Wooiey, Director, j, Public Works • City of Tigard • 1 31 25 SW Hall Blvd . Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: CUB Foods Center Proposed Roadway • Improvements Dear Randy: ? In our submittal of the CUB Foods Center project, we did not specify a level of improvement for either 72nd Avenue or Dartmouth. After reviewing the Kittelson Traffic Report and from our discussions with you and other city staff, we propose to construct the following road improvements. In addition to this letter, we have prepared revisions to our site and grading .,, plans to reflect these improvements. ,. SW 72ND AVENUE , . . i . r The current rights-of-way on SW 72nd Avenue is 40 feet The physical street section s presently a two lane road approximately 20 feet wide. • The Kittelson report indicates that at such time as the entire Tigard Triangle is fully developed, the projected traffic volume on SVV 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site (particularly in the northbound movement) just exceeds the level requiring a five lane facility. In .fact, their analysis shows that if a five lane facility is needed, the need is not likely to occur until well after 2015. The Kittelson analysis used the most conservative assumptions. A cornerstone of those , . assumptions is the land use plan for the area. Their analysis used the existing land use plan for the Triangle even though that plan is being revised. While that revised plan has not yet , .s. been adopted, if the present rebornmendation from, the Planning Commission is ultimately adopted, many areas that are now office commercial will be redesignated to medium density residential. , If this plan is adopted, traffic volumes during the evening peak hour would reduce as much as , 80% from acreage developed for multi-family residential under the new plan as compared 1 . 1 At -/ . ' ' • , n....1w Aat,....,.t.. «+....n .A nl +r.ia..w...-...—.«,.a n.-.4t.i.n...J..»r«N._.....,....+JJ..,..•..i,,..iNrc..»w:.r...w.,,.._t.....nL.:.4-.,:1,-:aMt1A,:ru, „crtu..xrt.»v-.-+iN..,».:.se.slt,.ia,-,wrJ.,.--Jyt,.3L.«.:.nW41..:Zsµ,t,t,r'H7{-.I.».r-..rSp.rJ' • t Randy Wooley . March 1, 1993 . . page 2 t4 with office development under the existing plan,, This is not to say that the projected volumes on SW 72 Avenue would be 80% less under the new land use plan, but simply that they would be less than under the current plan and would therefore would be less than projected in the Kittelson analysis. Even with 10% less projected traffic, SW 72nd Avenue would function properly as a three lane rosd. , Proposed Rights-of-way Since the future basis for traffic projections is very likely to change in the Triangle, and since in the worst case, a five lane facility, if needed, would not be needed until well after 2015, construction of a five lane section adjacent to the site is premature and may ultimately be unnecessary. ti !t However, given the possibility that a five lane facility may be needed at some time in the "\,. future, it is appropriate to reserve the rights-of-way at this time. Proposal: SuperValu will dedicate 25 feet on the west side of SW 72nd • Avenue adjacent to its site to equal a rights-of-way of 45 feet from the centerline of the road. In the area between the,Dartmouth/SW 72nd Avenue interesection and a point approximately 200 feet north of and the 72nd Avenue driveway, 31 feet of additional rights-of-way will be dedicated to create a total of 51 feet of rights-of- . way n the west side of the centerline (see discussion on Proposed Y { Construction below), Proposed Construction • The Kittelson analysis concluded that at such time as the intersection of SW 72nd and Dartmouth is signalized (sometime between 1997 and 2003), the back up of vehicles waiting the site at the 72 d Avenue to make a left turn onto De tmouth may begin to conflict with vehicles waiting to turn left into may begin Proposal: To c onstruct side-by-sid e left turn n l anes between Dartmouth and the site driveway on SW 72nd Avenue with one left turn lane dedicated to southbound vehicles wanting to turn left onto Dartmouth and the other left turn lane dedicated to northbound vehicles want to turn left into the site. The total street section between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection and the site driveway on 72nd Avenue will be 51 feet of paving and will include: ua a 5 foot bike lane on the west side fa a 11 foot southbound through travel lane 12 foot southbound left o a turn lane u a 12 foot northbound left turn lane o a 11 foot northbound travel lane - • . • , • • ".4 Randy VVooley , . • March 1, 1993 Page 3 For approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd Ave driveway, the paving section will also be 51 feet wide and will include: • 0 a 5 foot bike lane on the west side 0 a 22 foot southbound through travel/right turn (into the site) lane 0 a 12 foot center merge/left turn lane • • 0 a 11 foot northbound travel lane • This extra wide paving section is required in this location to accommodate the transition from the side-by-side left turn lanes to a single, continuous left turn lane. Since there is only 20 feet of rights-of-way on the east side of SW 72nd Ave., it is not possible to accommodate the northbound travel and left turn lanes (along with a shoulder and drainage facility on the east side). For this reason, the entire paving section will be shifted to - the west so that 39 feet of the paving will occur on the west side and 12 feet of paving will occur on the east side of the centerline of the road. The result is a paving section on the west • side of the centerline equivalent to the ultimate required section for a five lane road (with the double left turn lanes). • Again, because of the small rights-of-way on the east side of the road, to build even the equivalent of a three lane section on 72nd between the site driveway and the northern property line requires that the paving section be shifted to the west side of the centerline. In addition, in order to provide the proper transition from the 39 foot section south of the driveway to a three lane section north of the driveway, most of an equivalent five lane paving section must be built on the west side of the centerline. Proposal: Construct 39 feet of paving on the west side of the centerline between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection to a point approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd driveway. From that point to the northern property line, a paving section of 33 feet will be constructed on the west side of the centerline with a transition to the north of the property to connect with the improvements adjacent to the theater. Striping of the improvements will be done to show 11 foot north and southbound travel lanes; side-by-side 12 foot left turn lanes between Dartmouth and the site . . driveway; a single continuous left turn lane north of the driveway to the northern service driveway; and a 5 foot bikeway along the western curb. Curbs, gutter and sidewalk will also be constructed along the entire west frontage of 72nd Avenue. DARTMOUTH The Dartmouth Local Improvement District (LID), will construct a three lane roadway with curbs and gutter within a 75 foot rights-of-way between Hwy 99 and SW 68th Avenue, This road, including all rights-of-way, engineering, legal and construction is entirely funded by 4 property owners including SuperValu, No public money is involved in the construction of this road. The LID allows the four property owners to pay the costs of the road through assessments on their property, The Kittelson analysis with its conservative assumptions, shows that the three lane facility will be adequate through 2015, but that sometime after 2015, a five lane facility will be needed, , . . ,• • , . . • • 4, • „ ••• I • • • L LL Li L. • • 1 LL•d • ■•• L • • • • . Randy Wooley ' March 1, 1993 Page 4 e What the analysis also shows is that the demand for a five lane facility does not necessarily come from development of the four properties that are constructing the road, but from the • build-out of the entire Tigard Triangle. . Once again, the assumptions behind the Kittelson analysis are certain to change as the new Triangle Land Use Plan is adopted. In addition, future improvements to Hwy 99 will occur but are as yet undefined. Finally, the possibility of at least an overcrossing of Hwy 217 with a road that connects to Dartmouth continues to be discussed although with no consensus on its configuration, intersection location with Dartmouth, timing, or source of funding. In a future full of uncertainty, it is nonetheless clear that under present growth assumptions, the three lane facility constructed by the four property owners will function very adequately for the development of those properties and for development within the Triangle for the next 20 .„ years. However, as future decisions are made on other transportation issues, the impacts to 1 • , Dartmouth will become clear and decisions can then be made on the appropriate additional I • improvements to Dartmouth. As with SW 72nd Avenue, construction of a five lane facility on Dartmouth at this time is at least 20 years premature and may be inappropriate depending on future transportation decisions in and adjacent to the Triangle. •• • , Proposed Rights-of-Way Proposal: In anticipation that a five lane facility may be needed at some time in the future, SuperValu will dedicate an additional amount of rights-of-way to establish a total rights-of-way of 45 feet from the centerline of the road. ". Proposed Construction Proposal: Because of the relatively short distance between the Dartmouth entrance driveway and the 72nd intersection and to minimize possible future disruption to the main Dartmouth entrance driveway to the site from reconstruction of Dartmouth, in addition to its share of the costs of the construction of the three lane Dartmouth, SuperValu will also construct a • second westbound through lane between the 72nd Avenue intersection and the Dartmouth entrance driveway. From the Dartmouth driveway west, SuperValu • will construct an acceleration lane which will transition back to the three lane facility. In addition, SuperValu will construct a deceleration right turn lane for vehicles turning right into the site from Dartmouth. • • DARTMOUTH SIDEWALK • The City has established a design guideline for Dartmouth landscaping„ That guideline calls for a 5 foot landscape strip between the roadway curb and the sidewalk. The sidewalk is 6 feet wide, The intent of this guideline is to create a consistent landscaped corridor with a ' specific set of street trees and overall design image, SuperValu proposes to conform to use this guideline except that instead of placing the landscape strip between the curb and the sidewalk, SuperValu proposes to construct the sidewalk against the curb with the street trees immediately behind the sidewalk. The reasons for this are as follows. 7 • • • • • • +.,,•xw,...,..«. ._.„....N.•.A-.-....._. .x......Affa.. .,.,•...A<+.s.a+'+.-....1t...+........�1.4.-.-,J�.i..-..n ,p.uu . r ,.-w,w w.... -1.`.u..Y+.-+:i,.•.-.»•wJl.%:i•.-•...u....Ailt.»....J.::41..1'.:A _ • .xM,-..::.' •4 ..v.:L':.-+,.,•.u-F4'«._..a,...-,cl„•r...... ..H:auu..w,..:xu.-..-....M..1«»,t''.a'.:::—,......:.,.x.+d,dri'4«L+i,+;A-..:...:=w...tl;f.UWM:n'.i!..�....,».aJA'-tiuts....a:rca,::.+.,N•;...iutr.... • Randy Wooley 8: March 1, 1 993 Page,5 From an ultimate five lane road section on Dartmouth, SuperValu has set the edge of its parking lot 34 feet behind curb. However, in the area west of the Dartmouth entrance driveway, the parking lot is also 14 feet above the level of Dartmouth. Using the city design guideline, to accommodate this vertical difference a combination of landscaped slopes and a seven foot, retaining wall will be required. However, if the sidewalk can be placed against the curb, the sloped area can begin almost `'t,,� immediately and the retaining wall can be reduced to 4 feet. The row of street trees will still be planted parallel to the sidewalk and road, but immediately behind the sidewalk. i SuperValu evil! be usin an attractive split faced concrete block retaining wall system, a it While using p, • four foot wall is more in scale with the pedestrian environment than a seven foot wall and will provide a more attractive and more appropriate scaled backdrop for landscaping on the sloped surfaces. In addition, the city's objective of establishing a visible landscaped corridor is still achieved. ,l , ti We think these improvements are not only consistent with the needs of the project, but go well beyond those needs to encompass much longer term improvements that may be needed as the Triangle develops. In fact, the level of improvements that we must by necessity build • improvement requirements uirements for that on SW 72nd Avenue, will very likely exceed the long term irv�prover�nent q road. f' For Dartmouth, in addition to funding the construction of the three lane Dartmouth„ SuperValu proposes to construct some additional improvements that may not be required for over 20 years but which if constructed now, will minimize the disruption of future construction to the }, , critical entrance to the facility. We believe the uncertainty of future conditions in and adjacent to the Triangle, particularly • . conditions that may not occur for,well over 20 years, makes the construction of other improvements on Dartmouth speculative and certainly unnecesary at this time. Yet having reserved the ultimate rights-of-way will will ensure the City that if and when future p im provements are needed, the land wi�l be available for their con ction, • We look forward to talking with you about this further. Sincere;. . 1'4 IIINOu. Gor o r for r� E� a SuperValu Holdings, �c a ;� t Inc. p • { ( • • i r ,.r.r.,.J .,.n-r-...ur.r a....l,'!, 4..w .. ........A...x Il... ..4.,I,..tl,.,. «w s:. -. .n..M.Ja..r..t-..n......-,..,.r.......r 1.,..,r.a.._.....r.-w+.'.trr.0 i #F 1r , • ... REQUEST• FOR C'. Pi11ENTS . ' etc `DATE: February 4, 1993 FROM: Tigard Planning Department N. RE SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PD t 93-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 93-0001 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU (NPO #4) 1) Site Development Review/Planned Teveloment Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi- , • tenant retail center with two out lots for future development.. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sign CoCe Exception approval is requested ry, to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sig Code Exception approval is requested ` to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, t4O-sided signs whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be permitted. • • , APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development: Review: Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Development Review: Code Section 18.80.120; Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; Sign Code Exception: Code Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapters 18.62, 18,;100, 18,102, 18.106, 18.108, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 251 1BA, tax lots 100 and • 101) ZONE: C--G(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The ,C-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative services{ public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail o sales, and single family r eead e nti a l units zts among ether uses. Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From PP y information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Feb. 16, 1993.. You may , use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable,to reepond by the above date,. please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as poseible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, dontadt the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 630--4171 STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer • PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal, and have no objections to it., Please contact of otar office. Please refer to, the enclosed letter. Written Comments: IF Name' of Person'Commenting. 4111,,.Ial ;- 54 I u Phone Dumber:' } • • I 1 !T x tF r 04 �ry ,ti UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY ; February 9, 1993 Jerry Offer City of Tigard 13124 SW Hall 191vd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Jerry: Subject : Waremart Foods x have reviewed the plan e p for this a fo s project and would like to make the following comments: 1. Since the storm line crossing the parking lot also picks up the drainage from SW 72nd Avenue, it will have to be constructed to public standards. A 15-foot wide easement , should be recorded. • • 2. Is SW Dartmouth Street a proposed or existing street? Are the catch basins in Dartmouth existing or proposed? How is this drainage from this street to be treated? 3 . The under drain carrying ground water directly to the Wetlands ' cannot inter-connect with the 15-inch storm line. 4 , Have drainage calculations been reviewed to determine that system is sized correctly? 5. Have calculations c water quality facility been reviewed for the � �.ity ev` e to ensure that 65 percent of the phosphorous from the run off ,,r of all new impervious o surfaces has been removed. ,/ , 6 . Does the intrusion into the undisturbed corridor meet with City approval? (See R&O 91-47 as amended by R&O 91-75 6A .0S 3 1 . A Division of State Lands Permit� � � Division � s � will be requi.red ' S. xn S ce the . • Water quality itu. facility aoff .. -a a�pur n �f f fr oM public st Teets r it should be considered p bli c facility and sho uld �e in a track dedicated to the Cit y for maintenance by • the City. . ,,,tilrllwwfw.a�wrrfbsi4 ". � VMY WII«Yltllllll{Yd�I4C,pip ,ypdtltlMCNtlM1lIAq ' fiM111YY.pMwIINiMIi� . 158 North i=irstAveriue;suite 270 h� e: �� n i 503/645-8621 Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 FAX 5013/540-$525 e h n I \ .. -. ._..._ a .•,l« r,n.,,,.._, r...,_ rt+•a.r.r.,..0...............i...4.1.1•. ..r.u:iNti,,..._ t,.,.r...,w....YW...-.-w.Yr ... _ Jerry Offer, City of Tigard February 9, 1993 Page Two • 9. An erosion control plan should be required showing how erosion .' will be controlled on the steep embankments along SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street during construction. (Possibly erosion control blankets should be required. ) Thank you for submitting these plans for our comments. If you have any quest ions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact the Agency. -.�`" Sincerely, 40 1, Y Jeanne Hedrick Engineering Tech. III /eb trxclosares tr h ..n cu.L,'..e..,, ..r.... ...,,.,o. .. -. u.l,_ .-::_a..:r.,. ,.....,.r , ,.,..,,....dr. , ---4,...--4,4,4,,,,.....--,---,1,--,_“,..-....ar_:'w,,,,:.,,,. 02/16/9 3 14:48 ° 503 239 6469 TRIMET PUB INFO 4->4 CITY OF TIGA D a005 RED sT oR C©MME TS • � ;' ' � � � �' ' � � eua �4 19 J3 T�z DATE: �,_,p ltixc ' d `RAM: Timed Planning Depent RE: SITE DEVELOPMEMZ R 1I T SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT..R VIEW 'DR 93--0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 93-0901 CUB FSOf�S PEt�VALA (IsT2 0 #4) Z) Site Develepeat Rea PArleed Dewe142mentgeyiee conceptual plan approval is rcequeated to develop an approximately 20 acre, site with an approximately 150,000 square foot,,, mdl.ti- tenant retail center with two Ott lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified ae the inture occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an ' , approximately 6,900 square foot ju.risd.ictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a ` wetland. ?i ae+parate application for Wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lando. ) Si Grade Emc_pti(2rt approval is requested to allow 28$ foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the code would normall�;�' allow a total combined height of 42 feat to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, t it _Code Exceetie�s� approval is requested to allow a combined. sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided Sig s . whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be permitSed. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Develospent Review: CoMmunity Development Code Section 18.120.180, 'Plazxn A Devel©pasnt Review; Code Section 18.80.12011 . Sensitive Lands Revco Code Section '1.8.84.040.D; g an Code► nxeepta.on. code • Section 18.114.145; Other relatsa Code Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, sr, 18108, and 18.114. LOCATION: °'Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmonth Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address nos 'yet assigned) (WCT 3 1S1 36Dd, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tit lot 2000; portion of 2S1 12h, tax lots 100 and 171) ZONE: C-0(PIS) (aeneral Commercial, Planned Development) The c--G(PD) zone ai1oWs public agency and, administrative' services, public support facilities, ' // professional`and adi►inistrative 8ervii es, financial, insurance, real estate, and f ' bueineae support services, eating and drinking establiehments, general retail /r sales, acid single family residential units among other uses. Attached is the Site ;Plan and applicant's statement for your review. Front iufermatiorz supplied by various departments and agencies and from other infacmatiari available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If yot wish to comment on this application, we need your cornmertts by Feb. 16, 1993. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. 11_121.1. are ur ab1e' to res n8 b the above dates please phone the staff ct ot y cbttuttents in 13taf� .L:Ctn � noted below with your comments and confirm your writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this Matter, contact the Tigard . Planning Department, 'O Box.23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 9"/223. PBONEL. 639--4171. STAFF CONTACT: .Jerry, Offer , PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT PL x We have reviewed the prapcaaal.� a�.�d, have to objections to it. Please contact J _ _ of pttr o'ff:'it*. . PLeaae refer to the enclosed letter-. . Written Comments: . . I is , Namtle', of Person domtenting: ',:�:_ `.4. :�..�. ,,,• PhcyxXe Number: y7 :. :,�, PEA t. x. , • • • • • ....ti.uw. l++r..w...At.-u•,H»�,..,.u.uta..-,kn..w'�.'A�t4M..x--,.i-nr,::,+,..,...c.i...,.�t.-M�si.rN � n..I�LgNF 14'� u.,.I.W..tl...1.a,...c..r..r.u..va,,:AwJ:..::R.N.�wa n 02/16/93 14:46 %T503 239 6469 TRIMET PUB INFO 444 CITY OF TIGARD [{h 00.1 • TRI-MEN' TRI—MET FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE 1 1,1 t • To: __Agit, . . • FAX 'NCO FROM: 10% �1 '�'' ..r,:+.w�...i��eu► �......rra�aa wr..�...r.�.�w�s �r OS • ° FAX N(0 2 3 9.-6 4 6 1EEL NO ' c A L! I . THIS TRANSMITTAL CONSISTS OF PAGES, INCLUDING TM S COVER PAGE. • • n I i • 104,1 t.n„.. ,..r.._. ..11.........r:l l.rti44....r. ...,r_.... -.....ll...,1....ra.,......_....-...r,n...rJ_.........,«..-.•..w++...r..r.......•....-•.r....r.M..............•...,...........«n.......w..«..l..rrw...1...V....1«u..r.....rr...fr•...........,r....-., .. .f IM.. ....xr .., «..,i....+=L.—..•-. .Gr..l,. 1 „n'• - - ._rr•.•.w -:An .a r++.+ r.r°n r n wJ.I Min .—.....w-..r....•r..l...r. .....dr.. 02/16/93 14;147 x°503 239 6469 TRIMET PUB INFO 444 CITY OF TIGARD IJO02 G •d TRI-COUNTY r. f a T oPourA' M (� hl ! I TRANSPORTATION G y 7 DISTRICT OF OREGON - ^� a 744.5gsc , co„) Transit. 9 t ci ET �•r /IO12 S,E,17TH AVENUE ' PORTLAND, I t. P f�TL r'� OREGON G ON 9r X02 I �' February 16, 1993 r , To: Jerry Offer, City of Tigard Ftom: Kim Knox, 'Tri MejoYe.i0 ' r . Subject: Cub Foods Proposal I I I As per your request, I have reviewed the preliminary site plan for the Cub Foods project for its ability to accommodate pedestrian and transit serrice to the site as well as the broader' • "Triangle” area. The following 'memo outlines the existing and potential levels of transit service to the Triangle, the goals for development and the corresponding design guidelines that would effect this type of development proposal. I • Transit Service Current service includes downtown Portland bound,senzice et ery 6 to 15 minutes along Pacific(Highway (99W) and half hour service via Line 78 connecting the area to the Beaverton, Tigard and Lake Oswego transit centers as well as Washington Square. I I, The Pacific, Highway has been identified on the Regional Transportation Plan lkTP) as a potential light rail corridor. The site lies 1/4 mile to th south of Pacific Highway with a direct connection along 72nd Avenue, This is considered to be a walkable distance to frequent bus service, and is well within the 1/2 mile walking range of a light rail station area, Line 78 currently traien ls. aloI n g 68th Avenue, but could also be ?2.nd A v Avenue, depending upon potential ridership along each corridor and the phoing of derelo meat within n • the Triangle Y F1 titer time. • • n A new 225 space park and ride facility will be going in on the south side of Pacific Highway between 72nd and Dartmouth Street. rt ppI . • ,, 02/16/93 14:4' %Y503 239 6469 TRIMET PUB INFO 347 CITY OF TIGARD I 003 f; ■ Development Goals Over the next 20 years, some 500,000 people are expected to move: to the Portland metropolitan area. One key component necessary to maintain the region's livability while ', accommodating this growth is to maintain ,nobility. The ease with which citizens can get ,, ., from one place to another makes a. tremendous difference in the vitality and character of a •p communityY .r• , .. The recently adopted State Transportation'Planning Rule (Goal 12) has set the stage for µ .' significant changes in bow and where development occurs, The current pattern of low density I ' , auto dependent, development has resulted in the number of vehicle miles traveled`(V [T) P; . increasing at eight times the rate of population over the past decade. The Rule focuses on reducing the region's reliance on the automobile while accommodating alternative means of • travel including pedestrian, bicycle,and transit, The Rule requires local jurisdictions to { achieve specific reductions in VMT over the next 10 years and beyond. . The Rule supports the following development goals;) '' I 4. Reduced reliance on the automobile . Creation convenient pedestrian Cr on Qf a safe and con p estrian system '. Reduced energy consumption Provision of market driven transportation options The aim of transit supportive development patterns are to create a leasant pedestrian P environment allowing for multiple trips on foot as well as linking people to transit service The Triangle as a whole is proposed for a mix of fuses; creating many opportunities for is . residents, employees and shoppers to walk between destinatioris'when full build out is reached. Design Guidelines 1 The following comments suggest a I range I of design sign i ssues fI ir the proposed p ro ect, Soiie of these are evident from the proposed plans, while others, such as window openings along 72nd . Avenue, will need to be resolved at a later phase of the,design process. We feel that these guidelines should be addressed in light of the adopted state policies to reduce reliance on single occupant vehicle trips throughout the region, These guidelines could be accommodated on the site w� haul com ra nis€ng the basic performance ce of the including ncludin g P arki n g ratios, service access needs, building program, square footage requirements or parking ratios, 1. Locate buildings and their en tranc es as close to transit streets as posSi'ble. Any ... building fronts 72nd Avenue must have windows providing• views into Facade that e business. • I r I r '114 t a, 02/16/93 14:48 °x'503 239 6469 TRIMET PUB INFO 444 CITY OF TIGARD [a004 } 2. Arrange buildings on the site to reduce the walking distance between each of the , buildings and pedestrian access to the nearest transit facility along 72nd Avenue. Align pedestrian access to the site with off-site roadways whenever possible (ie Clinton and Baylor), 3 • • Reduce e the amount o f parking required through programs anl . to encourage xrdesl�iarrn�;, transit, bicycling and walking by both employees as well as shoppers. For example, as ;., higher density housing is developed across 72nd Avenue, it is possible that with • pedestrian improvements these residents would walk to the proposed development rather than drive their cars, Also, Tn-Met can assist the tenants in forming carpooling programs. 4. Provide preferential employee parking for rideshare vehicles, Within designated ?' employee parking areas, locate parking spaces for those who carpool to locate closer • to the employee entrance. 5. Locate parking away from the 72nd Ave u e and preserve opportunities to connecting �. the site to future pedestrian connections to light rail along Pacific Highway. 6. The ourrent plan does a good job of providing a direct edestrianwa from 72nd P Y Avenue to the building entrances. Pedestrian crossings are needed across 72nd Avenue at this point to assure access from the high density housing proposed for the adjacent properties, I As another option, however,, the buildings could. be reconfigured to front more businesses on,72nd to enhance pedestrian linkages to a much greater degree, I , I 7, Provide weather protection for those arriving at the site on foot, This would include extending a shelter al on g the main access routes from the intersection of 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street as well as from Baylor Street to the building entrances. It i would al o include an awning along the building frontages to protect pedestrians. • • I am available to meet with your staff and/or• the developers over these issues to e t et wit staff elopers to go � issues ' greater detail if you wish. llei.;e fee l free to call at 238-5859 with and questions, • • I I I I I I if I I I „ . I I I it I I I c' MAR 01 '93 13:29 REGION *1 HW' DTV • post its"'brand fax transmittal memo 7671 #of pages r -t,, Piorr4..L , Wife' , 16...,, ,f .e- 7 . Are._ ' . • ingir , 400gWiiiiiiiiiipli to, a e r If •TC�7 °opt, (0/ / Phone 1( �• ,-.3 , "RQ : Tigard Planning Department Fax t 2,4, • ,� Fax# ' ,_...lD , .v ' L W mui;7 002, .__ _ ,».e ._-"j . PDR 93,0*01 SENSITI LANDS •N/EW 4SLlt 93.�OOO2 s1GN C6UE EigE +TION . • SCE 33..0001 CUB FOODS,SUPERVA.!U (N 9.#4) 1), Site De,11.9. m nt Rem P1anr ed , Devel -nt -.4 , . : ., nceptual plan approval is requested to develop en . approximately 2« 'nacre cite with an approximately 150,000 sgaar'e foot, multi.. tenant retail center with two out lots fee future ,development. A grocery atcee has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. 2) ft eiti r Lards Review approval is requested to allow filling of an " approximately 6,900 scalar* foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately Seven foot intrusion into the nor t ally e uiret 25 foot develppnent eetbac from a wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested • from the Division of State Lands. 3) 8kgn Code Exception approval is regaeeted to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the ' Code, Would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be dietx'ii ted , he two sins. In addition, ee.C`.ade peep elea� � i . _�?�__..,.� approval is xeqaested. ' '.`- to allow' a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided eigee w�iszea3 a oor i.ned sign area of 21�1 9qz zta feet would normally be permitted. , P'PLl"CA8L REVIEW'Cltt ERIA: Site lleve LraDRterit Review: Community Development Code Section 18.126.180; Planned bevelaptsent Reviews Code Section 1880.120; . Sensitive Lando Review: Code Section /8.84,040.D; Sloe code Exception: Cade Section 18.114,145; Other related Code Chapters 1A,62, 18.100, 18.102 18.3.06, , . 18,108, and 18.111. LOCATION: Northwest corner` of proposed SW Dartmouth. Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WOTH 1S1 :3$) C, tax iota; 600, 2500, 2501; portion of 1z. 36CD, tar lot 2000; portion of 2S1 183 , tax lot i 100 and 1p 1) ZONE C-0(PD)b) (General Commercial, Planned 0eve1e nt) The C.-G(PD) zone allows public agency arc adtninisteative services, public support facilities, pzofeeeionial and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and busines s sulapart set rice c, eating and drinking eetab1iehments, general. retail ' ' sales, and single family residential units emote; other uses. /, Attached id the Site plan and applicant's Statement: for your review, From , information supplied by va.rio�ts departments and. ages cies and from other' ' infozuat.&oe available to our Staff', a .tepo.rt aria recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. if you wieh e to comment on this application,, we need your comments by Fes. X, , 1993. You may use the space provided below or attach a. separate letter to teturn your comments. U f yeee ee, aloe le to rES nd b the above ct ,tee please phone the staff contact noted below with. your eortnents and confirm your comments in writing es soon as pos tble. If you have any questiohe regarding this matter, Contact the Tigard • b Planninci Department, PC Box 23397, 13125 SW Ball_ Blvd.M Tigard, OR 97223. Mgt: 639-41/1. i 5T. ? CONTACT: ejetey Offer PLF2 SS ,CHEC TTE FOLLOWING T`TEMr TEAT APPLY: " We have reviewed the proposal and Dave no ob jectiene to it. ' ' ,-,.., please contact of our office. . Please refer to the enclosed letter. r ", Written Comments: , ...",r" - • �.ri ,<. w� P 44 *� . r ..:.. � +i L � ./.4r:( e p .• i d. .0 - + 'Q�_.:. .: :ef/.. PI„c . . -..,24 .61/2-?..-42.,.--4,;1 , .60 .-t. Abe , . ,,e '1' Name of Parson co'tmentieg: ;,.. ,,G, .'. if (/). L' ,'/ems` , Phone Number: _ 5Y i A. • • ;: V. ww' ,. .. _ ___,_. �,._.._...x.. .�.,.... ...... ...... ....,........ .,,.a..... �.,.__ .,,...a,., ..,, „ ...,......,,w.,.,,,way_..., ._,,:,....._.,...._,.,...,,, ..,....,._..., .,,........._.._..._, .„w_,,,._,._ �. ..,.._.,. } ' ' ' . J '''?";/),,,,,, r ,I,T. a ' ETLAND LAND USE NOTIFICATION F( . DIVISION OF STATE LANDS WETLANDS PRAT N \\J'\P' 1mYD Oregon 10 503/378-3805 Ore o 775 Summer Street n 973 i "1" 1 . County: W4sui Local Case File No. : S • • 0 City: ,__,,:2AAb DSL File No.: ;. 'c j 2, APPLICANT: SL PEP- VAL , STo2€S LANDOWNER: Supc-72V4u4 Hot_bH1/43GS c PALA L Sim&I ar.)5, 01exec:Betp, ge.TA IL .Ue161R?'142N1" name P Bo* � U I A street street . © . 3&LE t2_. `i�3. -t� - E ig ues d-fi A .���5:Lf Q.cL... city state zip city , zip c 1 L5-1._ ____5:-. - 00 ( (ila) �6 /S 3 phone phone 3. LOCATION: SEp;/ 5& I . _ R 1. S 3(0 1/4 Tax Lot(s) .20 ; NWI quad map name _J v n. (attach copy with site indicated) c Attached: ' NWI map X- Parcel map >e Site plane ' Other se !p .o jrl VIAT.t it PRENea L ' 4. SITE INFORMATION: 'MOT To titf t- f'4f NWI Wetland Classification Code(s) PFol �._._ • Soil Series Name (optional) Adjacent Waterway (if any) AEI) R.is,c_k_. _.__ In Floodplain? Y N X 4r M'-,tp,r, Current Land Use VA-c 7� Zoning C-C2 (ge-4x-/A,(4-c.�C ommetcoitL) 5. PROPOSED ACTIVITY: • >' site plan approval �.�� subdivision �`'° grading ng perms t _ �__.. planned radi . unit development c ' permit conditional use p public works ,l ) A 1 building permit other ^ . 4 Zone Change to: Project Description: !2 cam? 7 + rye■Gets.kr, �i57/i o- 6 ) .54,41- f- ..._:, ,+1C.v,.( Completed by/Contact: )I QrF`c fi e-- _,. Date A� `- ci 3 . Address`7eamms Pc.fi ro,woc, ,DE-.pr PO Box-23317 (I,Jt`a rot q 7203 Phone 439417/ (Thin form 3a to be cotnp1eted only by planning c6artmont,staff for v,appdd wretlanda) !SL RESPOASE L . , 0 A removal-fill�l 1 pe rmi t t s required from the Division of State Lands. ..� ' A pe rmit r��t wi l l be required �r e when t the development ent project proceeds. 0 A removal-fill p e rmi t may be required. U Information needed includes: } r . 0 0 A wetland determination/delineation report. , • 0 State permit was issued a has been applied for. 0 ll permit required the project if/because:p u i rid fort p ,� No removal-fi �i t i s re ��e descry bed ro'e�c because u A permit may be required y the Corps of Engi veers (326-6995) Cotry ments. Response completed by Date '4 If the project i r : �. s changed to inVo e l fill removal the wetlands area a p 3 g � 1 ,or r moval fro�rj l an state removal-fill permit Will be required. . , , • • 1 ♦ •" � 1 (�3, .• • e �p�i '•'a r,a ` 5!..rte'"" .2a^ M I M r ^b s{ /al, l ro� V i Iy ( VCi • -►4'- t •> 1 ,' /�' ..._.., "' : • >R• \•.,' ✓, R� �+g111 ♦ ,.D M+ ,J f..:,r.l••. r ',•r •_y • Vr 1.1 ,`. *N ( 4"'"`",.1 I it+ �-'1 ✓y-M( • , t. _ . ( ,,.. '» r ry a"Y'r, Y ,•,. N i �. { ''C tldY»IA ..!'.. , ... �;..-t*T,�""" ti.. ° .,...-}}'� �• +�•hA �4r Maae • Y'r •} Yrl' '.°: 'e! .� .1 i.� _ •"' r ;: + • y 1 ". :i&'''\\ w-": . • M(v i.7,:4'f d' --,,,".--..» 1 '✓:: . • »'` ��` • 'M 1,?` , • 0 ♦ •``! „�`y ,1. ;4y •$1 :uJ' •Sp,itJ 'r• "�r i!' 1 f 7• [v,tt, ,4'lyn, 1./',.. • r -...Ot.Sp•.r'11 �• 1 1 y:''• °o" ,yb 1 .. .'� u o • 1 ,,' l 1 f• , «.xfw•rd .r d + •✓ VJ {4 -,' r t Z '..'114Y ' kii ' "" 'T.,•0,•+'„1, • w7.. o, w c• .`\ s,i 14. 1. .• +.+J ,�; ..1 »� „'.r� V t• • �. - • •: ." • ,y .-4 1 fat. 1 ~1` ,-,?..,..t• 1 \1•• t '',` "' r'1•Q++.�' #vyq a '+ ,.... rwf1'• t• / r w , • •r 1,•«'.1"f�' tl•',, w'•fr'kV., a ",1r,',k•+1 5I js,' .1l„•,n...+, 4 .t• `"•,� +' :r • " , "")991'; '/ •sC �,•�( e tit ti + ,. I 1 a s /'`y `[ . ,,,.,ti ''N , {�' r .'• w i t{.�L 1.A'�/,,4 "' ." •'"� a r d. �4•Y", Y +.7 y', ' `ti, ^. ,i e � •-q' � � '•' r�' r.•�+� •" i • .• ,1,,,,.' . •j'r a. ! ••r ,''" j 1"; ^n a ,) 4 ,.+ r a • o'.. ' a r.,e.,,r ^_ Y M • Y."•• r 1•w •'. • 4 .7 4 , r I.• y`yh t r1�i �N• �� !' ��1 Ir,��, ` • 1» /� Q. y.,�p..waj er�""Vb.,,-•.0 "W • . �jwfa."�? "«j ♦+ �/'�� /~ • •• • S ••� , • ..w r r 5 A t' !*�yt: t III •' 1....1..'' • •' "{ r, / � •,�{,� t � • , "r• ;.! y ri a r..• N '1 11 „ ,„.1"'. ..1.:' '� e:"' /n(�� d• 1� i,w -'-1.*"s. •n 1/ ` Y• Al/ •• • 1 �ow „r' • „ai,,Y •,.N Yi r ,•,✓, • -, V 1•�s yN/ ` ,r Y r • " •f•t L<+`f 5 I• • it:7,;,..14, a"" » . • • . '1 • a,♦ o •,� '/N /J••+° ' t �' ` 't ""+.�v..,:,,,.. •••...•,.,. ♦f w'. , • ••••r d !'d / .14'.4 Y .r /• r "' M D •y r y /�! + 1 F.V. •: ,r[[�� • N .,•.,�1'^ „r,.:..,,• 4' •"'N .,� ' ,.. •_ ` •I ,O " • la '•.a ,..j `, .$ .p,,• �,•, S,. • ' mo.gwyv,p."';`'U ., M', ».. .rr J•'" �',,�,c' * .': 4$* .:, Q ih ▪'. ! i �f '�a •✓ `h 7.3' ya a g/ ^V` ✓"1� r �."• •• • i' �'Y ■ C• 16 1�7!;I ,'S'"(a •� ♦ '.�,. r,• ` . .",- Y r I.R.r «Y „'4.•'o,h, et'' ,. �" ,,f.;,: M1;� , ;• �' J 4. •�..•+�/�J r, ,. , < .„ 14�1. /C'r b 'a...a a "4":•,..„„jai �•a c,1 ,• ^'N, M.. �,+, .. pl T/I ..,1. • +v..tl 4";',,M ` \ �l+r<";. IY r. ', 1 7' •.,,■ M• .' 'r • [I Y 1. -. fr..,1 ' ,r r r•a 1Y O�,Y�S�R ha'. <.3• �• 1•`.r.r a "� �r'�''"--ww-' • h •.Ci1t �•. 1.. `) .,.,.t'1: . t r y . "Y'�.r•--'.•♦ •4 0' w �f fir. • (yy� �tp/., �('y '• - 1 I, y y .•.r► •''ti, • y♦.y x.11 } d pOW!'�Z•° y 7-•,' ' e • 1 4 ^+ yt j- . . La. 0 0.•11,4i H " .,✓,r• "• f-•.• . .,` y x'Y°„y • ♦` •�.. {rJ .> 1,' ,j t r`i w.t% r.1!%• • �••" �•� 'dq-w,,•.M.r: I', ,.y. , j `'44:::"'';:):, "•r .•J11' !( 't +r' .ay• M.� ",a•� 1. I . '' «'•r i r.►,i+r s' "..• ry + r •e N .:ek''ti ;*+y.,,'4�'"p •":b •j�� +' , x , . ( ,, ., ? •t" * !.liyy-n":»S:.'1 .�` �tp e • 4}•�9 1 , '1/ . *'t ';V a IA,,+',iJ1 a N•N w n -, , 'a• •r t'd �1 1 ,,',Se dry j t•i..'+' "'} •• •• *'`,'' 'il. •"1'4 +' ''''. r °d l'''Y, S f."dR"'<..'' 44 '0.."• - •y, r i l .r' '1' .`I.,Psv.'1ti '•∎ . s . y, 1 Y•4«s y ''•a j 04 , iY , A • ,l �5, •.,�_ '•q�;, ...r�.,�•�.�-/•�. �i•. Yr�; F "t { { 1•n�'" ■ 'y r•,�'.l,t ., •" '. A4 f�. :�f Pt h1J1?,�ivt1.*,• •• .,$.' :P.♦ �\,. * l"\�,. ✓+'Nib. , 6•+M ,••, f .•'^• ;ti!!71 +'Y.L7 !, x'•',•' '4.6 s' Y r Pt"<'_k-ti',T: r7-e-,.�,� .. E1>v,Y,1 y• i„,,,_:. 4(.10,,t„: ,+ �o^ " •+.• �1',. °"♦ir ,f�; '1' „�' , C.• •r •a ,r.,."N`4 M,.•^ , �j .- ?..4 •�• . �gt'�{.•�,,yt 1 t'1 a+" �✓ ^fr�, 1 1 • 'r • '1,,,,,.F.• ••. • `• •• • o_• ,y yr♦ »•' yy IJ ,It ✓. 1 !l./\.{;.. .:.,•f/�_ . i•+'h,r, °V,i f" • .•.'�♦` •:/`�.-K''f) ♦x e,� C a 1fk',. � 1l 1 •a, •'�"4 00 st.::, , � �risv/y/I I �, ,• M yw'y�""'"�•ly M1 "•1 tL 'l ,•r • $ .. y r'.1•• + yf#N ° •,t'1;✓ 'V 7 ',,Lk,,,:'• ,�j+ ef'"� -.r,rrr� , , .-..ht,N r • i \.,Y r , "'r ` }} I • '��r.ti' p •s j{,<'r, y L �I;,,./1 �� �%+ 'w 4!t s ••.1. ,.•'•• ly tg.t.,47 `7`, „i .,,t.. 4•',' •t11 r.+u i4iti .�'A,:, Y //' /^�,� / . +7 :'it •a i • • ' n • . r.'r. •, 3 »•,11 /N'1 t y • `':•• 1 •. '•�\ 4 1 ,•n '7 ,1 r w r • 'y 0 ti' `‘1I 1' "4''d. 4' »:,-, r it S,• '4 .h "�� % 000 . .y"i • " .r'Y.4/•'t e, • 1,� / 1 •y � < 4,14' y •F■1Y' ,' ." -•�"1 1 F'' y k ••,y. x `.,.,+ a• M x•F .• ✓�, 4 tl 4t, /I n a01" cli y. ',ptN .«f " 1 i ' p��•yy �[•"\(,,",p• • ,/ /'.` �':• j �. ;.� :.Ct Ct/ . i 1 Y? f • .r a �Y`"'• tl 7 f y POW, aR 11 x'41. 1bJ���� .::,:re,,,:-;.,,,, ` may " `r 1 `'.W.W •:0 a,. . • •., .".. �,±,,.,,.,,�.r•-''�'.-✓1 N vt r,y.," �,3n�1, ,r,V 71,• .;(.1 a1 v*,,- Y • -1,, • , \, • ON ►,, r L u.� /'j : *.;✓ y d ---,_,,Q-".;,1 t ► i . "'���iii 1 x, 1 'i i ',, ,r t i .,„#1444).'/° y' wfw,., xr rq'�' ".,• a . e, �•yyp'y��g♦ay'K .Jl./VtiL: _., " •j��'r . Ly� �»/•''• '� ♦ 4`• , / ✓ ,. Y •♦ 4',' it '1.aA, ,.,.,.- .-' .w + , :, ,.. '»x i•- 1♦7.o N "y ' • •''{, t t: i , ,,0, •+x'w. 1 ,'� " !r;; i' , , . s } t•fr Mt ` �A• y ••xn(((��� ••t '' Y{ •Y y f ..,...A..y N ,. ' y i d. tt,tr1 ' ri:x.• 44 '1' .: 7'•t /i u: lY,4.•1»Gl+✓.(�.,, yr , i'f•M. plgo1 i4,4:y .,M`' aaa,: ..'1,4«•_...,+''".'C,,, .,,''• '' •,4..i a• 4 1(' j4 .V.! a.,.,Sw ,, 4�. i 4 ,,...y,,,w 1.i„t;'J f i ,, r, • �.. ,;) r 4.4 y?'y• .Il ,. •tt,1••�.r.,_{' ,a w'/`41��.,4, N " x Y 1. S t 1 ,,�,;•,.II�^,•,..^r. d N .,r '..... ,�+f P N A{ '�:,44.3'-i l''��� .. +'",r '.•�, 1+ k +"`•5'til'y tx• Y }�,i . �"M. y ', ✓ "��7.)1}'Y�i�1'j�a'�.fy,, '..."O• ,'h y + ' r .. • ,' t/j' ar'1 y it '''''AL* i1" H I y • •►' P`(1[t, + .I',p`,'^ •• ( LI, ° , ,1i � tt r,,f/• ,n✓'"� ,l t T . 4 , ,� ''.4• '.'' j 1/,,., 'k ti{+,,,,,,y,,,,4 Y 4 e N „; ,,�' , •.' hl''�=f: Y. V lVL C i T, .:r �„I''•+ "11 �. ,y•n A }Z, i� Il 'al N 'I , ,. tl) •,fir.:,-.0.1y x i} tom,y1M'• 1 T 4 y f ar{:1 W i # + Sy.♦ 1 5 `t , ,,y 4 / t t 1„ 4 1 7i �,dle/�"!'..� {,.,`44, 1 T M M 1,� 0 1� + Y YI+~"4}{ l l,'.11}�1t ll•.•' ',1�• y1,n S Y .v.' " Ypq• , t✓{ j r i, !1 ,'✓ ./) 4 4 4 1,i1,''rt 1 .s ,{x e k.,..i u • ....J...:'.4 W.wd,,,4'•r+•W•: t Y •1,'7 t . ' f W ♦� r'• 1 "NY a .'MY4 '��,�, + •, w /+,}, 1+4 ., .,. ,�, 4 •»air,,«pp ,,yt•:� • fir 4t,1 Y, dti 7 1:,�+�'Y y „ 4;',1 G 1 •1% ..tl . +'1.11x �,. 4' a . tl /} •1 ••i1 4 1 j + t 11•t'x v N h • 0',!t " 4 ' +t r ,, ,4r>'.•./" f+ i !7 ++" pJ • 1 1,.., f 4.\ I a ^' r w i,•k/ .t w s 'i • �7�-t� t i rl x , ii V, / x�•,,b ...7 r''ILY.w s :Ii, ',,��,,�Yy' ,r "r•r•" o-.,,'•x' k 'Y } l 4 "4 t x\+ ", • ✓yam \ �ww , b , 1M " ".. '. /-' ( '' - ; ', , Y 4 404' /' 4 ++�, �p w y " 4 4:+r,�,,+� ry" +'� . «",."..„..„ 4, .e .. . ,i x : t» `' " .r ,\` V y+} s"� "'a 4 ! I y l hMgr+.'.•�� r,+d w t ry'n✓y" yr pO311Y h .',L i r t t�Y G,,,; I•1"`'' ay "� tl} y N'' `+•.,,, • �, ., _:...y. },Y Y U 1 u ;t.A:&.:-�1Xp,� �'i • 1 y+' fir+ , 1., „ •+ 4Y \ti„, i,', },� • •,• ✓I,"',\,+ra 4 r./ •1?' i, •POW1 s» I, • ,, : ,' ,✓,9-I 'N' ,1..,11 " '''� r'' f' ,• 4,.. 1' i;\•••741` : 14 •^'0'✓ '"' `, `",�' 3 �JM�4 r' • ,, 1'J"`'.4•. ''.:17'."••••,44,''''',,;„.•.14,;4';''',, "t4�1'.,,,, w.; 'Y 1,4+'k'': } • 1'' v ✓ • i. . . • 1 , I' PLANNING e " T FOR 4(2.__ _TS �: � RE,gUES - FE� (1 t i t,� i I DATE: Februa 4 1993 1 6 199,3 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR 93-gaol SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION r' • SCE 93-0001 CUB FOODS SUPERVALU (NPO #4) 1) Site Development Review Planned , Development Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an ` approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi- i' tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. . • 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested ' from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sign Code. Exception approval is requested , to allow 2.8 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined, height of 42 feet to be distributed' between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exception approval is requested to allow a combined sign area of 280 ae r tare feet for the two, two-sided signs whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be permitted. i,,' APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development Review: Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Deemelopment Review: Code Section 18.80,120; •. Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; Sian Code Exception: Code section 18.114.145; „ Other related Code Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, . 18.108,, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmouth Street r and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 2S1 1BA, tax lots 100 and , 101) ZONE: C-G(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C•-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, , I ' professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real eat ',e, and h business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail i1 sales, and., single family residential units among other uses. (,'ri Attached is Site Plan and applicant's stateme for• your 'review. prom , ,•, the S` Pl nt ` information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other fL. information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared i and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If y ou wish l , to comment on this applicatio n, we need your comments omments by y Feb. 16, 19 93. You ma Y - use the s pa ce provided below or attach a separate letter to r e turn your comments. noted below with your comments . r e writing es contadt If you are unable to res d by the :above date, please phone the staff Y mments and confirm your comm�,nts in soon ° p you any � . possible. If ...ou have an questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard i: Planning Department, PO Box 23391, 13125 SW Nall Blvd., ,Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: I '' 639--4171 i STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer PLE SE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:' We have reviewed the propose./ and have no jedtions to it. 1 p p nd have ob. e Please contact of our office. — 4'" 'Please' refer to the enclosed letters . • Wr�.��te n Comments.. 1 ""' 776 :8 :' . ".1" IP .' r', " /live 7 , 4A"i'fr>f, Gpf LrG", N,�I +w Or? z 71/Z's (J!y«.........�.� it ,,,/f I'/ i✓'• /'"1 ST, / f e) [ , C::_01.4112_1_7,, i ''. vAL.,,,,j.,, ,i „.- f2__._____ 1 �. g: q _ Name of Person Commenting: ,���, goikdk.,.. k 2 , Phone number: , ."' k . 0 . % • N REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Co,e � o:� ) ��E DATE: Felaruary 4,, 1893 RECEIVED PUNNING FROM: Tigard Planning Department 1993 RE: SITE DEVELOPMYNT RE! SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR '93-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 93--0001 CU8 OD FOS/SUPERVALU (NPO #4) 1) Site Development Review/]Planned Development Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi- tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center:. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an ' approximately 6,9001aquare foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a • wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sign Code Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Eaecep ion approval is requested to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided signs whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be permitted. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development Review: Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Deyeelopment Review: Code Section 18.80.120; a' Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; S%gn Code Esgeption: Code Section 18.114.145;Other related Code Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots SOU,' 2500, • 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 281 13A•, tax lots 100 and . . 101) ZONE: C-IG(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative services, public) support facilities, ' professional and administrative services, financial, insurance,,- real estate, and business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sa les, and single family r esidential units among other uses: . Attached is the Site. Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared you and a decision will be rendered o�i��the proposal.' in the near future.. If wish to comment on this application, we rieed your comments by Feb. 16, 1993. You may ° , use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. 1.t_you are unable to respond bar the above date, please phone the staff contact • noted below with your comments y ur � � •ing as soon as ossible. If you have any questions regarding this contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO;Box 23397, 13125 SW Ball Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: ? rr Y O f er PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ,ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: Remote/Fill.P stn, is Co µ"N14 +r1 . "^W w M r AWN" tZ `uiw} . tic3, ,C4 Name of Person Commenting: i, > tdiji,1 Phone.Number: _____ y � • iyee RECEIVED PLAANNIN( SET NE) LAND USE NOTIFICATION FORM DIVISION OF STATE LANDS WETLANDS PROGRAM D I 1;�,I C r O � 1 u 19 775 Summer Street NE, Salem, Oregon 9731%7,,,P. ' 1- 260: ::.) 503/378-3805 r • M 1 . Count y: f S IIJ 6- t'6,t0 Local Case File e No. : / City: / C-A. a. 2 _ DSL File No. : ,',.1/u_ ? '3.- oc1.5-7,/ 2. APPLICANT: 1(3w rti-e LANDOWNER: a V /1 _0' 4S arrNer-g4;p name e'� name ; i��7 d i* , �..` r _ j t`i VC. [/q 9 a W. R erNo,S"c G t". # - ' street street _&ae j, e r C2 R /i Q_d7 SctA..) Die .. A .. ,. /,;e7 city state zip city state zip . (5_"3) 3-Is-r 78 --`2 ctbn . phone phone 3 LOCAITIOt : 1 Si 3,.3 c.c- 20a T R S 1/4 Tax Lot(s) 1 3_. c-, 4. NWI quad map name _. , (attach copy with site indicated) Attached: NWI map Parcel map Site plan Other r . �4 SITE INFORMATION: NWI' Wetland Classification Codes) FOI `/`/ Soil Series Name (optional) Adjacent Waterway (if any). In Floodplain? Y N ,4_ . ' Current Land Use k A-A r - . Zoning A- 0-5— 5. PROPOSED ACTIVITY: site plan approval .X subdivision . _,� grading permit planned unit development . use permit public works r building permit other Zone Change to: Project Description: 5 / -- S • s;d - rte er ; _. Cd)A6ALAS±r 0 c±1 0N 'oc e e-t- NA tt e PIA Ar't's o 1 ..,_,_Aems,i f4s A t4 e#t ladvd Completed d by/Contact: ��t D o� ery _ Date r-�`�'` � , Address L3!a. - SW as-L vd • Phone 6..3?--z.//7/ , ( . (Thu form is to be completed only $'Y planning department staff for mapped wetlands) V ' DSL. RESPONSE �� CI emoval-fill permit is required from the 'Division of State Lands. A removal-fill permit Will be required when the development project Proceeds. .<4' A removal-fill permit ; f�11 er`hi7 t tray be required. rmatio,n needed includes:Ca Information s . udes: � � � � � � � � � C -" A wetland determination/'e1iteatio report :4 C) state permit �._._. C3 was issued C3 has been applied fora C No removal-fill permit is required for the described project if/because: .. CI A p permit may be required by Corps of . p red 'y the �� p 9 ��995) '' , comme n t s: Xl.,,,e___ _-_-11_________V /e tA) . .71-lat,ds ./Z.,--.:,(44e4 c4 ,.. .,,,.-.1..-.t'7 ., t...\,.,„ of Engineers �C3�� ..�. w.i Response compl eted by . 1 Date � . f, r, 4' If the project is changed to involve fill or removal from the tretl ands area., a ti state removal-fill permit will be required. 1 1 , • �� �. �,,,. I Via' ,. 1 RE VEST FOR COMMENTS , TO: DATE: February 4, 1993 FROM: Tigard Planning Department REVIEW • ICE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 930002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PDR 93-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 93-0001 CUB FOODlLSUPERVAL NU PO #4) 1) Site Development Review Planned Development Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi- tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an approximately 6,900 square of jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sian Cade c Exeption approval is requested to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exception approval is requested to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided signet n whereas a comb ined sign area of 210 square are feet would normally be permitted. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development Review: Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Development Review: Code Section 18.80.120; Sene�tave Lands Review: Co de Section 18.84.040.D; Sign n Cod e Exce tion: Code Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 7, 2501; portion of 181 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 281 1BA, tax lots 100 and 101) ZONE: C-G(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, and admin� services, professional an i etrative r financial, insurance, real estate, and . business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single family residential unite among other uses. AttaC°'=ied is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From • information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other anfarmation availabl e to our staff,, arep ort and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If yod wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Feb. 16, 1993. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. ' If you are unable to respond to the above date, ;please phone the staff cont,act pi . your confirm your , writing as s possible. Iy ouhaveaquestionsregardngthis matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO BoX 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171 STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer PLE A SE ECK THE F llTEMS TEAT APPLY: We have r reviewed the and have no objections ect io ns t o it. :n• Please contact ,— of our offices Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: WE HAVE ) 2ND AVE.�� SOUTH�� r�.o:� A� 2� •GAS LINE :[CAIN ON � .W. 7 BE WEST SIDE OV THE ROAD SO TK{ ty� THAT((�T IS ON THE T3AYLbI�. 4�LCl.W 0 WE �WILL INVOLVED WITH ANY ,STREET IMPROVEMENTS', PLANS DO NOT SHOW OUR • GAS LINE, SKETCH ENCLOSED ' Name of Person rson Comnenttng: G, SCOTT PALMER Phone Number: 721-244 , / i ` • • • • • • • • Ir • • • ! �,r ` r. ''i. F as '1 /Or • a•,y ,F ',1'�elw d i1'"',1 .tn '�� ''� w:�i� Ir+. 1 II • , Ilk: I (0) rdt 167.0 o�itii� gl— IT"; d. bgt(d)� sett. Itti4' COL U6'tL/ A, GM S'�IL� FLb4 w ►'A&; « + `ti"+ j E E ()Q. 1 Aii Ltd * f� "� i' Q'I Idea f:, —.. 1 ff'�� 1 1 1 • i V 1 1 ( ‘,., ,,,...' . ' tV g Ir+ I 1 • ('''1!■.,,\\"--,,, I 'I F I Y .. i,� i, cry .,ts� M a � • r r�4E . V '"' 1 t w t 1 I I D " t O _ _ ' 8 ._ - _ ` r fl-. 6,4111-2 -60.- -- -4.- - - - - _ -- - . �. _ :. _ - #11990 • - - - - - - 1994 - - --_ - �} tEl . - phis plat is to be used _fog-info ationa - _ a -_ purposes--only — for¢ jcu current and exact r • _ €ocati location of u -faci sY._ - r - t4 L L BEFORE SOU DIG" - . r a :246-66_99 Aster is 325- - Sale€ - - 585-6G 7 6 Li c. Cty. -__994-2111 t - Eugene 342-6676 Clark--Co, -:696-4848 (77) �4D 112120 az.4 fix* * F- - Ir . , __ ._ _ . ': pii.:1//46. - _ ,.. _ . - ., ,_..,......,.. ....,...., r-.....,..._i. ,,. ,. .. _..__. ...,,.LL•..,u. ......,«u.-w:.,M..., .....M.»,,....,„...,.,._..,. ,..,...._..,••........._..- 4.W,,.•,.. ._....,»wu_. ,..,... ..w--..,..vr=4.....,,..�":'..,�: 'a:=.i»:,r...,. . i RECEIVED • , RE UDST FOR. COMMENTS N�� DATE: February 4. 1993 g "O IVVV FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR 93-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTIOPT . SCE 93-0001 CUB FOODS/SUPEYVALU (NPO #4) 1) Site Development Review/Planned Development Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a wetland. A separate application,for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sian Code Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the ° Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exction approval is requested' to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided signs whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be permitted. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development Reviews Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Development Review: Code Section 18.80.120; Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; Sign Code Exceptions Code Section 18.11.4.145; Other related Code Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 2S1 1BA, tax lots 100 and A 101) ZONE: C-G(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative, ser'vicese public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single family residential units among other uses. Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. Prom information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered oh the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Feb. 16, 1993. You may us e h 4 space � the pa e I rov�.ded below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If vi are unable to respond bar' the above dater please phone the staff contact ' noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as you have any questions g g matter, contact the Tigard ' possible. If n yest�,ons re as.^dLn this Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: ° 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITE We have reviewe op salTanddPha:, o objections to it. ` d� the proposal leaven ecti Please contact of our office. 1 , Please refer to the enclosed letter, Written Comments: • .w"jdAv . Name of Person Commenting: ” Phone Number: 6:3)L--1 .rw. • n • lrtdt .p' 1 • • r y r.a REQUEST FOR COMMENTS A • TO: � � DATE: February 4, 1993 _ w. FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR. 93e0602 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR 93-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 93.-0001 CUB FOODS/SUPERVrArm (N'PO #4) 1) Site Development Review`P1med Development Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery Store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the oenter. • 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdiction a:' wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 2.5 foot development setback from a wetland. lea separate application for wetland modifications iS being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Simon Code Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the ;• Code would normally,allow a total combined, height of 42 feet to be distributed • between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exception approval is requested ° • to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet, for the two, two-sided signs whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be permitted. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development Review: Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Development Review: Code Section 18.80.120; Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.0.40.D; Sign Code Exception: Code ' Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, ' 18.108, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest co rner proposed Street , and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600� . 2500, 2501; portion of 151 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 2S1 1BA, tax lots 100 and I. 101) ZONE: C--0(PD) (General Commercial,' Planned Development) The C--G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single family residential units among other ::.See. Attached is the Site Plan and applicant s statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other . information available to our Staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near ,future If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Feb. l6, 1993. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to res and b the above date, please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and Confirm your comments in writing aS Boon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter. contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tiga;:'d, OR 97223. PHONE: • 639-4171. ■ STAFF CONTACT: ferry Offer PLEASE We have l�reviewed lthe xproposal Tand Phave no objections to i contact Please contact � � of our Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: �. Ur M'` Y _ Y� ICY C`X Vii `LV�.0 M.�u�.�ua b G1 vim- + `�^+ `� 56.443.4j CVO, 4 ' M.�. AL441. 41i.r 41-t-t�`i/M"+w1, �Y�++V+' i � !r'�� r!"M✓ t ri Name elf Person Commenting. Phone Nu • • • RE O UEST 2FOR COMMENTS TO:'' h¼i („ TQ 1 C., DATE February 4, 1993 - FROM: Tigard Planning Department R82 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR 93-.0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REV/ W SLR 93-0002 SIC1V, CODE EXCEPTION' • SCE 93-0001 CUB FONDS SI]�PERVALU (NPO #4) 1)�Site Development Review/Planned pg ela mnt Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an " approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi- tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store !' • has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center„ r 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an r approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a }r wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) ,Sign CodelAmption approval is requested �' v ° to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the " Code would, normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exception approval is requested .' to allow a combined Sign area of 280 square feet for, the two, two--sided signs } whereas a combined sign area of 210, agaare feet would normally be permitted. l APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development Review: Co aunity Development Code Section 18.1,20.180; planned. Development Review: Code Section 18.80.120; Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; Sign Code Exception: Code ` ' Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapters' 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of proposed SW' Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 151 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, � " 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 251 1BA, tax lots 100 and s 101) ZONE: C--G(PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C--G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single family residential units among other uses. Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From , information available to ourastaff, a report and recommendation and from prepared e other �, supplied by p agencies er information will be �r r and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Feb 16, 1993. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. t' . If,you are unable to xeemnd ry the`.above date, please phone the staff contact ' possible. your comments confirm your this matter, contact the Tigard noted below r ' Po you 9t' questions regarding � r g - Planning Department., Pb Box 23397, 13125 SW Ball Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639x-4171. STAFF CONTACT: 4I'err Offer PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING IT ENu THAT APPLY:We have '>uovsewed she Prz._.isal and have no objections to it. ;a Please contact of our office • Please refer to the enclosed Letter. Writ ten Comments: r . r Nattie of PerStdll C:orslxtaientLng 3 :-,u //v45, P hone Number. 7, • r , - ` 1 •. V h . REQUEST FOR COMMENTS, 4.. TO? ._. :i / DATE: February 4, 1993 FROM: Tigard Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 93-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW }{ PDR 93-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 93-0002 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 93-0001 CUB 'OODS/SUPERVALU (NPO #4) 1) Site Develapment Review/Planned 1' Development Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an �. " J approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi- tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. 3. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow pilling of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and an appriaximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a ' wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sign Code Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth,Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed , . between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exce ti pon approval is requested allow a combined sign area of 280 s to all g square feet for the two, two-sided signs whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be.permitted,. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Site Development Review: Community Development Code Section 18.,120.180;' Planned Develoment Review: Code Section 18.80.120; Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; Sign Cone Exception: Code ' , Section 18114.145; Other related Code Chapters 11L62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108` and 18.114. LOCATION: Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) (WCTM 151 36DC, tax ;Lots 600, 2500, 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, taxt, lot 2000; portion of 2S1 1BA, tax lots 100 and • 101) ZONE: C-G(PD) (Generate Commercial, Planned Development) The C-G(PD) zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and • business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single family residential units among other uses. %, . Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other • information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared • and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish `. to comment on this application, we need your comments by Feb. 16,, 1993. You may , , . use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If o' are unable .to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact k, noted below with your contents and confirm your comments in writing as soon as s, Ppossible. If your have any questions Bh3.vd.matter, contact 97223 the Tigard lanning ►apartment, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Tigard, 639 -4171. i■ STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Oi;,fer • ■ PLEASE W41HECit THE e have reviewed the proposal and 'have no objections to it. Please THAT APPLY: : ha Please contact to c .. of our office. the enclosed letter. : . Written Cc'Imentai * * . 2 ' ...4—,,u i f " �� N�' i ( � . .� l„ *"5f .:. r' . ? z,ed . .. ,' } .r J, C Ll, � ”' .0 `'M I. �44'.4.."d'( d�.i „: .;p,.,n� .0"K^"' �.u..u+/ .[��w.��'JI,,t' '...., lt, '`""`_ ..�' ''.�w(;.:�_«u;�.✓'" �1Ji'. ''' ,,(�G.'' / 1,0 #2�"�''`. ) • 2 e of Person Commenting; Pkioisie Number: "e`. � � � � � � � � � �� � � � i 4 a - .,b • • ., , , . .., ,. "`iii!:. . a n.. ,.. ,u 4 .. A ..lei�«. 7, .. .....i . � � � � GORDON E. DAVID 10'201 h,''rl:OR BUILDING,SijI I E 555 c ,• POS1 OFFICE BOX 877 PORTLAND,OL EGOI'J 97207 , `5O3.248 1185 r • ' �j Y' r I r.: !1. .r ,t ,. .I #,• J 'h iii 2'I' .. F. t • ` • r 1 t 1 ).� .rte' '• - ,' .. ••• , ,r • • ;00111gitt 431 • mod.. PROPER 1? DEVf L CPMFNT SERVICES February 1, 'i 993 k!. PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTING C IV � P 11 Si RAI LOIC PLANNING I X1 District E��n in eer Q ' 4f ATTN:CENP PX01®E RP -f 7 �1 Box 2946 F l ., �" 1 P' r OR 97206-2946 • Portland, Division of State Lands 775 Summer Street NE Salem, OR 97310 Greetings: • On behalf of SuperValuu Stores, this application is submitted for a wetland fill permit on an isolated• I • wetlands of approximately 6,900 square feet. The wetlands are adjacent to but isolated from Red Rock Creek, a tributary of Panne Creek, in the City of Tigard, Oregon, The enclosed application contains: A u completed application form U vicinity map ;�y�• • u mitigation plan map at 8 1/2" x 11 u supplemental narrative to the application • u wetland delineation report u mitigation plan report u list of adjacent property owners der proposed mitigation requirements We feel confident that our,prop ' irk n plan will meet your req � rr�ents as we have • consulted State Oregon Department rtment of Fish c�on�ulted with representatives of the Division of �"t�ite lands and the ire on �e a and Wildlife, In accordance with the instructions in the a iic .f+on materials, no application fee is enclosed, It \ pp same. We look forward t your prompt there is a fee, please notify immediately and I will rig�tT�: fo o • attention to this. Please do not hesitate to call If you have any « ions, glnoerely, • Gordon E, Davis, for SuperValu Stores r r • • • • , r it I r , 4 n I r. r I I I . r I Wetlands Mitigation d Compensation .P I . ,, I CUB roods r4'..Irket r I r I . rr r r . , SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon . For . r Super 1 Stores, Inc. I r , . 3601 State Street r. Salem, Oregon 97309 • I tl •r ,. 1 1E8 Associates 1514 Muirhead AvenuE." Olympia, WA 98502 4 (206) 943-01127 ''.AX (206) 943-27i)1 <r. VebriL.i.ary I. ttt. . I 4 r jI i � t .. I i • .era» 1 .'., Wetlands Mitigation and Compensation Plan For _N CUB Foods Market Site SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon For Super Valu Stores,s Inc.n 3601 State Street Salem, Oregon 97309 by IES Assdolates 1514 Muirhead Avenue Olympia, WA 98502 (206) 943-0127 VAX (206) 943-2791 uary 5, 1993 I' } ■ e 11• n i i i i i ., ri Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction . • . • . • • • . . • • • . . • • • • 1 2.0 Mitigation Concept 2{ 2•1 Component 1 . ,. • . . .' ., . . . • • • . • . . . 3 2.1.1 Grading Plan 3 2.2 Component 2 3 2.2.1 Grading Plan 6 6 2.3 Component 3 . 3.0 Planting Plan 6 3.1 Components 1 and 2 . • . 6 Table 1 -- Emergent Marsh Plant Species 8 Table 2 Component 3 Plant Species . 10 400 Monitoring and Contingency Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.1 Monitoring Plan • . . ... . . . . . . .. 12 4.1.1 Monitoring Schedule . • . 14 • 4.1.2 Monitoring Reporting . . . . . • . 16 L 4.2 Contingency Plan . , . 17 ,I L ri.T // /.... • n ■ • ai • a { A Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement emen t P tan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 I I 1.0 Introduction Based' on field studies Conducted by IES Associates, two wetland areas were identified on the proposed CUB Foods Market site located west of 72nd Avenue and east of Red Rock Creek in . . Tigard, Oregon. The lar ger of the two we tlands as sociated with Red Rock Creek is to be left undeveloped in the construction plans for the property. I I The second wetland is a small, 6, 900 square foot, o isolated wetland in the west-central portion of p the site, that was cleared during the initial clearing of the site and would I be filled during the p pro o ed development.el op vent. (See Wetlands Delineation, Evaluation and Im pa ct Analysis Report, IES Associates, 10/26/92) . To compensate p e for the losses associated with this s we t an , a Wetland nand Compensation/Enhancement aon �n�ancemext pw l an has s been I designed within the high r eaches of the overflow a rea, along east side proposal corporate � : the e 'de of the creek. The ro is to in two water sources into I . I . a' series of three small pond/emergent marsh areas within the wetland boundary. I I I I I I • I ►e compensation/enhan C em ent area is divided into three ree segments: (1 ) an overflow emergent marsh curtain between the water quality y treatment pond and Component 2 Of the mitigation plan; (2) a series s o. three linear excavated emergent marsh 1 I' I • • • .,v.., ...«w.,lh,.m tl.r.l..._L,._.w.. ...,,y.,.,.....1 rw..r.....1..u.....+,-_.....«.. .n..4.J.._.,.,..w,... .....+.,L,+...x.a._ •.sa,x._..• ._...,.._..+... >...i..,. .,w,-....... .......«w. . ........... ,r.,n...n..... ..-,a+ .- _. ....r.. .- .....,.....,.. i...,,.N... Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 .:. p onds located parallel to Red Rock Creek, between the L . development site and Red Rock Creek; and (3) an area to be planted to a wetland shrub/scrub community to increase habitat diversity. Components and 2 would be 0.38 acre or 2.5 times larger than the isolated wetland to be filled with the development of the site. Component 3 consists of 0.3 acres of an area that will be planted with shrubs and small trees with no grading, tilling or disturbance of the existing system, other than the a. holes dug for the plants. , The combined systems of d sys ems o these three components will encompass 0:68 acres (29, 620 sq. ft. ) or an area 4.3 times larger than the area to be impacted. 2.0 Mitigation Concept The mitigation plan is divided into three components, s each with a significantly different design. Components 1 and 2 will include grading, creation berm e creation and 're-vegetation, with emergent marsh plants and a hydrological connGction between ;f e 'Water the surface run-off treatment system and an overflow connection With Red RoOk Creek. The design of Component 3 is strictly a planting plan showing the placement of different ,p eci es and the size number and spacing of each • `• SS,R WETLAND_PLATING LEGEND 41lai)m ®p''11,' m �. la GaL1L9lI HAYC v,annSNA:E SIZE initlLAIY 'p AL NU *, ���� W� •^r • �+1r. SOFT RUSH IAINWS CTTT15U3 1:100 10• I C? SLOUSI IDLE CA r OtTNUPTA 1300 16• ®11 -, yERnA uxE u11cu3 NEVAOEIl31s 13C0 10 �,yyr,� �i • ', '(2 SUALI-fRi CULRUDN SCRPUS MICROCAnPU9 -. 1300 10• .• o 1 1 .t ., +.� WMATO SAdITARIA I.A1iF0UA 1000 12• �iii7� �j1�► (9 hum-s1EN ewiusN saRM13 Acutus 300 1e' Q-14 AS . ? •�1, ,���r ,\.X•ADU PoNOWEW RotwooETd1'PECnNAn15 : 1DDO 12• �O{y,,V}� 4r�� O0sniA TALLOW sAU%s+1cNEn3l3 1 CAL(3 Ft) so 6 Fr. `i1 �j� y cj N001KA ROSE ROSH NihwJU 2 0At_ 100 3 FT., (14111 rl1► m ..0111 , - ®0V•CK t1AWR10RN CIATALWS 00.3d.A.St 4 FT• 20 , to FL mif�l q�»�1 1 0 1 REV-OSIER aocWCOO caulus stoLaNmtA 2 DAL 60 o FT SCALE: 1" = 201 431 �� g 2 C6 1rJNCEnelY ' LCNICEJIA MbduCRATA 2 CAI. 10 10 FT, !�6 10 FT. �' Q 7 /1A 10 � ,'. OSASKATOON SERNCCrtY AMELANC/At]I/ANiTdNA 4 Ti, 1(.NNE MAPLE 'ACM CRnHAT•U :4 FT, 23 6 FT, 1� /�yL0 (S �, �{ . RW-fLOMMNC Wtn1ANT RICEC,$41dJR1E1)u 2 OAL 13 4 Ft, C ` ^�T �`:r 10 en,c '�: I . • ' 2 CNOKEOCItRY PAWN:N.yCIItlANA Q R, � t0' 6,FT, ��� �� �� 6';• C� wp m F,,•. �,. EXISTING TREES LEGEND �� �, ; , crntMDN 1 � o ,��`D u1,,,�., . , ., �-� .. t ° . . , , , , .. , , , �d, I A9t OREDON A91 �� •�1aTlI�'�� ,I HAIYRKMI OLACK HAWIHOR7! � * , � I�r,7♦•• .,�,g fil YYY... ON....��TF' �''ILAN�NG LEGEND •16 ASH, .p. I onF"H1(��I j,i� �.- srsTEU�',��.�w �i i Efsaimummr. $CJL+ N" SIZE aT dflllIl i (/- 6 WRET�It'1=`•• nAYkood As11 rnM01405 oxrCMPS 11AYWO0300 2•cm-,Bie x'etc. 4:: '111/ RCD SUNSET UAT4t, 'ACCit RU04M'RW SUNSET 2 CM.,U69 ,33'-40'c.c. 6• e'-O OM,3 STC11 10'0.4 •2,'�r. «, ,ilk/M..MAPLE ACCR ClndllAtUN 1 , G�(''Y� w. '.�11 WCSttfN'RW CCOM TRUJA FUCATA �6'-b',,OYd 12'0.0. ` ((.5. ' A C Call •'� OWDitFILC VATilnlllat, ' V10URAM htSCA1U4 1AAAttsa' $4•-30• 6'o,0. ',18 ASH. �� SC ,+' ' JMAntsE HOLLY LC CREMATE'C0111'E1(A' t CAL 4'0.0. ' ,4 �,, \ c t, '� t UU0110 P1Nr. PINUe i4JW VAN, G1 IR'-D1•SPREAD J'«6'o.0. '4• �, IJ� r�� �• • `OL'AECON onA11E '•1A1100 AtAM0UU4 3 CAL ' 4'0,0,. �• - A I ' r'' ••µ xl UTTO IRV:A LAUREL PR6US LAURotralAS*JS'OTTo L01.50',' 16•-24' 3'U.C. 4, T I 1• 4g 'I 1�1�{lIaf �5�l�5 . @ PARNE�'COTONEALIER, COTCNEASTER LACIEU3 2 DAL S''O.C. _ rr• I I •,ITJ1`liti �1%-A G' ' Ra REDT1MD rbOWoco 1 Cd1In)s St0.0NIFtRA 0AILEN' 3'CAL s O.C. 4 �O I 010•11 2, .W' A R EJ, �.r', -D'Rosy dt.ow T,AnaERNY 04Rab[IS niUNDCNdI'nosy oLoYe 5 OAL J'0,C ! . , ffss SNOiwWND;!,,nES sPinEA oulIAIAA 5N0WO0WW 2 OAL '3'0.'• A'�7,�•'+ t€1• a t' A'4'�'•. a.. COCU tEARBERRY CC'IONEASTCR CbiCNEASIER OAMMERI 1 OAL. „ .10" , t� '' 1 E;r , . - k� ItAW®,1lDtl ..,NODt Roth NiloiANA, 2 oAL 3 • �Ak- -e A• b A. A 1 �L`�)...�� '■ ' ' � '� 18 ASH A �. , / �, h r /i., r c EXISTING RUSHES r �•C e, Li �► wAttn WAurr 1,6 •SH 3-i o ASH Ii j 4K � a FACaun uu / x.1. ,�i. 1 0 r�1. ASHM ° w y ,di`l;'i 1�1j� �ItAA l./C tb HAWTHOR, t/Sr A a a ' Acii;"'�,A'/� 0:111 f•II 4 f. 1q HAwtNoR ?�� �•dfi ��r. ��sa' ✓ ,�` �2A ASH w, �"' �.Q '(1,p11 10 a' r . . 1 , ,, , ' . , ,, , 1 q, SW' ' :?;44r. 1,. 4,„ ...., , . ,.. I► k l9r' i111L ASH 4-8 ASH, At 18 s ? /;y,a�j', /� r a4. y�j ; 31 RW t,N'i�t l r / rU e/ .;i3��+rr / 'f' 'rs 41 :*" •#.1, �1 ,�2��11,� I�/! 'I► cal '+` / "" �. °i• �' 5H8+2 2e JN ``~� i� `/ ��IA.�:j �� 1, .•1f�eH �, •/i ASH •:,t Ar0 s n. ..,';+�0: k 1,••-1-.$11.. ,� �•ASH84 ; ,. bi���?�1at•l•I \' 1. cbc�3•"��1) 1 eQ 4'di..0. A.' Ji_/,.,f l y/-� \ �^��`dye "•8+5 •';'4 fell.i '---•., `-� `1t►A .�`',` • fit• ' 42�.,►�e '�' "`.,. '►,a�,�`r.�► .�•• ' ii awE +w►4�,>r, (a�ti�r ►$ ., ` ;a ,;,�'':•.t►�,,N0Aito t). VilATE (QUAITY FAGILIT`� iit?' ...'' 4‘. " ! ,'';M7., `' ' SINGLE CELL TREATMENT WETLAND) •�Will 1� vti� ,1,..,, le 0' e ,h.. ,-4,.....,,,,..-=', :� taw :iiJ - i• . 1 u i ^,;msµ= ,• ,�5�, 1 1 N '` U y tE`1 h`� *p pt4:..,. ,....„„w„_,,..:,,, , ,, , . T "rr �=---.`-- ., . ,i00-7,., C tilt 9 � •,I 'mow ' f �--�--_ >,u as Yl t!'1'_ tA 7` t ild l rr �'C1 A1itJl�i LA1'1 . , Pb4'WA (Cat 6iATk f711 gT,9MLEl l C1F1<C20fl H73flH - 1ei 640. t; !{0-ot27 v� !�!'�d91)8 .ter {� ,» ., Tao OLAN•,t1140 PLAN ; :>1 . '""'"'► l criii'aF itAiid,bpr_• 1 • `off•. Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site { February 5, 1993 2.1 C®m oxxe n�t Component ; 1 consists of the integration of the sub- surface and surface water collection area to Component 2. Water leaving the water quality treatment facility will • discharge from a point near the north end of the facility onto a flat, wet emergent marsh/grass area, extending for approximately 210 feet, from , north to south along the west side of the water quality pond berm. A wet grass/emergent - u , marsh combination will be densely planted in this area to stabilize the area and reduce erosion. The planting scheme for this area is the same as designed for the area directly west of the wa ter quality ponds and east of the surface ace �ater • sWa1e, connecting the northern-most pond to th e two southern most ponds of Component 2. 2.1.1 Grading Plan The Grading and Planting Plan exhibit is provided by Alpha Engineering, Portland, Oregon (Exhibit 1 and back •.. sleeve) : 2.2 Component 2 Component 2 is the main emergent marsh portion of the . mitigation/compensation plan, It consists of three isolated , depressions, paralleling the east side of Red Keck Creek. Pond 1, the northern-most pond, lies north of the retained ned emergent marsh (( s ush wetland and and due west of the 3 • nil • lav. , • Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 • ..1 retainin g wall. It has a deep water component at elevation 1) 1.68, grading up to elevation 174. It is connected to Pond 2 through °a linear swale leaving the south end at elevation 173 and extending along the west face of the development site and the water quali y treatment pond dike. P ond 2 is linear from northeast to southwest, with its deepest elevation at • elevation 167, i.e , 5 feet below ' surrounding surface elevation. Water collects in this pond and then flows westerly into Pond 3, which is a similar depression with a bottom elevation of 165 for a maximum depth of 5 feet The water leaves Pond 3 in a linear pond/ depression that extends westerly to Red Rock Creek. Pond© d 1 is fed by an 8-inch pipe flows continuously, yr draining the groundwater seeps (that exist on the project site) to the east This flow runs 'continuou l . year-round � y n.a d runs near full during the winter months. Water will fill Pond 1 and maintain , - component center that has an open water com anent �rx the c an approximate surface 1 pp� xmate see� �area ��of� 600 sq. feet. As water elevation rises, water will flow southerly. The slopes of Pond 1 are 3:1 'to p rovid e a g radual slope and growing area for emergent marsh plants. During high storm periods, Water may 1 overflow th pond, directly' to the west, where it will sheet flow through Com p onen t 3 in an e xisting grass wetland area into Red Rock Creek. �' i as it discharges to the south �' eelk The water, s g in the grass-lined swale, will overflow in a gradual sheet- flew, across the e xist ing rush wetland area. This water will ro replace � seep he Wa er th a t historically fed this area from , • the east. There will be an increase in frequency, duration and vol ume o flooding into this area over what existed sted 4 • • I Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 : . previously.. This should modify, the area slightly and increase the potential for the wetter tolerant species that are mixed , - with the softrush, to expand and provide greater habitat [`` diversity. 4 L_ When water reaches Pond 2 it will form a small open-water ,.. pond of approximately 1200 sq. ft. surface area and 4 foot depth. With the dense clay soils on site, water should stay . in both Pond 1 and Pond 2 for significant periods of time, I.- When water reaches elevation 171, it will overflow to the east into f IPond 3. As the water flows into Pond 3, it will fill a small depression with an approximate 800 sq. ft. surface area, to a depth of 4 feet, before it will start to overflow. During , peak flows, when the ponds reach their maximum depth prior to discharge, Pond 3 will exceed 4 feet in depth. }"+ stops spring, or the le�te�, of r o flowing in the s t I When water Mops aw g � p g, water where discharges from the water y, decreases to the point where di�schar �es p quality treatment and and from Pond 1 are no long reaching � ' I Ponds, 2 and 3, the ponds will drop in elevation to the deep water areas, which will maintain open water or wet emergent marsh areas , ,� �'� � � becaUse of the ' s for significant of time bec dense clay soils and high water e1, '1 ; o a t I Wetland anon and Compensation/ , ' tld Mit , I � I Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site , I. February 5, 1993 ' 2.2.1 Grading Plana • I I h • I I I I i iV, Wetland Mitigation Grading and Planting Plan exhibit is provided by Alpha Engineering, Portland, Oregon (See Exhibit 1.., 1 and back sleeve) . 2.3 Componaent 3 I Component 3 consists of shrub/scrub plants surrounding I ' Component) 2 wetland ponds. The purpose is to provide r` diversity, cover and a physical/visual separation between the wetland p and units and Dartmouth Road to the south, and also I between the ponds and the development to the north and east. 3.0 Planting Plan • i I I I I 3.1 tom ®naem�t s 1 and 2 � The entire area will be over- seeded with a grass mix as soon as grading is completed. The intent is to stabilize the area and create a dense enough root mass to compete with the expected .,.eedll canarygrass P r3' invasion of arundnacea ) ; ". and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens) . 4 � I • s. .. that have a diversitlr �.es 'I'h: mix, include spec _ The graces will uric u' of < rowth patterns, being able to survive extended f looding for as well as extended periods of dryness. •. or durationsy ' a need Species common to the area, even thou h not necessarily native ► pecies m�pn �;�g I f I J II I i 1. I I QQ{{ 1' .,. ..:.... ..n i.. .. ,.,. :.r,I.•... ,.:_, . .. ..,.. i 0 i.... u. .,a.,I...• .•. ... .. t Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 t a to western Oregon, are incorporated to provide that growth. The grass mix will include: Redtop Agrostis albs 25% ; Red fescue Festuca rubra 25% Oregon bentgrass Agrostis oregonensis 25% • Meadow foxtail , Alopecurus pratensis 10% Common velvet grass Holcus lanatus 10% Perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne 5 a l� The entire area will be seeded at a rate of 100 pounds to 1 ti.-:e acre. The site will be fertilized with a 10--10-10 organic fertilizer mix and over-planted with Annual ryegrass (Latiurx mul tifl oruzn)I at 20 pounds to the acre. �I Depending upon the time o f construction, the area may be ` � �� � � ; required to have intermittent to stimulate growth of the grass species. If the work is completed late in the i fall,���a� single watering, shortly after construction (using a water truck), may be sufficient to force the grasses to germinate , I If an irrigation system is to be installed, the emergent f' marsh planting will occur during grass seeding. However, if A , ` it is late in the season, the planting will wait until the • beginning of the rainy season. Emergent marsh plants ��will be �„ planted on 12 to 18 inch centers. �" � � A mix of sun tolerant species with high biofiltration I and micro-organism habitat I r- values, have been selected. These are indigenous to the area, in • with portions ��h p ns be', g hardy in�rad�srs in I�et areas. � The� speoies MiX is included in Table 1. I: I E I I I I si, , I; 4 I . ' l II iii, i ') e b t W o 0 r •M • • • Wetland Mitigation and Compensationyl I. Enhancement Plan t CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 _ Table 1 - Emergent Mars h Plat y.I t S e c i e I s • 1D # Common Nan Scientific Name Number Spacing ' (Soft rush Juncus effusus 1500 18", 1 (Slough sedge Carex obnupta 1500 18" (Sierra rush Juncus nevadensis 1500 18" 2 ,- Small-trt bulrush Scirpus microcarpus 1500 18" (Wapato Sagittaria latifolia 1000 12" • • (Hard-stem bulrush Scirpus acutus 500 18" (Sago pondweed Potamogeton pectinatus 1000 12" Small-fruit bulrush,: Wapato and slough sedge will be planted into Pond 1 along with the grass mix. Soft rush, I a . slough sedge and .Sierra rush will be planted into Pond 2 and 3. Hard-stem bulrush will be planted near the outlet of Pond • 3 and in the over-flow channel that leads to Red Rock Creek. The outer, periphery along the west edge of Pond 3 and the • a south edge of Pond8 1 and 3 will be planted with a shrub • community to provide al shrub/scrub wetland component. Wet . ` slow growing shru bs have bee n chosen to reduce the possibility a ibilit Y of the plants over-taking and eliminating the potential of the emergent marsh vegetation t o thrive and function as propO�e d• r •, 1 • The existing vegetative e compo sition along the creek, both throU h the property pp andl south f thel ropex`ty we � 't0+ the sore o property, r examined to identify those t species 'Which were f richi. o ning readily in this area and to determine their groWth patternS. I , } • I I : I Y 'p • 1. V +, Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ ; . `0 Enhancement Plan `r, CUB Foods Market Site \ February 5, 1993 Based on this analysis, the following plant species were s selected for this area ID # Common Name Scientific Name Size Number Spacing' 4 Sitka willow Salix sitchensis 1 gal 30 6 ft 5 Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 2 gal 180 3 ft The combination of the plants will be mixed to provide a L . I dense, low hedge effect along the edge. of the wetland/ponds. 3.2 Component 3, Component 3 consists of a shrub/tree/plant combination to buffer, the wetland from the proposed Dartmouth Road, from the 1` north end of the development and to provide a transition from �. . the creek into the emergent marsh mitiation/ compensation 1 area. Due to road height and visibility constraints, specie 1 composition consists of plants that are lower growing trees or medium-to- low growing shrubs. The list of plants is included r 1's • as Table 2. 1. 1, q r' s' Y 1. r 1 3i 9 a tY J....., ........ ..rx ... ,........,. .1ar ' .. nq V ` tiu. ' .,.-., _._a,n___ ..u..s,...A.....x,.n..uq.-x«+.,....,_..,.Mw,«.. ,,, ,__. __...•_, . .-,I+w... ....»ir,. JI ., _ .__t.,.. x,.«,.,. -,_.,. . _,. . .,. c_,._-. __,., _ . .. ... ,...ul....n♦ .+«» - ' i I . Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 . r Table 2 - Component 3 Plant Species ID # Common Name Scientific Name Size Number Spacing 6 Black hawthorn Crataegus douglasii 4 ft 20 15 ft. • 4 Sitka willow Salix sitchensis 5 ft 20 10 ft. ‘ L 7 Red-osier dogwood Cornus stolonifera 2 gal 60 6 ft. . # 8 Twinberry Lonicera involucrata 2 gal 10 10 ft. , L 9 Saskatoon Aamelanchier serviceberry alnifclia 4 ft 6 10 ft. . . 10 Vine maple Ater circinatum 4 ft 25 6 ft. . 11 Red-flowering , currant Ribes sanguineum 2 gal 15 4 ft. 12 Ch ec he��� Prunuu s iir g x niana 6 ft 10 6 ft. . 10 I r 777 . • I • I I K .41 4:14 ie o r ' ti �{ • v Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan • CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 I_ plant 1 n pt species will be multi-stemmed. Potted plants will have been potted for a minimum of 6 months prior to planting. All plants will be subject to inspecti (IIIM I. Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site 1 February 5, 1993 I4.0 Monitoring and Contingency Plan 1.. 4.1 Monitoring Plan A three year monitoring program will be established for the mitigation site. It will, be initiated' when the grading and first ' IF year planting are completed. At the completion of construction and planting, a Time-Zero ,b Report will be completed by the contractor and the wetlands . consultant, i.e. , design biologist. The Time-Zero Report will identify probe ms in obtaining materials; differences of sizes of materials than were originally called for; replacement materials; Iif necessary, and any other conditions that varied from the restoration plan. At the initiation of the Time-Zero ' � e ero �e ort a� �series of permanent photo points and vegetation measurement plots will be 11 es.tabl The photo points P p s wall be designed �to give a kg representation of the entire site during each stage e ` of the I monitoring �� � �noni 'ng ��program.�����,� Photo points will be established with permanently marked stakes An instruction sheet, with the ` and numb k . will phi�tagrapl�s to bed taken w`yl�. p direction number of � be provided 4 to allow continuity if the monitor changes over the years V� ee geQation p lots will be established in each � one o� the habitat types to i in Y'p'° provide �cons steno` in the quantitative measuring of each 'plant. ' ots in the'emergent pl �p � �� � gent '�marsh areas will be f.')µve fe®t di counted within diameter, , with and in a h al�� plants measured an thin .the five- - 410 IL , Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan ' CUB Foods Market Site . February 5, 1993 } 741, foot plot and identification of general conditions in an area 30 feet in diameter surrounding the plot. Thirty foot diameter plots will be established in the [ ) shrub/tree area. Species composition and percent of total cover and canopy cover will be measured at each point. In addition, 1 invader species that were not planted will be noted and their , density recorded. Records will be kept of non -native invader , species, particularly reed canarygrass. At the point where a noxious invader species becomes dominant, a contingency plan will be initiated to take this into consideration, Planting locations of species proposed in the mitigation plan have been selected based on anticipated pond and groundwater levels. The success of plantings will be dependent upon the 2 maintenance of these anticipated water levels and limited disturbance in the maintenance of the retention/detention pond. Monitoring of hydrologic conditions in the created wetland r' will consist of observations of pond elevations and seasonal f inundation of the wetland plantings. T p .y I.� � � � � ndat�.on p� g . phis will be accomplished b the establishment ment of a monitoring schedule allows _ ; �; ,�h edule that allow. the monitor to be on site during the non-growing season } } ,F i �F . 9: wur , I'd . u f n At • .. ,. •I I Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan cum voua$ mar et mx tom - February 5, 199 4.1.1 Monitoring Schedule ti Year 1: Year 1 consists of the growing season following the first year of construction. �p Y I The first � �sxte visit will be conducted at green-up, approximately mid-May, to determine the initial survival of the , shrubs and trees on the site. It will include a plant-by-plant ( inspection with a notation of any species which, appear to be stressed, dead or delayed in initia3 growth. Photos will be taken of the site per the established photo schedule, which will be fV, created at the initiation of the Time-Zero Report. ,. II A second site visit will be in approximately mid-June to check germination growth of the grass and sedges and to evaluate the need for first year emergency irrigation. If at that time, it is . � determined by the monitor that the area is not receiving sufficient water to provide adequate germination and initial growth, a Itemporary irrigation system will be established. The irrigation system a system from well community stem uCSU s���be temporary pipe cyst a or a ��com7m� , .ter system or water brought in by, tank truck, depending on the estimated amount and frequency of watering required and the , 1 plot surveys will o be resources available. Photos and also completed at this timed IThe third sits visit will occut in early to mid-August, depending On weather c ondxtio r.re T the summer r is extremely mell hot, �i� the earlier in the season;visit will occur ea Whereas if it is a cool , er the visit will the towards the 'end ' of August. The 11 � � � town {{ purpose of t his visit will be to evaluat e the ab ili ty.,. of the new r, � i1 4 i Wetland Mitigation at�on and Compensation/ n / Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site February 5, 1993 r ' , 1 vegetation to adjust to first year stress and summer heat conditions. " . Site visit 4 will be completed at the end of the growing h,, season. This visit will determine the success or failure of the plants at the end of the first year. At this time, all dead plants ! ' will be noted and recorded.ecorded. This information will be supplied to 'the planting cont~rac�tor, 'for revegetation e�tation during the' dormant w�•nter g � 9 I , 0 period. ,,7_, [ f. I I. toward the latter part of Alast site visit will be conducted p December, or at the end of a major storm event, if one should occur, to evaluate the hydrology and the relationship of the high water to the vegetative communities. It is anticipated that it will not be possible to take certain photographs at this time p however, these will be supplemented with water level photographs and general photographic coverage to document conditions during the , visit. year 2: Year 2 will consist of three site visits. a 1 , i r The site visit will be ,n the spring,e first site will during s i.e. ,e during ' - I green-up, to evaluate over winter success and to inspect plants ,,,; 0 " that were le-planted during the dormant winter season as part of e revegetation th construction contract. II I second site, visit will be completed "n raid-summer to 1 ' mpletc i , .; evaluate suimimer growth characteristics and revegetation and to _ ~ tics a monitor oundcover and canopy performance ' I '" the r �' per the performs" eano cover standardsa f 15 � ` I r ., 0/ 1 , Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site € .• 1 February 5, 1993 , A A final site visit will be completed at the end of the growing • . , . season to determine summer success. Year 3: Year 3 will include three site visits. Site visits 1: 1 and 2 will be the same as those outline in Years 2, ' u The third visit will be the final visit. At this time, it will be determined by the monitor, with assistance from the y appropriate regulatory agency, whether the site is meeting the performance standards and goals as identified in the Mitigation Plan. If it is determined that the site has met the goals, no additional work will be done. If it is determined that the site 1 has not yet met the goals, a contingency plan meeting will be established between the developer, wetland consultant, contractor, w monitor and appropriate regulatory agency, to modify the project so i ' , it will can the performance standards. This could include additional plantings, replacement of plant species and/or an , extension of the monitoring period. , 4.1.2 Monitoring Reporting Annual monitor reports will be submitted to tho developer anU appropriate regulatory agency by November 15th. The monitoring reports will include photographic documentation for each site , visit, with photo descriptions and a plot-by-plot analysis of the vegetation plots. The repo L, n o-�s. The report will generalise the ' overall ueg p �t conditions" and address the effectiveness of the Mitigation Plan in , ' 1, meeting t he performance scan dards. 16 , - in .a I. y Wetland Mitigation and Compensation/ t Enhancement Plan CUB Foods Market Site , 1 February 5, 1993 , iA final report will be completed by December 15th of final 1 year and will include a summation and final analysis. If at that . time, the performance standards have not been fully satisfied, but ' the monitor believes that the site is viable and growing and that the standards will be met, it should be noted. The final report will be the determination of whether the site is a success and whether the construction bond can be released. 4 Contingency Plan If the created wetland and upland buffer plantings do not meet established performance goals for vegetative cover, plant survival,. drainage and water quality controls, revisions to the plan will be made and implemented. Depending on the problems addressed, activities could include changes in soil or hydrologic conditions and/or the replanting of wetland or upland buffer vegetation. { '• This constitutes titutes a Wetland Compensation/Enhancement Plan by T�s Associates for the Supe r Valu Ma rke t p ro ject located on 72rid , Street, Tigard, Oregon. k• L. Van Wormer Senior Biologist i a. I A ssoc, ates tt r • • \ I Ira , j , 1' •)- .;" , '. . . ., . ' . . , I Evaluation.'o • { and impacts . lysis Report ' H. and , Conceptual mitigation plan ( o£ the Proposed 'Super Valu Store Site �� SW 72nd ,Av►ei ue • Tiga�rdl, C)re� on t for West Coast Grocery Super Valu Stores, Inc. , 3601 state Street PO Box 120 ' .. Salem, OR 9730 1 a; (206) ►43 0127 FAX (21 6) 94$-2/9: 4'$-2 79 , ' be seer 3,' 192 1 , 0 I' w v , ■ O " ' ..,,.«.,,., -..,.i.-•r,t...+..�1•,..-....+.............i.....»....rr..A...o i....1,...»,.i..,...„ :-iru...>... ....,...._.........a:k....r...r.i..u.aw..r., .....�...,....... .. Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction . . . . . . 1 • . Figure 1 Location Map 2 . 2.0 Evaluation Procedures 3 3.0 Evaluation Results . . . .. . . • • . . . • • • . 4 3.1 Site Description . • . . . . • . . • . . . 4 i • • Figure 2 - Site Map !.„ • 5 1' ,, 3.2 Vegetative Analysis . . . • . . . . • . o 6 , i , Figure 3 - Soils Location Map • . • • 9 3.4 Hydrology . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 • 4 0 etlands . •' • • • 0 • • O • . • i i i 4.1 Wetland #1 • • . . • . . • . . . . . • • . 11 1 e 4.2 Wetland #2 e . • . . • . . • . . • . . . • 12 1. Figure 4 - Wetlands/Soil Core Location Map • 13 4.3 Wetland Values • �� . • • . . . . • : 4.3.1 Functional Values . •• • •. 14 4.3.2 (Biological Values . 14 4.4 Wetland Classification . . . i • 0 • . 15 1. Figure 5 - National Wetland Inventory Map • • 16 5.0 Impacts Analysis . . . . . . e . • • • • • 17 . s 6. p tual Mitir ation/Com 18 1. Hi aiiography . . . . • . • • . . . 19 • Appendix A el Forms 21 . f r . r 1, I 1 1 i r ' i i t. p 4.Iw ., �....o.. .r,.x..,.,.... ..,,r l.. .,, ...i. ...,, .�,....,r.,.,• ,.. rr..,e,.•.. .�,.. r..r,n...A.., i " r♦ , r r n n n �. r a.� . r ' e r—A•..v.h....:........w._nx.I...r M.......Al-x. .wr, ♦ r..H...lx_-.u.+ w..ar......-v:.......,...—v....r...u..h. ..._ u..l«....n...l..J......r. xi ...v..... .i...A._i._.,..n ..,._...ra....N.....a.a.. V.... ... an...... .««-rn. ....r.._ .ar..,, r 4 t Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Concept Report Proposed Super Valu Store Site, Tigard, OR I December 3, 1992 4, (. . . 1s o'' Introduction IES Associates was contracted by Super Valu Stores, Inc. to perform a wetlands evaluation, delineation of the proposed Super Valu Store site located west of SW 72nd Avenue, just r, south of a large theater complex in Tigard, Oregon (Figure 1) . r ' i The purpose of the wetlands evaluation was to determine the t' L. functional and biological values of the wetlands and to classify the wetlands using the LAS Fish and W ldl .fe Service classification system and the C��Lty �of Tigard/Oregon State Lands classification system for determining buffer set-backs. In addition, IES Associates reviewed two additional r�e P p an impacts analysis and wetland � studies � and aced mitigation concept for the site. Work was completed on the evaluation of a previous wetlands call made on the site for Super Valu Stores and a review of a wetlands report completed for the city of Tigard by Scientific Resources, Inca (SRI ) for ., the proposed SW Dartmouth Road extension. This extension is 4 I scheduled to cross south end of the proposed project site. independent wetlands IES Associates conducted an p delineation ion the site. a 1 t. i n 'r . \ ; , t IIMINA , � '.. '6Ak/t *♦C•fwl• ;RU 4M .. 7 R .p ( �. M' .., e. d ns l. L A r iaM��'v �.� o. lr n'• M 41 1r4M RI 1 r MET C r w - . 1.:4 tj r ,. m •: iii T • :I P 4! 1 "I' ' Ca +. " • ii 1. .1. , ,c, y►r I 4 • • M • l ♦ c s : ° q i,41 : 1 .`>j b ! � ye« X10 N / SN^I a o a„/'yy.. r e r 1.11 . a` • I \;... '1 .. Z.b� I) 'w �i__' l 1.ti a �: •A. a f 1 � , i ' `` 443„............:� •• ..•ter• b 9 1« .w b a w SI ,; �0lQ A t =•my L. .• tell ! 1 +...•w IP. 'RE!NS1UEHU A�A/ 1 6. At44L! t DTAC .e1,` i:LZ!: •! ,, /•' ,t, 1 lF C , Hillq..1' ►dYIN� 4 r f YLQR {j ;. lIHI: .LL;J , .•y1, • tr . ''o 1' h Yb . Ys L S fl rrb C,, '.•, /11, .. Ni, . ; •.Eti /00 IP 1 4 S,dG i • x!,d�•1'" C� f e Iliuul4 c l ', N {u•,'�, a *• 'r"ti! 44 I�' f`�� ía . r �fjai �, • 11 vim' L •y 41:k;?; A, �' ' ;,, ;; r a I !4A < 1 AL, f 4, b• X� � a ��NTAMO;. i II� ° ° 1, ` B�, 1, I Y `f�',,43'r MC. • N ' �*A �� �M 0/4� �d• • ` r r. w u irx '� •✓` ® ? s 43 "".cc+w..n ..1a'i;I i ;,' . .tr, („y vlrl� ;4 /�� e• 1 � � tl „�t,d i s db 1 4 �.t .1\TIGARD trove , s ∎ A I 101.04d MS11ll'4�r. ;; :c 1 r• /"` ,�f y 1.4' 0 ~' I �'�+os� 1. WI+UdB NILa CI ' / yr i n.A$... j ..... t�d;:: �d °fir .!N i \:q I �., '111MX 44C" t 4,O �IA ';',.ICI 1 MFM �fi eP �� nisi law 4,G it 4140.0`i• Y.W.0 eW 4 N t-- Q as .. ,,,„,,,„i ...--- ,ae la---MlAUiiiit ''dD.,».........,.... l�r i 14011 •f di x .1 BIW � .., T l •.AN`dn 'I.li at S. �►� CI' • b'Idaa 1A. u. 1 4. „C Ii eed bb Ab:algal LA�i r .I,,LCI a ;.,�/, --^�� t, • bitSe Ibtti M ei 4� AkI P/e1'YNIl(At 441411" pW fir'' i t(Nf/1}B- . ApA� ,r ' �4�W it•...i4111 . S • 4, ; \ '6e ti:L :I H •UUk w 1' �641,/i)0 . yp"'" ,,► 1 j , ,.. iini.g!Iiir el l .1 �► btlawAbl .....� at/UdMgUW fLf�+'�r. , p 0 a IASISIslis 1, r iCNlcii A '!W usilSO a ST +^ I laiNYA..,,:1NN tie IN.H[I � ��}1 ism C1 �` yi /.''lA UiW .L MAA4INA t :IC nApl4Ylsab � � 1 ei lObl iA Ld ro BJMAjrra�. 1 �• y I • PL ON tleJy Lt. ..f.Aii IT � Y. . r' ij V AlIK a I. �eN . +1• e A ; 1 . t,. t S i 0,4 • »,. dU11�/A!llU• • et �i '�re... V x OAS Ilblxb(', ` a INw al•th t; M• ,4a• ; ' N c ILA7.,.IU r ♦ - y }' I�Mi 0h11 I 1 Cl "' 9 W Aii iV M !% rAUNt111A 1r M O.• Al, It.► hW anNpk 'i'' '� S. it tiuMd"i'.• ∎r I ISA A44 rti?,o11N1 M 'W d i ' $bll � o, } ti IRIi � w s x . ! •stm to , '! 14. •N WSthl 14 a l 1 t hb w � � - ' � 1��• b olio:i X • 1' 2.. . ' 4.41-'44'1 't.,k t:'d"V° 0. ' Oh i ) 4' i ` i</):1, ,! .:. , . w Y+i4h11,1W +./,,..V ,f s. .. '''' 1$4A KL. "y.mrrr..osb•wa.r ., ,• .. .... -, ... ........ ... .-:-_. '' '.__ , il' ru..e�ie+w ,.... .. .... u•iiwiii+nw'.. ..., .. .. -.. ,. IES Associates Locatin Mai w ' i , • .Iuirhea �y �a�, " ...• ., 1 .✓ 6,�► � � lea sr�y b r Y. Alt ,I V ,S liar o 1 ' r yr x ,t Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and lmpaci s Analysis and ' Mitigation Concept Report ! rProposed Super Valu Store Site, Tigard, dR December 3, 19 9 2, �` 4 3.0 Evaluation Results ' // 3.1 Site Description rqp The project site consists of a large block of property °=1; lying between Red Rock Creek on the west and SW 72nd Avenue on ; ,.. the east. The property has had the buildings removed and has ' , been cleared, with some limited 'grading to remove vegetation in preparation for construction. There is a theater complex ° north of the property, north of SW Duvall Street. In the ' southwest corner, there is a proposed SW Dartmouth Street extension crossing of Red Rock Creek. To the south of this r ( area, there is a nursery on the east side of the creek and l' undeveloped land on the west side of the creek. f` ,,, Red Rock Creek is bordered by a narrow tree and shrub ;, A, . order and is a narrow vertical-sided channel, averaging , approximately 4 feet in width throughout the site. LI r {: . ,f y G . I i ii 1 , 1, `I - 2-- • Palmer Acres . - _ - `r ..- ._. toy •- -S Dartmouth Street('r�per�e _ -.s 7 ---wi,,,_ ..,- . 4, ,IN 49. -.: ._ in,_ , - .114 04,04.\- .i:. _ to - 1. .-4 !et e,@ , a __ _ 772 rwe.A,„ - eze, = - - • W0/0-0,„. _7 -41::'1%.**---,„,„,,,„ i . , 4-4tis ass/ =__ _ , B� 8als Cr -we -- e a�®�$ NN .. - - 1----C--4--- -"----t i ' .. :- era 3 - - _ I- i �- X - at I . 1 . a . , . . . . , _ _ .-.,- . . 1 r... ,;: 1 i .r.,.._ _ _ i p., _ _ ,-..........._ • , , 1� r. 1.• .. ! M ............... ........•«, „r.. ._ ...d!.t.,.m,.,...1...,r-«„m...,.sr..,. .w,. ....x.�..t..........,..,....w..lMiu r4....,.«l„ .....x.......11.x,.....,r ...w�...1�+nrw...«:1,..,,.+.r-�..r.«.-r..r...�........N w...J.,.w........-,.»,.�lw.N.k..,r........a......hl l.�,r.4. .. .,xx 1_...n!•,. «aN,._t.,_ .,........,..,. „ .. « r • • • A... • tl'illgi IES Associates Wetland Line I :0 . . 1 . A. RED ROCK CREEK/WEST PROPERTY Some 1"=100' • � F Theater Complex X p le 06 • Cq • g , i d all s , • h• 'i i .4: , uVall S t f 1;.‘i"r"..'''''''''''.."..""' • ea b• 0 •• r j W O 1 • p� p�� e��q 4i/d 4�1qd�� pr"`Y r 1 G"a CPS! Ci r 0 / . 1 > ( • • C r--- 1 i ., . . ., . 1 1 1 --.0"—ela 1 ,' . ' . r air.1 rd ttli pi 41:) • , ti 1. i �'' #, ' I. • Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Concept Report Proposed Super Valu Store Site, Tigard, OR ' . December 3, 199 • 3.2 Vegetative Analysis , The border of Red Rock Creek supports a Oregon ash (Fraxinus latif'oli.a), red alder (Alnus rubra) and black hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii) canopy that is wider near the .__.. but becomes a single, scattered . north end of the property, g � tree border throughout the length of the property until it •.._ r the south end. At south out caches t the sou h end it� widens oi.��,. again o The understory along the creek border .; predominantly ; • Himalayan blackberry and cut-leaf blackberry (Rubus : lacin atrks) , snowberry (Syznphor.icarpos albus) and Noc tka rose (Rosa nutkana), with clusters of hardback (Spiraea doug1asii) . The grass meadow edge along the east side of the creek has wet vegetation, including field horsetail (E'quisetum arvense), creeping bentgrass (Agrostis palustris), Baltic rush (Juncus bal ticus), Canada mint (Mentha ar'vensis) and three- i. stamen rush (Juncus ensifo11us) » 3.3 Soils According to the Soil Survey of Washington Counter 44.egon ' Jul.. 19 82 there. are three soil types on th p ( July )j yp e property. The � :nant soil type to 72nd Avenue is t rloma �.�. t adjacent ''nd. ��,� Quatama loam, 3 to 7 percent. The area bet ween the u a�ama loam an d a narrow Aloha�;. .., g silk loam. There is a corridor along the creek is � TY� I, . . narrow band of 11uberly silt loam along the east side of the creek that extends across the creek onto a flat plain. " y 4. Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis a n d Mitigation Concept Report Proposed T:p7r9.9V2alu Store Site, Tigard, OR IDecember The Aloha series consists of somewhat poorly drained soils formed in alluvium or lacustrine silt on broad valley terraces. In a typical cross-section, the top 8 inches is a ` � � dark �brown ( 10YR 3/3} � silt loam with a moderate � to fine subangular structure. Soil is medium acid (Ph 6.0) . From 8 to 15 inches, the soil is a dark brown ( 10YR 4/3) silt loam, 4 with, medium faint to dark grayish-brown and dark brown ( 10YR 4/2, 5/3 and 7.5YR 3/2) mottles. From 15 to 22 inches, the 3' soil is a dark yellowish-brown (10YR 4/4) silt loam with faint dark grayish-brown ( 10YR 4/2, 5/3 and 7.5YR 3/2) mottles. Aloha soils are classified as an upland soil by the Soil i Conservation Service. The Quatama series consists of moderately well drained ,,� Isoils formed in mixed loamy alluvium on old terraces. In a `. No typical profile, the top 0 to 9 inches is a dark brown ( 10YR 3/3/) . From 9 to 15 inches, the soil is a dark yellowish- brown (10YR 3/4) loam. From 15 to 21 inches, it is a dark yellowish-brown ( 10YR 3/4) clay loam and from 21 to 30 inches, the is yellowish-brown ( YR 3/4) clay loam with e sr it is a dark ellowish brawn 1.0 faw fine, distinct light brownish-gray ( 10YR 6/2) mottles. • Huberly silt loam is a poorly drained mesic Typic P'ragiaquepts that is formed in mixed silty alluvium on terraces. Permeability is slow, soils are Moderately friable and medium to mildly acid. In a typical profile, the top inches is classified as a very dark .. is y gray' ( 10YR 3/1) silt loam -'.T•. e. 10YR 4 1 mottles. From 8 to 15 inches, with few dark gray ( /` ) ches, the soil is described as a grayish-brown ( 10YR 5/2) silt loam mottles. with moderate to extensive d • I , • • • Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Concept Report y Proposed Super Valu Store Site, Tigard, OR December 3, 1992 Sol 1 cores were e tak n alon g the edge W of Red Rock Creek eek • and in the depression extending east into the cleared area. Soils along the creek were typically dark ( 10YR 3/1) soils in areas that were affected by over-flow from the creek or in areas where there was apparent drainfield influence. The .o areas of drainfield influence were determined from site maps _ I p showing the location of residences and from the bleaching and soil affects,) which are typical of soils'receiving high levels • of chlorine. Soils were also checked for odor to determine if they had any of the typical septic aroma. Soils with bleaching and septic aroma were identified and marked with d non-wetland indicators because of "atypical conditions. " .,: Soils® is in the stream c®rridar were typical I of the Huberly series. The soils outside of the stream influence were 1OYR 3/3 4/3 with no mottling and no oxidized root zones. Soils in the drainage and settling area east of the creek were 13YR 2/1-3/2, with varying levels of mottling extending from extensive large ( 5YR 4/4) mottles to faint (5YR 3/4 to 7 d 5YR 4/4) mottles, These soils have been modified by drainage and standing water and ► ` n g dnd are, not typical of the Aloha series • • r a. , [ ‘ r • • ,+ X411} . I • .7 ,1/ , 1 �u �4 �';t'./f, {r,c','1 .1. .i 'C� e�4'Mr 446.1.2Ar! 1,,''l L if J^ a , Nla ,'.1.'—t a I. I dle, 1.i,, 1b mete; �`'-{ yv ° 1 /, { ,,,,' ,t,f '�'i r A' ",414.,,:$„" I X )AEI~ .�• .{'N� !j �� '{1'),��rI i `t••,r,t�'�1 :.l a• •, ■ t�tl ,t ,t .,. , W al +� rrt �A .,. ,i' `, Y , it t ! i l• • t, .:4,131 I��, 95�`f• '�1';ji t .�". 1 •, ', 1 I. `r tt1.♦x1,i,t b 0. ...V ti ,,,,�y,•••. '11,,�1 Y. '7•a/�f • l A'?„,'..i e ..♦ �, ti .1,�,�„.'� ,�5.(w'e .1$ 1••e` lit a-k, ,} .• ~ .1 17 (.'I , ••42,00 ,1 �, • 41.I'.. .. + , a; ••'a, •.'�'4 '' t �', 4. • ,� 1,� �'' h� 1.� -,J ,,��• I�% I +.>�.'y,y. � T1f5 •'�1 ,• �t'If 9I '• /1 .Ap ,, �•'� 'I. Xi µ w�''• •M b l'iM ! ♦' 1 j t•, ,�I ,11.., '�A,;' 1 •, r fat •W. �l�t�r t oh. r''� ,t h: ,i ,��: ,�, �J � ,�. 1r. �•�; v t �j Irk,'; A e • 1. 1 ', • ,,� JrruJ ..`. 4I. h �)!}'It�r (:, •'t I H1 ',F' r 41 ;i1' t I', 49 it �, ,.� »,.'► w "4 H,r” ';'7,;��' I, 1 �V r ;.' t 4,. }, t r ri�"M^I''.r■ 1'' � 'gyp ..t � f" i � .jC' `l��• .11 'P .'� ' � i ,�K • 1 {i ,y 1'..,I ��.,;r � ���i•� .�7Ci • ' �) 1 • ,•, [Ll.1df.S1 1. 44, 't'',' ¢r. ,rl;,, ' .11h ',4ir1A'Si''r, I, 4 •�A ',k• I ,Qu ;�N1;/�'�i �' «. rh '"r��•vy''r! .'.7t'•'`4,r ;i I ' t 1'"1`to $'!.++ „ �VLi )1�ti {0,./r;t I ,fll:i?� I ,4,4;er„ 1 `it .`; 14 "r, ,,; 1 .4 V • t{``.VA`{'•;;,/r 'l, e. ",',,,(+%'1• 1` ;. 4, I'•'',r )1 I II ,,r'. a• 4 1• f, I,I f,. 1 1 ". .• 1, .t . , ,' „{ r' A`�y�d�r I r , ,f 1 !Itl ,. .. l'1 ,,, { 'JP.' , (.{f',{,, 1 1:•X /, ti l .rl i v' . ,,�' v 1 „,I r Ir 1 � .1,4 1 1,., ,e X11 4 I, r, f ii '144:' , 1•• ,'.r r , ,, �' tdt. 04 • ,,4 �' I,Ae,r 1 0 �1•. �, . �I y,- 1,0 J .),{, ITh[y'1e/�' 1 �. ! '1 �; �' ♦. +,r'.9fR' I` �,.. I ii , . Ir .i 1;#� , .SP' Np� 45c 111 .I 1, ,o' e�' a t r .37p.,1•,Y 1 ,t "1' 1 .•� ,i / ' �],Y r4i • M Iii r7 J ,4 �� r ')� t 'Ili,. � wi.�1A. :,..",,t� �y• ),1;44.. '1 1 1, 441,9$Tt P y h� A �l f f�y q■ i ) 'r/, .•')1 //�1��� . i,14 ,siIcy'• f 1 ; 1) .k,, ,.. , 0 ?�'j t7'i 110 o.•+1• `r ,6.he,),‘., „i , 1' ,'lK '' ; ,i. , '',,,4, �,,r5,‘, /- ;., ., •,,r A a,.A•••l' .11:' jt•,i,J;1j°”' '•). , 1 ,,.Y� .)r� / /1'.. VI ' ,.4.:1,,„f.,,,. y •, r, 11,I ,,�i lj lry{,iJ�, a )a{'•04004 ;,t!: . y .f 1 i 1 o ' ��r'1+f (, ` ,r /��.11 01�iI j�',, 'p � * • l�i.� .,1 '`t�Z1J�) ,.i� ',I t,' 4 •r i � 0 N{',rr' ' I d I.•),IA , f,• 1 a,.._t 1 r 1 ":'l i 2 vot P ` Y 01 1 'uur 1N1 ''IM t , •� ivy If Il ,e���• � w t •' %,�1"r Iw'' ',�s- to : •1+��{'`a'� aw{� III�Iro'' � ''7A r' {14),'.A ••r , ")) ^ rr��'I;{...,.•• d i i Vi T, 1'I$' l •'•. ''1 l, ',r {.4 "e r ,I;,4 "41' 11 1 , v 1 I' °•, 1.' '°; M.' •,. vIt, a l7•. t*r i w 'S '•"f.'1,'i..,'1 ) ,�i �•• I"Ail,.' 1I..0.-',.t U....' . ,,'1't ;1 �, 1 tt._.t•',�e�1 ,1 '.1 t ,, .,' l.1 + i I, M/s r o. ]',,.P . ti L. 7✓' , y , 10 Iltp j , '{'. .4j,,:41, !}, ,{, 77N7r °°i' !/' 4 'j7P �� M'• l ' , 1' ' .,,J�� ,4,! A• , ,Aa., I, .i .•�r 4,.i.I �`f, , Y 401; ' 1, ,.is r I).G,'.I; •,, 1," '�''4 • �i'n1.1;1 ), �� I I f{�� y! � l. ,t, { �D�.1'41 1 ,ryr t ''ll �F 1, G'r • I 4444',o�f,�n e A �yy�r ,itil •, iri 0,. , . 1, r 1 t .-... ,.-•40„,, �',�('i'o, 1 �!'X' ,.�Y',,T1 ,I,+,�"•�j}}' �ii'.. r1, / ` )Ifr e r'1 "�L yl •�,.,r,,,,i` M�rA�Ih �.y� '`" I,I. ,}� :'� 1 )-rYl Ay'„l) 'a �' •"11�,+, j 1 t;";ti. °i�1+1 Y 'Q S.1�Y� ,I ` .0 Irl �1?� s ,1, i 4,i,, r I ��,,�• ' 1 y, , !� ,r; •I L. u,l• 1y. �� ,1 AI �'� '� i7 Pty' 4tkf., El! '' i ,T ` .'..a/ri il '1 ° 1> ',;t:...„...,', / 't +A a `�\,... • . 111 rp, ,•. r•g,� �;�`► T �z Q, I This Figure is extracted from '• 0 A shin g s Q.�unty, Oreg , issued July 1982 by the US Department of Agriculture n Service. . oil Conservation . The informmatlon is extracted from Insert #44. • 11 Soils identified on the site per this figure are: i ID# Soil 1 1 Aloha silt loam 22 Huberly silt loam 376 Cluatarna loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes • 4444., 4444.. 4444,. x�ywioYds,wni,crpeowltNphep•��.1 .'.. .; .'.......... 4444 4444. -... ,,......... .. ., 4444. 0 i iS Associates S011 S Map . „ oiympia, WA 98502 b Site (206) 943-0127 Tigaro OR Figure 72nd Avenue al ; II 3 w �♦ e ., _ _. ...Aa.a. w _Y.!_.: ..1 ,M..r._vr ..r .... .. .. . w...__-,.r e.r_.i,._ _ ___,._.i ,,,..._i. _.+.,:._r-w. .. .•,...,..., wry.,nA l...a..uw.♦L_a+t«..l r.-Ar. .4.nrww..u,u a.4.a..r4, y rl •r •' " Wetland,s Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and i' Mitigation Concept Report ` Proposed. Super Valu Store Site Tigard, OR Decembei, 3, 1992 3.4 Hydrology . . The dominant hydrology on the site is surface water run- : y . •'' off. The water runs down slope from 72nd Street into the ` I drainage corridor paralleling Red Rock Creek. Near the center of the site, from© north to south, drainage f1owS westerly into a depression just east of the creek channel. The depression is separated from the, lower ,creek channel by a slightly elevated land bridge that runs from south to north at the west! ', 'edge of the cleared area. Water becomes trapped in this area for long enough periods of tin�vle to affect the soils and vegetation. A second hydrological activity is Red Rock Creek which flows in 'a (Vertical-sided, low flow channel elong the length of the site. During the winter months,, 4here 3.3 evidence that the water spreads onto a flat plain along the east side of the 1 creek, forming a narrow over-flow area. Towards the center of the site, this water extends further to the east where it combines with surface water run-off coming from the perched wet]andareaon the east side of the .water sheet- flows through a dense soft rush stand and continues to sheet- flow until it interacts with the stream corridor. Combined { ' 'surface and stream water continue to flow southerly, paralleling the creek, until it leaves the property. ' 1 � k JJ • I , I 10 fi .. • 9d . yy y rye • Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Concept Report .. - Proposed Super Valu Store Site, Tigard, OR December, 3, 1992 4o0 Wetlands ° There are two separate wetlands on the site. Wetland #1 Creek. Wetland #2 is the isolated ' •, is associated with Red Rock C ee We # ' wetland east of Red Rock Creek. soils on the graded There are two other areas with hydric �© s g slope east of Red Rock Creek; however, both were associated 1 with known septic tank drainfield areas and not considered wetlands because of the artificial water situations which formed the hydric soil conditions. Also, the septic tanks have been removed and the hydrology needed to provide the. . third parameter is no longer present. 4.1 Wetland 41 Wetland #1 is the creek side wetland. It starts at the • west end of the fence that separates the east portion of the site from the theater complex to the north, then follows the , ; 1 dense shrub vegetation (west of the hay bales) until the' riparian border becomes a narrow line of trees along Red Rock Creek. At that point, the wetland extends into the grass 'flat paralleling the creek. ]t follows the west side of the hay bales unt' s a soft rush vegetated depression. T 11 it reaches The , . wetland extends off -site to the south along the Creek bank At the point where the wetland crosses the proposed ". Street, it is approximately feet�y" extension of SW ��DS,:rtm�uth� � � 200 � � ' •. from the creek. The IES wetland delineation was consistent the wetland delineation c� Dartmouth`'�`�••. with th � 11ine�et�.on e� SRI on �t�� Road� •. extension Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and Wetlands Del n � X Mitigation Concept Report Proposed Super. Valu Store Site, Tigard, OR December 3, 1992 Wetland.;and 2 4.2 • Wetland #2 is an isolated wetland (depression) located ' east of Red Rock Creek in the area that has been cleared. It starts at the 'bottom of a linear swale 'and extends westerly into a small depression that is perched on the slope above the stream corridor that separates this depression from the over- flow creek corridor. ; Water is trapped in this depression for, long enough periods of time to create hydric soil conditions. Lack of vegetation, presence of hydric soils in both the i'A" ' and 16B ' horizons, soil texture, cracking soils and time of , . year of the evaluation were used as indicators of assumed " positive hydrology. under the "Atypical Situations" classification, these criteria are sufficient to classify the area as a jurisdictional wetland. • • I I . I r I .0A.Vin• tN � M ^ (yflr Qpl jo A. M ,.., Sanitar Seaw.t Easement LEGEN r)I ® was eINO IES As • S f, . • fief. tm4itVollefe®.111.®4 RED Re' • • • ■ ■ ; l n Fl }s 1 m�► ,� il �`� • 4, 1 „ tea,' ^. 1 .�'� �� 34 i 1 ap‘ i P-1 Duvali Street I ,. ' ,' ti,c,' ,6ft 1 1 4 d„ I i 410 V-4 Q. es Z, / : Cr • � ,I7 0 SP-3 'tl ' all a ° c i//i iSP-4 I • SPA 1() **1> 2-6 .,, . I / '■ /441' a4:6 „ �yY •�� .. �.mI11NfnSUAA1Gl ' *1 :. E fir,}.., 4 1 �.� i, 1: • • Iw • , ea 1 , • , I 11 , 1 , J' ...EG E N D , I .. s ,. IES Associates Wetland Line RI aisa®4 RED ROCK CREEK/WEST PROPERTY LINE Scate r= too' Theater Complex I "141 1 ai • . r 1.-1--�- --�- . . : r.1...) rd Plot# 7 d -Fla 0 0 r I ..0 _ . .. a to r uv;it Gtr t (0 ,: C r • I• J • J 4 I I O 0 14 A : 0 O• 10 W � C /zo cv ♦ V r be/r4 `0 E-4 I, t a 1 1n (I) I M 0 0 (1 Nei C ,s! 0 1 �, M ti i...42 ad • C t„ t y{t I s rri ter r04 '4;1 0 :., 0 0 Cr) • f, ,� C a 4 tti and is for purposes only i Nli�l ImM�6�r i jurisdictional tir siit planning purposes,uses, %..-4 map of the P g a � ��more accurate,m�a I �� � wetlands can result from �a survey by a qualified ` land surveyor of flip Flagged wetland edge, .' ,. ,.._ .,..... ,..... . _wan.. r i Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Concept Report Proposed Super Valu Store Site, Tigard, C, „' December 3, 1992 4.3 Wetland Values 4.3.1 Functional Values • The values of the Wetland #1 are as a water corridor, with the grass edge along the east side functioning as a .r biofiltration cell when the water overflows the low-flow channel. At this time, the water sheet-flows through the grass which collects sediments and utilizes nutrients as a fertilizer during the growing season. Prior to clearing, the Wetland #2 acted as a biofiltration chamber, collecting and ti storing surface water until it percolated into the groundwater table. 4.3.2 1 iologica1 Values The wetlands, other than that portion directly associated with the creek, provide no wildlife dependent habitat values, but function as a open meadow area (much the same` as the open areas surrounding the residences) . Surveys of the site showed very little mouse, vole, shrew, or other gnawing mammal presence along the creek bank. There was evidence of .r cottontail rabbits S y l vil a gus f loridensis in the shrubby areas adjacent to the creek. Passerine birds nest in the tree and shrub row along the north property boundary; however, the biological value is More ' of a tree and shrub area than that of a wetland area Song a sparrow (Me1ospiza welodia) , yellowthroat (Cebthiyp s triichas) and fox sparrow Pa,ssere11a i1iaca were observed the� C ) b�er�red in tti shrub •. • : � and tree area along the creek. Other nail-wetland related . • i i i III ' , r R • • I Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Concept Report 2' Proposed Super Va1u ,Store Site, Tigard, OR �, December 3, 1992 • • 1 n were scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerules • �.._. � � species present we � � y cens( p ) , � � • ., white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), Savannah � sparrow Passe r culus sandwichensis), e- in (Turdus � � � � �� �$ migrator.ius) and common crow, (Corvus brachyrhynchos) . • 4.4 Wetland Classification The US Fish and Wildlife' Service has mapped the project area and classified the wetlands r ang fed Rock Creek as � � •�; (broad-leafed 0 ) Saturated/Semi- Pa].ustrine Forested broad--l.eafe �duou permanent/Seasonal Wetland (PF0iiY) , This map is generated p primarily on the basis of interpretation of color and infrared A aerial photographs (Scale 1:58000) with selected ground ' 6 ; truthing" to confirm the interpretations. (Figure 5 - US Fish and Wildlife National Wetland Inventory Map) Based on our on-site evaluation, the wetlands, on the site "' should have been classified as Palustrine Emergent Persistent " a Saturated/Semi-permanent/Seasonal Wetlands (PEMY) . The creek and the shrub area adjacent to the creek were determined by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to not be r 1iverine•r therefore, the entire wetland would meet the �� J q .. 4 . �.. Pa:iustrine .PEMY classification. • I i . � I • • I ( 1r+ �+`�'•"�.,.•:�« •'+:,I,:i,�,"';� :V `� /��i.11��'PS•."„"� ',, •�. 1i 111 1 y •i'. ...« _, Y; t-1, '.I. '1J �` , �'' •, ., . thim 1, „r. #04,,,---. 43-% ,. , • .''t.1 �""!i•' -� z• ,•s.f.' 4 'y0'r", :1Ni'r��•1 1 Y •I �' •1 ;'T'". +.7,, 'l •G.d•:.1:...°'. •..� 11. j'r•.s_` - '` \' v!'(/ IYc1` . . 'y ".:. » .IS RI ! ^• 4/VKZ 1C -• r J.,, K � 1'' - i + fir..'e,.11016-t..- J v.•a �Y " so: . ",.•-,--')/:. :' 'Y' '. .,i ,/ ",, o -..,{x,11'•'. `4,47: . ,,R. �I�' 00.. '.00,411; .. ..• •```� !:' , ;+„.?!, r CO .1 J :_.',0 ilia% ;' ' ►,!;,°.;1 /,''r.,/ •,it.R.44.+yIVA■y�':4i' liTi.RA I, ';�:i.°r,...'rE {�i••• \ �'�'..I ' I" `•.,rte..- 1 I il• ��1,„,,.., 'ICI .Y"Ip, r�'y rr ►•.°.'"j1:1011J!'lI►�.401►' 1511;to� .. t' ,♦..1 L\ 1.'• ti's::n r-.1„ --, fit; N}1,r't' AII>r . Al 4r �1't41, ',oi(''•l'1'I fit r�i,13 ,r �r�,_j _.....y.„1./.,:..,..t/•i.�S t ,. II u h 1, ow ■∎ r\•.1,•e V.I••I PEMw. , r )FI:(i /.,I, .,1 qt;:) ' .. 'Lenbotl -.^ _1 •-- . • .•a , ,Nh• 2,d:i ..P ,.•6•'•" I/ x.11,1/°r�. / ✓y:i:�r-- ~ 1,i 1..1�":r-'„,, • tom;:, /''pp i Ili t..:I! \\\\\ i; ,,, ' 0.II ^ti!.. r .;r..... v .4 : �$ . .r * / • •1 II`' •1,1,,' ^ 1� {; \. i•'•i1 V ..... :., '�• : • '• I�.w•/ iy' ••°' ,/11' . y,V . ,,•,.+1-•;1 .1.�.i ` •.Nf"'.• I,Y. . ' r ' k:'. •.1, a +Y.1. ..•Z•.•,,�.r• \ :,0'.' jr: . , • •1■ r'a ye, , II.�• O• �., , «•r. ,,, • • 14' �'�{' ,s r`•• - r f,�;,�►1�.,•iV �•i i`i,I i..11 I Iwf 1`\ itI;:•�-e i t1 ',.'..% `.1i,t -.!:.�_. 'It, \\ A b :Li ..:Y ., : 1 .',^1E 1 .11:.,,,`�1yi 1' 1,, •',� 1 I'. • i ° ��I)' '°t H,� ' �,,16`.r.��{I, 'ii.,;":-' �I `Y 1 •1, +,-\ ti •\� �~ ;"3 /�'Y li •'•,♦ •A•.a �' ;�.: i• t‘l. r �:{.� :Fi. 1!, _q,�%Ii 1' I . � ••.'�/• ' 01■0,... ;: .O; 1 in i( l'irt?..._:—■„ N., r>\• " if.'''N,17,,,i}:„,--;.1' PAW x •�. .A .”,, -,, 4 ,• '^`~ ' *// , ',�,y'', ` a , ' +rtl, , R7 � `-•---►.. -„ (•l:, t I(:-�t-(,.n,"t,q; ? f' , Y , 1s ,•1 if wN +'r:,-,. J'Ja•n[�CJ'. , ± .. ;i.•�I(,�I '1 11;1:;'1!1?"..101':kr y o. ' ,.......,\. \ , r st ,.•t"••,4• .r`•• •'..r. �.I..•�.Q/•r• , 0-F '.• ��+•.°. :S:M• : ,:• • +1+\.':.n,1I, . / :.M `f••,O �. ,•/,�''i4A •I ` 11 , J r �+, .•• '.• , , •i• ', • ..' _ Y 'T",,,,;:l ia: t• Y •1'♦ 11` 1' , ^• -$1. , .k.`•4,•r+•,`A)`e i� ® tltr, • �'N'In ♦•r.• i�.��' •�',4 1 ,�••.� i ' �•li 6+, 1 1 • •1 •• ° (y ,� •I1, +,•r-r'� "' 'TraceN� \, .,ti�•L :� '�:'x i , ';' '.r )1SPUSDOI+ 1 .3k,•i ,,,,-) . I+ ,..:e• .. ',*.•• .' .Y. ' . 1 1,'�"4' 1)44 id�1?,,'�j,. '•1 'r • , ', iyy1j `, ,` �y/+L•!f✓+// ,, , + t"<.!M• i... + ...r. ,, '.r. ,• h'1. '+•«+ Pte/. is , • ti• Q , ' r mLi.noiC+r•' ''''l , U�,YYKZ'Ic • ..►., �., 1/ 1. �t T. ' ,1. r°y , -. 1. , / - 'Y• 0.. ` .: .••' '•r A. �''t L hFi it i+l,iM ' :T: 'f.� ••° /PFQl,Y.,, i )r ci,„,,,t��''i'■N0''I•■• , ' • �. Y♦Y;i 4 111)..I11.,, � " J j w•e?dc� .,1'•.,•; , ,'' 1•.1 F1.Air ``q,.y . ,'•t`` %ui, I, ,/ I•i. r,:i ti 1Y h�.♦!I . `•i.•I•�,{!•p,� ••r �, 0Z.-.�7I„� •+YW I.. r 4 •;j� (. •�, `�•• O/ '• r•I•N 1�r,�:l l{f S Ii1,I JI, l`',.n .'• •.d111r•• rI f 1 Ii' •'1.. ''Ll_ 24----91, •„'/' - • .P•'• .•,,,a ' 1+. '.,.,,=`,,, '' 7,1-+W,�,y'°+.,,•le WAY "1 1 a ' , l,tr • �, `,'�I 1 C)( "� .\--asl� Ili Yw�l i `. C) •" • 1.2 ,,, L d. •4 •, . ` i '1.4 • ♦) ,1/),4,Y, ., ''• .,,,j.':,-"..: • ,,•,,. • .:\,tt' I+ra+-' '.-I-..., 'n r 0,•fI l + •••, :. ,.. ,, -•,:•w•• .. ,,•,:.••,.,-1 +:Bor11 ;' ..nom ' . •4' �°��''+. . ; •'• • '7-1- I 1 ,•J .:'bv. 1#,AMr0;∎ 1i.' r�'6'i '• r' // I 'f•Y' .r.+w, , d""-"0 1 ° *.iilkN fir¢!' •'j 1 i 1. •}• J i , •,, I, .•'iii N1+rJ:7:-y,„, , •,•111s° %j" i • r 1• ° I' • . ., •.y.:r.r+.. ..� l.: .. •: • +i♦ a,•, , + .e°' i' °l1 . •• • :�, i " •iiiY °(,i •1 v '• '' �ijii§r"P1 :' j,Y` 1 �! •.'1, 11' ' 1 AIA' ,b .• "• • 1 1 .•,rj 1,'1 , y_.. • I,e��' 4in4 J•i�.Y«',+ , Y•Y+ �`�Q • r di � . '•''�, 1„�.., '� J '! /' •,.. A-r. ''•', 9,•�+a a', i 40., •n ,� ' I ° �J,,+, '1+ ♦ �,,.r.Y�i idN:l'Lj� / , '••,;. "4 111 .''.. I,PO , ■ • p• I, '''..• Y I I •, • L ” r ' )+ • ,yl ', i I Y rwtnj I'� ) It ,,1,,1 r.:.',40.',� 11 t . `i' Y .,• w ' ' .-„ i ' 1, ''•, u't Y ' 1' LY�� 1' i. ~ 1" rw, r 6 ,,:kt , i.'a i , Y ,,1 i- 'W 4 .'►1 + ,'.•,1 s •6; .ri•.++ ` (' 11''•,1 a , A:.. /• ' I t�+' 1' Y, lie 4,', - +' i 41,,--,,,,-:r•. � ,,' i .� �.• , .�' Y 1 ,�•r,..1' y ;�'^i+, d •, I i 'r , t ,, '• •• n q + '•••' 6' ,.. ' a 1 . y,✓If I i ili h',`Y ',1i,"''',Y4j 'c 'Y • '.�..s i 1' '• *.t ''i`'A.'.'. bd til.. �' '11 r ! I National Wetlands Inventory iAssociates 1514 Muirhea Pr posed Super Valu Store Site , o (206) 943-.0127 n 1 Turd, OR 'i. r e 5 • . I . S • n n Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Concept Report Proposed Super Valu Store Site, Tigard, OR N December 3, 1992 I 5.0 Impacts Analysis wa , Most of the eastern portion of the property located Y between SW 72nd Avenue on the east and Red Rock Creek on the 1,,,, 1. west has been disturbed. The creek forms a narrow corridor . . . „ that varies between approximately 60 feet from the high bank of the low-flow creek channel on the north, to over 250 feet at the south end. A hay bale filter silt fence has been ' constructed from the north to the south property boundary at the west edge of this clearing A small wetland, identified as Wetland #2a was impacted during this activity0 The total wetland area filled, or disturbed was approximately 6900 square feet. In addition, an area, approximately 6 feet wide, at the maximum, and 80 feet long from north to south, on the eastern-most edge of Wetland ; , • #1 was also cleared `(Figure 4) . This area will be filled ° under an after-the-fact permit from the Army corps of Engineers, Oregon Department of State Lands and by Permit from the City of Tigard. This area will be mitigated at a ratio of approximately 3.5:1. The remainder c s on the property are ntac t. hex ainde of the wetland hay bale silt fence �. The �'s preventing siltation from'entering the wetland 17 #1 a , ., 14 I iNv Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis Mitigation Concept .Report Y and Proposed Super Valu Store Site, Tigard, OR December 3, 1992 6 ,O Conceptual Mitigation/Compensation • The project proposes to utilize property north of the SW Dartmouth Street extension, i.e. , between the wetland boundary on the east and Red Rook creek on the west, for wetlands 1 replacement and enhancement. The overall area, extending down , to , , l., ae l intca r,; a threewithin-coY50 ponfeet e�nt of systemthe .creek It bane will wil include be incorpor 1 ) oil t ,w. -water separators in the parking lots to treat water prior to it ! I entering g the wet-ponds, C 2) a retention/detention or wet-pond , system to collect hold and provide additional water !n � quality treatment to the surface waters collected and (3) a mitigation _, ' enhancement, intermittently flooded emergent,marsh Shrub/scrub ; area. r, equal l h ti to or Brea The mitigation area, which would be equ ' greater � � � 'r 1 1 in size than the area filled, plus enhancement of the existin g i wetlands would provide the maximum functional biological values possible in that portion of the property. A mitigation/compensation plan has been completed. (See Wetland Mitigation acid compensation Plan, 2/5/93 ) f. I This constitutes the IES Associates Wetlands Delineation and Evaluation and Impacts Analysis Rep. .. for . Super Report for proposed , Valu Store' site located in Tigard, Oregon. R,. L. Van Wormer Senior Biologist , IE$ Associates 1. • Bibliography Cowardin, L.M. , V. Carter, F.C. Golat and E.T. LeRow.. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Dee • Water Habitats of the United States. U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Publication Fws/QSS--79/31. i .... Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. l � 1989. Federal Manual for Identifjing and Delineating Jurisdictional. Wetland:.t U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and 'D.S.D.A►. , Soil Conservation Service, Washington D.C. Co-operative technical publication. • Franklin, J.F. and C.T. Dyrness. 1969. Vegetation of Qregon and Washington U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Forest. and Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon. Good, Ralph E. , Dennish F. Whigham, Robert L. Simpson. H" . I* Freshwater Wetlands Ecological Pr ocesse s and Management ement Potential. 1978. Academic Press, New York. Greeson, P.E�. , J.R. Clark and J.E. Clark, eds. 1978. .0 Wetland r Functions and Values : The State of Our Understanding.Func`tio - -- , Proceedings of the National Symposium on Wetlands, American Watr Resources Association. Technical Publication Series TPS ' Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Hook, D. ID. , and others. 1988. The Ecology.,;,,, and Mana.ement of Wetlands: Vol. 1 ?coloc of wetlands of Vol. '? - Management, Use and Value of Wet ands. Timber Press, Portland, Oregon, i Marble - Anne D. 1992. k Guide to Wetland Functional Design. Lewis Publishers, Inc. , Chelsea, Michigan. �.9 National mist of Plartit S eves Reed, P..I3. Jr. 88 N � That Occur in Wetlands Northwest lion 91. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Publication. WSt,UT-88 (26.9 ) . , C S Robbins, .. , S. l3runn and HuS, Zim. 1966. Birds f a North America. Golden Press, New York. .... Soil Survey Staff. 1988. Keys _ tm _SO i��. Taxonomy. Cornell University. Scientific ntf "Resources, Inch , 199 ; Wetland Determination M '19 '• ' I ' J. .tll a.u[.,u u1n ..w.l.lk,r ..I,cL..l I I and Delineation and Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Proposed Dartmouth Road Extension in the Cit, __ of Tigard,� Oregon. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Tech. Rep. Y-87-1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. Soil Survey d Wa hin ton County Area, Oregon. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. t_, r' U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. 1988. Design Manual: Constructed Wetlands . and Aquatic Plant Systems for Municipal Wastewater Treatment Center for Environmental Research Information, Cincinnati, Ohio, • I I 1 1 r I y f I I I t I I i 11 J ' ■ x Appendix x A -- Field Forms • , , I r 1 • , I • I I' I , . , , \ I t•'i �I 4 I a V, r } 2 y I I I t. DATA FORM ti INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD • OUADHAT TRANSE.CT SAMPLING PROCEDURE (Vegetation Dtstu)I , Field Ilnvecti l':,tor(c). .,! I PiojeciiSite: 2. N . x..., .� i OatA: 2_ , ppa , , . . +'; .. Transact I Plot M ..L._. Note: it a more detailed sup esoripilan is necessary,use the back of data form or a Held notebook.' t . ......... ..4 a ,..... . . .... ti r.M w... a +..r.. ... ,... .-moo .. w v r .., ... ....r...'am.r i' DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES I' Indicator Indicator i II i Herbs(Bryophytes) Status SapIirtrjs Status i., ., ---T.-726-7. w . ' �✓ ♦ era C e a ��C • ,,,•.. a N' a 1 sA Q.to 2. .... , , I , 5. 1 e e e s' Q • 6. ,'e.� r ) i a . .,..( _ ti 7 . /1..... a ., .:vW!c 4. a , 7. };I , , i d i Y-�.o (`i s. ►4,4 A 'g K N C 44.• u.' 4 .............s..r....,..u...e,.+..i..+�r.....a.a' .+.r...r..«.+.,... ! r , �a .�. ,_.. ..�.....�..� U. ( 11. o. • . . . I I 1 2 . , • [ 3. - .�.+...... m Shrubs. Tree,�s .r.01,1I141•vo..r.r, ....nr.nw.10•01wrw.o.e....r..wr •■ r,.rn..• • / i-+ ry. ■ q 1.�1 ......r...--- -»_.,.,-,-,-..... 12, .,.. I. Woody Vines , . t � ..... ...:,........... , , 3. ....--..- ----..:_..:.4;, ,.M.:.w..: .......:::.::_.. • 1 r.r..............;;. J: ,• 6. .................. I I I 1 II 1 . . . . ..+. . « . .. • ■ 1 O. :: ....a....-.:.-..+ 1 e j :.,..,�.:...,; a.. 'P�r�nt od dominant c',,clas that orb 0U�PACK disr PAC • � ' I� �I� , I r 1I I , 1 4 u • , I . . .+..e. ...----- - -- ..;,r,�.�,.,-- • DATA FORM I INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD OR COMPREHENSIVE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD (Solis and Hydrology) Field Investigator(s): Date: Pr V W t/Site _ State: County: Applicant/Owner: _ W_.___ Intermediate-level Onsite Determination Method , Comprehensive Onsite Determination Method Transact I Plot w Vegetation Unit 0/Name; Unit: g Sample Within Ve , Note:If a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data Corm or a field.notebook. SOILS S ' Series/phase:I ''� e G�-/ S', �y Su rou :2 ''c. i"q c ;'a A44 e s Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes ,_„- No _ Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol?'Yes No.... ,,,_,Histic epipodon present? Yes No uW 1 I Is the soil: Mottled? kes4_45t,....Yes No-„ _ Gleyed? Yes No 1 Matrix Color: -/ ' Mottle Colors: Other hydric soil on icators, 1 . , Comments: HYDROLOGY • Is the ground surface inundated?1 Yes No Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No� * . Depth to free-standing water in it/soil probe hole:. � P @ Maroc other field Indicators of surface inundation or soil saturation below. Oxldi z . r zones Water-stain z.sd root z�a Water-stained leaves .,� Drift lines Welland drainage areas marks Surface scoured a patterns Water-borne sediment deposits Morphological plant adaptations � 1 Additional hydrologic indicators: e„ ,;.—. �:._..��i�.:/ 13 rc? .4.1 ,, (4' Comments., a 1 MIM .e <' M - ° " r P This data form can be for both the Vegetation Unit Sampling Procedure and the Quadrat Transact 1 li • � 1 ' Sampling Method,or the method�dused�m�i� ' Procedure of the Co heristve Onsite Determination Me f Pr earn nation 2 Classification according to"Sell Taxonom .° according Taxonomy.° 1 1 1 1 1 1 13,7 pp 1 r I 0 , ` 1 , • • 1 I ' DATA FORM • INTENMEDIATE•LEVEL ONSITE DETERIMINA11ON METHOD . QUADRAT TRANSECT SAMPLING PNOCEDUftla (Vspotar$Iott Dana) ` Field Investi ator s • (./�+•-. . el,,a, kc.-1. 9 • Project/Site:-�--.-.- ..�.� . . "� r^°C.,._..., pale. � i--:....._.. l Applicant/Owner: u- r Shift+: County: �' 1 l Transact it plot it , ,. t , . Nasal II a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data form or a field notebook: 1 Y oda ar ro M..a.....r ..w.. eft ON .+. n. .w we w•i r r r ea P. O R.,ors eo an r ...Y .•w .. .. .we .w r w an r• DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES ' ,[ ' , , , Indicator ,ndi c t r • j Herbs(Bryophytes) Status . Saplings Stii%u � 41,, . c a s Ala- •u.r Mt C. 1. 4.r ed _cc a Sat G ,1a 4, _._.�. 1q, 1D• x. 12. ' 12, . ..� Shrubs Trees • • .w. ...� ,� �, ...er._.. • ....�.: :..._ ' , • 5 . i 0. • • i lola d dines II � — .�,..,. �1 . 4 P U ""r a, yy s+. • G�VV" � F Percent of dominartl species that ar®QUA F� i , • • •. r s. r 1 •, • ■ DATA NORM INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD OR COMPREHENSIVE ONSFTE DETERMINATION METHOD 1 ., (Soils and Hydrology) Field Irtvestigator(s). .. Date: . ,, Project/Site: State:_._. . County: A licantlownor; �. pP I Intermediate-level Onsite Determination Method r__ .. . Comprehensive Onsite Determination Method l' Transact it Plot is Vegetation Unit id/Name: Sample I Within Veg. Unit: Dote:II a more detailed site description Is necessary,use the back of data form or a field notebook. OIL ..�... . Series/phase: – Subgroup. /'�;L0 ' Is the soil on the hydric soils list? yes 1C tdo Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No-, --r Histic epipedon present? Yes ;,— No„L.__ Is the soil, Mott ed? Yes -- No Cloyed? Yes No_ . Matrix Cotor: ('- Mottle Colors:��--:-.-- " --'-�'-` 1 ' Other hydric soil i icators: ._.. ! • IComments. M■.. , HYDROLOGY (, Is the ground surface inundated? Y e s No Surface water depth:th,— _ Its the soil saturated? Yes No I �I Depth to Ire+-standing water in pit/soil probe hole:_ .. Mark other field indicators of surface inundation or soil saturation below: n leaves' Oxidized root zones :r.. Water-stained • , 7 Water marks Surface scoured areas I Drift lines _X Wetland drainage patterns Water-borne sediment deposits __ Morphological plant adaptations Additional hydrologic indicators 'X .�......:... fi'. r be used for both the Vegetation Unit Sampling lin Procedure,and the Quadrat Trans F This Gala form can - diate P g Method,or the Quadrat Sa pl nq t , oce Transact IS Sampling Procedure of the interm►e vel QnsUa d�eterminatton Iv�th ` m � 1 on Method. Indicate d is used: � I' Onsite faet�tt � g 2 Procedure of the Bony hra��alve fJnt, min 1 Classllication according to Soil Taxonomy," ati thud: Indicatta wttiic mete r • I ' I3u7 . • • ■ • l • • DATA'FORM' IN TERMEDIATE-LEVEL O■SITE DETERMINATION METHOD . . QUADRAT TRANSECT SAMPLING PROCEDURE, ;; (V®Dat0tIon Data) Field Investt aIo rC s . a,L CJ° h- ;� -�---`� Pro ec/Stte u -u °6* �-.� 'Date: .....?....2- J5—i .lkppiicaAtti caner State►:. '. County: ...__. ..eit- Transect M Peat 0 Nolen: It a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data form or a field notebook. \\ w Y.. .... . .. ... ...... r...r r . .w...NM O. ... ••• w .... ... ... DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES • I , Indicator Indicator Herbs(Bryophytes) ,Status Saling� Status Won 9, 0. I ..e..w.o.rrr.r •• 1J. , Shrubs 1 'ors • Y .. . 2, -........_....W...._,...e....�_._. 4. � ' ti 10. ..-...... ..�,.�. ...:�.;„:.�.:.. 1 1 I ............. 1 t, _. .....:,:,....w,,., _... i 1 l - ...o.....w..n 2. . r I, Vllood d/iries 1. ... . Jy • I /., Y.Y..M.-'LYJ. _ esiawswuaw.ru. , _ www ..r�M+.uMM�lr�s , : mr.�..wYr..ow.�.� Yin 1 w.+.w.:r.nc+.....► I' ... /l■ ■ 11 1 ..........::...rr . ' t ■ I I I m Percent o!dominant cpecIIs that are Ot]i-„ rACW,andlor tAC_._r._. ' • • • I I I • r 1 . i . << " • DATA I hT ER MEDI A T E-LE9E LCI S IT:DETERMINATION T10N ME1HCD OR COMPREHENSIVE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD (Solis and Hydrology) r �s Field Investigator(s): , Date: ProiocUUSite: - State: County: Applicant/Owner.: inturmedlate-level Onsite Deturrnination Method , . . Comprehensive Onsite Determination Method Transact Plot"ti � . : ,,:, 1 Vegetation Unit H/Name:. Sample I �Within Unit! 1 Nate. If a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back oI data form or a field notebook. , L SOILS 1 Series/phase: Su rou , { Is the soil on the h dric soils list? Yes..2c,— No Undetermined • Is the soil a Histosol? Yes Na .4, .Histic epipedon present? Yes_ No ,)( ' ' , Is the soil: Mottt d? Yes,;„ No Gloved? 'vas No Matrix Color: .-Lo -- Mottle Colors: ,, .y...24 Other hydric soil in icators:_..,._.. ._.,. _._.� � Comments: - 1 Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No„ _ Surface water depth: ..._. i. a''': ' Is the soil saturated? Yes No Dep th to free-standing water in piVsoii p obi � hole:- Mark other field indicators of surface inundation or sail saturation below: -'' Oxidized root zones Wat er-stained le aves ,._ �ater marks Surf ace scoured d area s � ,,; , Drift lines Wetland drainage patterns Water-borne sediment deposits Morphological plant adaptations ; r ! ,.,� � /^. �, (�---c .Additional hydrologic inflators. ..,...4 _ • • • .,__ +Cormrtents: f1+� - ■ 1 used for both the Vegetation Unit Sarnpling Procedure and the Quadrat This data form . can be drat Tianect Sampling Procedure of the Interrrrediale-L�ivel Onsite Determination IVIethnd,or the Quadrat Sampling , erms b � �� � Procedure of the Gorri�herisi�lo nnSiti��Determination Method, Indicate which method Is used: �� � � � , 2 Qlassifrcation atcarditig to°Soil TaXonarny:" i • . .. e ) . „ t" • , • ■ ..�......�,... ..............:wti:....,.... (, DATA FORM INTERMEDtATE.LEVEL O S TE DETERMINATION MEO© ' QUADRAT'TRANSECT SAMPLING PROCEDURE I A I (Vmg tettort Data) • • Field Investigator(s):...., O Projoct/S►to:" �t1.,,.2.7' ^' ._. 4,.e �`9 1 r-d Data Ai, Appl�c s tiOwt�er:'.:_. , r - St�cte: . County: a ifilASkhCt il Plot a._� � NUM: if a oltore'de,,,ailecf site description is necessary,use the back of data lorrn or a held notebook: ■ • ..Ow s'... r.•. a. Or r'ma..■■ ..,,w r .w r...w�... •• w 4.•• ... ... .... r. r a ast w r... ... a r . DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES .. Indicator Indicator Herb, (Dry/iphytes') Si��us �nc� Siat�►s x " 1. - (A 5 ' E' a fi4 etl 1 .. _..__...... �'..W ....r..rra.. mss.. ,.. .. Y . • ' L. ., / , c L' 1 4.,l rd u CI" �S, G.P o c? �. •0'0 " r!a. C co 6. ' �� C a - c :.� i wu r• " C(' ....11 _�. .. _ 1 .......awn..«...' i r�. r....,» i . Shy ;�.reos 2: ..:. �....�.�-..._ 2. »�---------� .,�..w.._..._. ;1' 11 . • .w......._......1 4. ■ 5. �„ _ S. rU 7 , ._.,..._......,..... 1, - �• 0. n..-....w.w .w.....a..r.... 1 iJ, a. ,.._....._. i' . it. . . - . t A�• � _. w+....wrrr.rw.w 12. '."'a^"'d ..w.+rnr.wno ...w............:....... ' f t 13 4 r.._. . w r.r.rlwo...�..•..r i � ...wrrrw.r.r ru.arw... i. I • M!/ ini ', . . • t �.-•..•n••.• 2. ....,-,.....:... s. fti 1 , U, ..n......... _ ,...«..++or ■.ww■•••■•••C.1 , . .,,.■ 1 7. .'. .w:aa.irrw.r.wa.....a...... •..•.».vur..rr+....b i, i 1 0. , 1 t: k ', P we of of dominant Smites that are ODL,r AcW and/or FAO_ .....a, .:�..: II t,. 1 ,. � � � � � " t a • .fir f ar . .. . ■ .. • AMMINIM! NUR DATA FORM INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD OR COMPREHENSIVE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD (Soils end Hydrology) Field InvestigatotO: 1 . ProacUSne: , ...» State: County: �. .,�.. , • - Intermediate-level O site Determination. ihod . I Comprehensive Onsite Deter 'nation Method Transact# _ Plot it at , Vegetation Unit ti/Name: -.:.._1 :I Sample#Within,leg. Unit: ' i Now:II a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data form or a field notebooks ;.' • . . 1 , , 1/ /Series/ hale: .e , ,� car/�.iSubgroup 2 d r ,. , Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined 1 6' , Is they soil,a Hislosol? Yes , No A Histic epipedon present? Yes No . is the soil: Mont d? Y s No:fg ,Gleyed? 1!'es No i Matrix Color: 2----- Mottle Colors:— ° y ' Comments: _:,_,. :�... HYDROLOGY . I } Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes - No_ Surface water depth...awe. is the soil saturated? Yes No _ Depth to free-standing water In pitlsoil probe hole: ;I Mark other field indicators of surface inundation or soil saturation below: ,. OOxidized root zones Wateestainod leaves Water marks Surface scoured areas Drift lines Wetland drainage patterns Water-borne sediment deposits Morphological plant adaptations Additional hydrologic indicators: CJ ie 1 Comments: wfwo..............�.. �.�..�..ws.... J I +Y -." ! 1 I 1 This data form can be used for both the Vegetation et ation Unit Sampling Procedure and the Quadrat ransect Sampling Procedure of the Intermediate-Level Onsite Oeterminatib Methh d � m i • ,or the Quadrat �a p,!ng 1 Procedure of the Coniplohettelve Onsile Determination Method, led h Method is used. 2 Clasasiftcatiarl according to Sail Tattoitiomy:a I. I is I I N,' r f e1• • • • ■ • s DATA FORM NNTENMEDIA`tErl. EVEL ONSIT DETERMINATION METHOD QUADRAT TNANSECT SAMPLING PROCEDURE �(V,r.ts9Ion Data) Field Irtvestigator(s): ,4 a jam_ c. Project/Site: L_ ' ---. . .'..o,,: '/�.' ,.. Date:. x1117 i- I 1 : Appilc;iitrawrroer:.rr..;.. 1)� �°' ' .. • .�...'.... _ Stag: 0 ,4.._._... County: 1 .� �. -Cran +�t Plot.0 ddueta: II a more detailed+d sup dpscri itort is necessary,'use tI>d back of data(arm or a field p i notebook;oak.> w. _. r .. .p w... nor..• r. ... .. rw r w. ... r.w r. r•• +. r. .n r .r. .. . r r I r DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES Iced' . I icator, Indicator �. Herbs(Bryophytes) Satuaplistatu 2.1 4. .. •, ,}a � ..._.._....__• • t, p .. .�,...___..■.._• 7. . . • a. ww . , . — U. . �....�.�.�.... 0. �:, � •i,1. ..�...._...w... •_...... .�.....rww...• 1 I. . • 1 a. 1 3. . Shrubs 1.®itS • • P Y .°..... .. rr ..' r ... ,r....•••.•+.....wqu ,, ..•�..+.•..wr•...•w • �y , !. .....v w.r I.:rwr:.+,r:rrli •• h ^, /i0►`. irr...w..rwrr n.. , /� •• • .vrrurwaw...+tiu.. s . ..+r..+rrd.... r V. w.....n.....++d _ 0...:r..r.......w.i 1 Ch. • .. .. .wri. • .. I' ��1d 6A ��J /�y� '_- .�.r «r...r.�J:o.i�..i' 1 , r••f•+�•�• +!uw�.�..' .aPi.ir+ wu�..tir..�..rrin..ir.. ,P V J iJ W �a • __ ...w .a. ..•••■• •.m.. ,+: . ..: , i .....r....w , .... IE U. .... ....n.. .u...rr...........r..,...+.....-„n.m+:.wr.r.I.L, :....,.:�:....—...w ••' _ 1 i, h� �. ' Percent o d ola�t u pec that Cb li Fh` idla r PAS 1 r I u I I r . wr . n y . • } , . • • a A • I I DATAFORM1 INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD OR COMPREHENSIVE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD (Soils and Hydrology) Field Investigator(s): .. Date: Project/Site: Mate. County: _ ', A Iecant/Ow . e ra r Jr , intermediate-level Onsite Determ nation et M had I Comprehensive Onsite Determination Method ti • Transact# _Plot . • Vegetation Unit#/Name: Sample#Within Veg.Unit: Nora:If a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data(orm or a field notebook. 1 • , SOIL • •! – Series/phase: Sut�group,2 — Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No X Urodeterminod Is the soil a Histasol? Yes No Histic epipedon present? Yes, – No,,C,_ , is the soil: Mottled? Y s No 1 Gle y ed? Yes No Matrix Color: Mottle Colors: _.�____. Other hydric soil indi ators: _........__;...._.:.._.._.. • I Con rnents: ._____. .� I _ HYDROLOGY y. U 'r• Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No �'L Surface water depth: . v i Is the soil saturated? Yes No N L0 Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole: Mark other field indicators of surface inundation or soil saturation below:! — Oxidized root zones _. Water-stained leaves Water marks Surface scoured.'areas Drift lines Wetland drainage patterns Water=borne sediment deposits ,�.Y..,, Morphological plant adaptations i , i Additional hydrologic indicators: ..._. :. • .. Comments: "4 6. , L . I • • aa data 6a o used for e This atal root Can be lase f r�.�tia the Vegetation ptatiort Unit Sampling Procedure and the Quadrat Transact Sampling Procedure of the Intermediate- 9 .P �9an Method,or the Quadrat p g I t_evol Onstte f�eterminati b t�Wa t Sam lint •• • procedure of the Comp►hensive Onslte t.)etorniiriatiort Method, Indicate which method is used. n I 2 Ciarsiflcatiort according to"Soil Taxonomy," I I • I I I I II I I a , . I I 1 ii I I i S i I , DATA FOR , FORM NTERME®IAPE 0 LE4E O �SITE O~TERiNA' CN AEtiCa ClUADRAT TRANSECT SAMPLING PROCEDURE ;, (Vegetation Data) Field Investigalor(s • / ,r ./U ,40:V.!',---=' ProjeciUSita: . Date: -# F " 7--- Ap�1EMGlriott+♦C�L+VIn�r: i ►.- °u Suit County; . . Transact M Plot Note: II a more detailed tine description is rtacessary,use the back of data form or a field notebook. ..w..w,........ .. ..w w p. • I r r r r,. + .r ..�.• DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES I Indicator Indicator ,�' Herbs(bryophytes) Status Spins Staluy...�., 1. 1. _„, Y. m..�....__...�..... ...�..�.....�. ; bi itiZr • 5. .,._... . .. ....�...�... __.,...,.._....� 1 6. • •• ■....:11.,.01,...,........1••.. ....... 6. —,.. ,.,,...:;_:. _.............w:_, 119 • 11 • . .:...e..:;_„�.. .�._.. ..._ ...�.. mmemmommosoommmuud_ hi. ,` Shrubs Traes • 34 5, .... —.......,....._.... ......... 5, .... ..... , y, u. ; .�.�� :.:._.:.. ....:... I • • • • • Woody Vines a. —,, �.:....... r..,...a..,,:.. . ) , 3 J , e. IA: �^ • I 7 • I 113 i 'H 1 ,nc of wt dominant pe o1 I c I I are ®1, F ACIdir P , �:. . � . I • • , I II ,I i ,.•.. • A n ni ,•I DAT1►FORAM 1 INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD OR I COMPREHENSIVE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD • (Solis and Hydrology) Flak' Investigator(s): Date: ' Prraje:;t6Sile:Y..... State:-_._-�..:,_.. .„ acounty. . . Applicant/Owner:caner: l•Intermediate-level Onsite Determination Method Comprehensive Onsite Deter `nation Method Transact N blot I . Vegetation Unit N/Name:. Sample N Within Vag.Unit: 1 Noce,It a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data form or a field notebook. x SOIL, Series/phase: 18. it • ,4) �` . Sul roue:2� 'a 4 �.I' ?LS Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes . No Undetermined , , �, Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No... ,- .Histic epipedon present? Yes Na � Is the soil: Mottle ? Yes No__Gloved? Yes No I; Matrix Color: .. . ... Mottle Colors: . '�"" c Other hydric soil indicators: ...�. Comments: _,_.._ .�._�.. ., HYDROLOGY , Y Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes No Surface water depth: Is _ 1 the soil saturated?lurated7 Yea Na Depth rk other east finding water In pit/soil probe hole:._... -.....,�......_..r... _,�..r.�... . indicators of surface inundation or soil saturation below: root Water-stained leaves Oxidized t zones 1� ..-_- Water marks Surface scoured areas ,_ Dtitt lines Wetland drainage pattornl Water-borne sedinrtent deposits . . Morphological plant adaptations 1 . Additional hydrologic indicators: I W Comments: ,,,, zz_______ ' i ''` i 4.w_.r.r..._rw.i.....:._..;:_..J.• ....��..ar —...--.-.o:..,— W».Y,r...; .+.I. .r.......::._.n...,..»...o...�..:» , ' I 1 This data form can be used for the Vegetation Sampling Procedure of the Interrreef dime�yel Onsite Determination tirMe Method,or the Quadrat Sampling Transact i Procedure 'f�" ` V • I I "Soil 1 � Which method Is used. pr re oP the Gan ha�nsive Qn�ite+b�atarn�inalit�n Method. Indidatu . 2 Classif loatlon according to Soil Taxonomy • 1 I „ ••Y.M.. .hw.rlis�w.Raw-+ 6w7 0 1 1 n' i , h, h. ,.,, •. u r,i. :,,.I.n:, tai.,,., n. . , .. n . hr.:,. 4 • • • , c • DATA FORM • : INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINON MET OD. i CUADRAT TRANSCCT SAMPLING PROCEDURE ' t . (Vep.tatIon Date) Field Indestigaor�s); +e.+.. .PsajetlSite: <� Dato• x�. . APp lican!/Uwnor• ► �r� a.r-- � Slate: County: -4!. Transect# Plot ' Nate: II a more detailed sue description is necessary,use the back at data'torn or a Bold notebook. • DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES • Indicator Indit;at'or, • Herbs(Bryophytes) Stains linry/s :;tutus 4r•.••YrrY • f.�Y I .••o.r.r.w+I.�.Y.,...�Y•V`...w1�.Yr. 1Y•••..n+rnwr 9. :r...�_.� .. y, . �.�,�, .r.,.,..:...._.� 2. ...._. ...�. ..:..,...._:, �D • �.' ��:�.�... .� .�..�..........Y 41°11,14110' r U. ....Loom /, _...._.tiv.r.nntY_ 6.1 .... ....._._.. » + ' ..._ .. 7. .. ... ... • . row.f �{��Jyi U i .....YYw.o.....YYC.•..wr •...w.YY.wsr !M. Y.w...•.••s.� . 1 ;, 12. -......::...._..... .� . Shrubs T t :..> .. 4, e • • �.�. ........._..,. . 4, w.,.,.,..,,r,,,,r . A. S: -Y---- _..�..-.mob .•..�.......�... �. :...: i 7 1I .. " ' ' ' , � 10, - , .. • . . ' . . . ' ............:.:.:._ 10, - . : �.,��.�..: �:.:�_:...:. ., • tt, 1I. • 1;1 ; .... ._.___ , �.. .Y_....- VNaody Vines, 11 . •. irwr wii... rYirYwi ri+Yn .•�. 11 . il, 1 .. I y ., rr..rir,.r:.r:...:r..w....Y...w.w..�r` w.�...�.r:....ur..,� • • 1Ii .. .. ..:+..r'" .ter .. e� nI o domlh nl ap�►cl�s ih t ire bL FAGV ,arir �e`FCC . I r I • . » i DATA FORM 1 INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION M EThIOD OR • , COMPREHENSIVE OJS1T: DETERMINATION 1N ATICN METH®D y , (Soils a nm H Hydrology) Field Investlgator(s): .. , Date. Project/Site:r._.. .,.. - State: County: . Applicant/Owner: Intermediate-level Onside Determination Method ` Comprehensive Onsite Determination Method • Transact a Plot w. Vegetation Unit#/Name; I Sample#Within 1i+eg. Unit:_ f Note:If a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data form or a field notebook.' • SOILS Series/phase:.- �., ` -----.-._..Subgroup: Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes r No_k , Undetermined # .E Is the soil a Histosol?'Yes No Te-Histic epipedon present? Yes No 1, Is the sod: Mottled? Yes No Gle ell? Yes No Matrix y M rt�c Co ior, ,l-�.�,�-� Mottle Colors: Other hydric soil indicators° , 1 Comments:, _ .� Y HDc�L� I� CY • Is the ground surface inundated? Yes' ,. No ,_ Surface water depth: ______ Depth to free-standing pit/soil p hole: Is the soil saturated? Yes No ,,_, h. G ion below:P n water in it/soil robe Mark other Veld,indicators of surface inundation or soil saturat' , Oxidized root zones ,,,,� Watsrlstained leaves Water marks Surface scoured areas Drift lines .._..� i drainage patterns Water-borne sediment de esits Morphological plant adaptations Additional hydrologic r indi+,ators. . . Comments: r�.'} c • H . , Thle data form can be used for both the Vegetation Unit Sampling Quadrat Transact pf vet�nsite Determination Procedure and the Prat Sampling Procedure of the mediaio-Le hod,or the Quadrat Sampling , A Co Onsite Determination Method, indicate . • Procedure of the pe date +hich method Is used Classification according to"Soil Taxonomy, �" r 1 1 I • I 1 ill I. i i I ., . �L.._ { 1 . . . { I rr DATA FORM 4NSITE DETERMINATION O�ET�IOd L1UADAAT TRANSECT SAMPLING PROCEDURE ' -Vegetation Uta) Fild Inv��latr(sy: ., Project/Site':St : Data: . ck. .1<i u ; Appeic:�trWLMi'neP: .. Stata7:_!f� Count : -. . I i anbbct ; Plot .r, fl Nolo. II a mote detailed,sue description:is necessary,use the back 01 data dorm°.!a field notebook. ' 'DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES 1 ' � indicator Ie�diaalor it Herbs Gryophl eSil Status apiiru,� 5tat�as • - :9 5, W. Y.-.....ren.r-....Yre .-..Y..Y..�...rr. . Y...+w.Ywr 7■1. . ...Y....„ ....Y... ..,.. - 7. .r r 11 1i�rNN'rr��Yr..Iw.�bM�...a�w .w�+.o.Y.�.�In.Yw.Y • �IY .r..wrryY-r..w... 1 U. ..�.,, 10.U. H. �. .... '�t� : 12 . , .. 11'x. 1 Js ......_ ...._......�..., a. . . �......._..._., Starub �1....r s • 1, � - «-r o w.. I V In 000.1100•11110.0•01, 00 , 2 . . j�. - 'wrlYlw+..larr�w�.rYr ji ,. - __rye • _ -.n...worr�'r....w . +wwri.rri ..Y.....wr..l... p '1 6 7 ......Y.,-Yr..... f y .-....,...�.-.............,. ....Y..-...-:YY..-. . , 1..... R'...1..-.......Y.Y... - ..._ I .r...l.l.rf..l.- wr.u.n.r.l• r TV - • VrY.M4YO1M Y. 9+ • .. .. - - . .O.WY.rra �M.wY..r inemem.v j• •• , U♦ ......w.if14...W..d.�.v.M..l1Y.�Y .Ml�r1 _ 1 i, {I `, I I I \ . .rY...rY....- . ...M \t. w..YMwY.'Iw1.nM....0• I: /1 • rY..r}.Ir. .r. y wi.. rr+ ........................... r.....++ii...w'w.is Yy , I Y r , s fa ii .-.......a.......:.a..i .. .i.:.: .K_................. U� ....:......�..........,.. ..o.u.....w..w 1 ' y Por��t tat dominant spe+�6e�that i►re CJp�;FAC'W,aridiet SAD 1.I' 1 % 1 • Ifr it I " I, Ai.• • .� .. ... 4 •rw..x.v...n.n,�u�w.�, �,W.�o.�.,•�o r •....0 r.0 •r n......� �w nr t.. ..w ina....r,rrr..n.re.,...... • I j7 i, n ■ i F • .,. ---- - .. ...+.r... ...00�v , ,e • DATA FORM '.s, - • INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD OR COMPREHENSIVE ONSi''e E DETERMINATION METHOD ' (Balls and Hydrology) � - Field Investigator(s): Date: 1 'I' ProjeSte:t State: County: . / , Applicant/Owner: 'I Intermediate-level Onsite Determination Method ",f Comprehensive Onsite Deters ina1 on Method Transact N Plot it ' . Vegetation et ation Unit H/Name: Sample#Within hin Vo g. Unit: �, Note:6t a more detailed site description is necessary,use t o back al da tat form or Geld no tebook. �t r , . - Series/phase: .. ct. Subgroup:2 1 • Is the soli on the hydric soils list?' Yes_ No Undetermined. • '' i Is the soil a Histosol? Yes � No •( ,Histic epipedon present? Yes. Noy Is the soil: Mo tied? Y s No --Gloyed? Yes No ; . Matrix Color./...fa,... ---, Mottle Colors: 1 ' . •, Other hydric soil indicators: .:■•....y., A.. Comments: 1 6 1 HYDROLOGY • ' Is the ground surface inundated? Yes-, No Surface water,depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes Na ' Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole:.�...._.._._.: -- ' Mari(other field indicators of surface inundation or soil saturation below ! . . — Oxidized root zones Water-stained leaves �„ • .. _._.. Water marks Surface scoured areas _,r,_ Drift lines „.,,,,�, Wetland drainage patterns . ;- Water-borne sediment deposits Morphological plant adaptations Additional hydrologic y ologic indeGalars: � � , � � � � � Cemmertl �.. s., . I ; _ � , 1 `hie�dalaform cah be used for both the Vegetation Uhl!Sampling 'rocodtra and the 4 uadrat Transact arrtplinPra du to of the In � �im ne gaiorilrallan Method;or the Sampling . Procedure oft t C on i e hensiv©nite pea Ir�tlon Method, Indicate which method is used, I , Classification according to Soil Taxonomy, • • . 6.7 F • m .P"ir , . i . : . . • ■ t '°` I, .� DATA FOR hi INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD (QUADRAT TRANSECT SAMPLING PROCEDURE Vol oeletlon D,rtal 1 Field Ins®sti�Ator(s�: . ., �� • Pro�ectiSite; .i '''� '� I - �~ ,,,,,�, Oate: 9 . Appl wOwner; SrAta: . _,_ County: _ /.2 I Transact dl Plot N Nore: H a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data form or a field notebook. c` Y.. Y.... . .. ...... .. ,Y .Y Y am M1 .0 .� .Y w M. , ..w M nr•.. .wr Iw rr. 1 I, DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES Indicator Indicator Herbs(Dryophytas� Status� S.vtirx�s `aratu3�� . I I wFaFrr. .owvi..w.r�.r y • .......w..�..++..�.�....,+�...e..r+ I I .,....._.�.: $. �� ! w . w � ....Fwt � .. , r n w n a tS�. , .l..asr.+ow.rrw �Y.u..w...i ............................ ; l- 6. 7.r w tl. ....a..�._ tl .....•.4' I �.' .a....... 1,< 10. ,®...., .. 111. .... ...�....,..� 11, t t.; . ... ...... ..,..r.' t . raro.rs.+..F.. 12. wi.wri....wawP n.r ^ 11./... Shrubs Trees , . .il..r.IWF.iwr•w....i .. i.i.Mn.�.u..+w�...r I i 4. �....... .�:...:....r.:.,..: .r...._ .,;_....:..a..... • a. .n..., .. .....,.�. ..�...�,...�....�. �. ,......,; ad I r..........�..a.. �,�+ • • • i 0i ..a.... .m.:.: 10. • 111•14,.......>*.:.:. .�..... .:... 1 . .-. s.: 1 Wood .VinrL 1 rt, ., .. . ...._w,..,.n,,...,..; . 0. i i, - 1 a I Percent of dominant speclet that aro ODL'�FACW,andlor FAC__._::.�... is r, r, I I 0 • • 1' !k" , I, DATA FORM 1 i INTERMVIEDtATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION RMBNATlON INETHGD O R COMPREHENSIVE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD ii ' �. i (Soils and iHydrology) G Field Investigator(s): fate: Project/Site: S1ate: .. ___... County: &,. ' Applicant/Owner: u ° Intermediate-level Onsite Determination Method Comprehensive Onsite Deter iination Method Transact IS Plot it Vegetation Unit ti/Name. _Sample tt Within Vag;Unit:,,,-,- Nate:If a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back od data dorm or a field notebook. 1 ' ' 14, n ." Series/phase:-,. / °Ir". .---�-Subgroup:2.. . Is the soil on the hydra soils list? Yes, No - Undetermined the soil a Histosol? Yes No,4 Histic opipeidon present? Yes No .. Is the soil: Mottled? ;Yes y No GI® ed? Yes No Matrix Color° �' .. Mottle C:oiors:_.... • Other hydric soil i icators:. ... ;Comments: . HYDROLOGY }: ground Yes No __ Surface r depth, Is the round surface inundated? _, Surfac water Is the soil saturated? Yes No;,,,,X,;,_ ' I Depth to free-standing w„/or in pit/soil probe hole: _ Mark other field indicators of surface inundation or soil saturation below: Oxidized root zones Water-stained leaves .: , Water marks Surface scoured areas , , ,--, Drift lines Wetland drainage patterns Water-borne sediment deposits . Morphological plant adaptations d Additional hydrologic ditlon Indicators: , y '�Si �kr. I Comma ntst _ _ _ _ �.--�------- , i ""±' ti .,:.�...o-.� ter _ �I form can be used for both the Vegetation Unit Sam...lin Procedure and the tuadrat Tr s This data t® g anon Sampling an act , Sampling Procedure the Intermediate-Level ensile Determination Method,,or the Cluadrat Sampling Sam . . . - Procedure e method adore of the a✓o hensr��Onsite Determination Method, Indicate lkhir,h� is used, 1,.,; 2 Ciaassilicatlon according to"Soil Taxonomy," , / ', %' r r f 11a1�/IER' .... . DATA FORM I • INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL Ot4SITE DETERMINATION METHOD.. ' ' I • y ' QUADRAT TRANSECT SAMPLING PROCEDURE Y• +st�tton Data : . 9 i ' Field rs i z /tk.�,r.:.--. ' ' ' ' ' Project/Site: � � Date: .. s . Applicant/Owner: .,, Stad: .0..&— ., I County: ./..0„,i, Transact m 'Plot�N'...,44.--. ' 1da�lo: H a more detailed silo description is necessary,use the back Of data corm or a field notebook. ' DOMINANT PLANT SPE IES Indicator Indicator Herbs(Bryophytes) t tus� Sapiinnnnnnn�s Status . dd1. .,.�.. „_,.�.P.....�.. .:.�.._.�...... 1. _....�.�....: 2. wur...w....o..:... �b..e�.rr_.r.r .n........r..... 60.., ...e�.NOr-►.� I�w.rw....r..r ,.• . i Y• ]Y�M .a. W� Pa..�evI�YM . .. yam 'Shrubs' Traps �{1 Y tMw.PfMOMi.�1 t i . � ' �. �..Y.�...,Y�MIY. PM�...M .Y i .. r,MnWA.r.nM�r Yw..YI..�..n...d • nom. \w..4.uY....a.. M....../wY ......t.YM....AdYYI.. .Y.t r 0 104 . , , . • ,t: ' 12, m aemwomomi. . . .................... 1 1!i' ' ' -_. , - - .........�,.:....� . t • «; dy+Rtc `Vines• r........r-- I 4. ..._ .:+.:. .....riteno__ �. I I , 7 j I I t�. w... i .::.P,:..W..+...:..:.'. ......:c:...:.... } �. Wet d('diIa l ec that ar� A Wand�or 1 a . . , I I f I . • M b �• \\ DATA FORM t , INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE'DETERMINATION METHOD OR ' COMPREHENSIVE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD (Soils and Hydrology it ', Field Investigator(s): Date: ,_.�....... ii . f'rolecUSite:_._. ..,__ State: _ County: Applicant/Owner: Intermediate-level Onsite Determination Method / Comprehensive Onsite Determination Method Transact N_Plot • / Unit I . Vegetation i alName: : ;- Sample a�Within flag, LJr�it..__„ Nolo:, If a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data town or a field notebook. ; SOILS S e rie�/ hale. Subgroup:2 P t_ t Su rou . Is the il o the nth hydric is soils list? Yes y No K Undetermined 1 Is the soil a I-listosol? Yes No iistic epipedon present? Yes N© m: Is the soil: Motti d7 Y. No_2 ,, G►leyed? Yes No ,,, Matrix Color: Mottle Colors, I Other hydric soil indicators: Corttiments: • I ._:. HYDROLOGY , Is the ground surface inundated?. Yes No , Surface water depth:—.—: Is the soil saturated? Yes No Depth to free-standing water In plUsoll'pro a hole: Mark other!field Indicators o i of surface inundation or soll,saturation below r Oxidized root zones Water-stained loaves Water marks Surface scoured areas Drift lines Wetland drainage patterns Waterborne sediment deposits ,,;; Morphological plant adaptations Additional hydrologic indicators, ' Comments! •• This data form can be Used for both the v . vegetation Unit Sampling Procedure and the Quadrat Transact Stocpingr Procedure 01 the inter ledi fie Determination l Onsite Determination Method,or the Quadrat Sampling ' " t1J � lit used, i Method. Indicate Is Taxonomy,* , et cats whit method�+Claasification according to"'Soil Tr on ' , r i , , v i I 4' m• ' I • • • / l DATA FORki ,,,' ItiTERMEDIATE-LEVEL DNSITE DETERMI(NA1iON METHOD OR ' COMPREHENSIVE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD F�. (Summary Sheet) 4, 1 Field Investigator sr: . . - L' • ,..._.,� Da �.- / ., .. ! � try• _,.��,., / 3'J J olectiSite: s..cr�u.yer�a•�'-.Mob. • SYA • - err county: �"� Appilc nuOwnder: "- r t c ''''._.• • intermediate-towel trv®!�slt s ) termination Method ' Comprehensive Jns! tY ] Determination Ai6�lhod Transact I ,Plot M„a.a....Vegstatton Unit Ii/Name:...—_ (Note:if a more detailed bits description is necessary,use the back of data form or a fietd notebook. ' Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? ' I. Yea No K (II no,explain on back) I-Ras the vegetation,soils,and/or ht,drolagy been significantly die urbed? 'des No yes,explain on back) ei r•� d 0 ' indicator Indicator . . ' • 1 Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant�Plant Ss Status Stratum . p .....+arer.: w.e�.r.r��e w...r..wonr >w ,umms��r��rp' V + , t1 s. , �tIMl71•fA•tY�l II�OWYI.1�Ita � `� Rte• a�+YwNassMmrrerwb (j rwl�s�leiu�w' a�10.6•r.®C ia�s.rasrsaiu aorw• a`.° �ci. '.. u..ma.w.wr ...so�.w... r1�i• wa"a'rr.'r ... .,.. n.•'rw�� sr.�.rrrs� • r 10. 23. a.._......INNINOo...111■111: ,ld.,. akrowastlevelarrrt0 I 1 • i i,n h�ram.wuu� a.. ew ° rriwNb�a I+u.ar.w.r.'. 1:J. ....•.r..e,..�r �.:..a....s a�. �r.rr�. a ..r..nn�.�r....r.r,�.K�v...... r-.rm�rnr... �e-,swrr.rrm' I . Porcant of dominant,species that are OBL,FACW and/or FAD Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No Is the hydric soil criterion mat? Yes „,,.. No Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes NO • the a'n Unit or plot wetland? Yes.�,,,..�,. No . . !s eve taoti Rationale for jurisdictional decfslarbi data form ca 1 This a,it dnr either tsdfa Determination Method© the C®rrehensle n be t�seci Ithe�the fntem tawNsvel�nslts LDetew 1 ' • ion Method: Indicate wliichh ntethod is used d�natte IDr�terrnrat • c • • 1, 0''tr'' " . , • • • • , i lorarmelumoraw " . i .. • ■ i Q i DATA F • . INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD OR CQMPREHENSWE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD (Solis and Hydrology) Field Investigator(s): _ — . . Dare Project/Site:— State: ...''.....,:..., County: , , , . Applicant/Owner: .. Intermediate-level Onsite Determination Method �' Comprehensive Onsite Determination Method , . M ry Transact a Plot ._ j.. .... Vegetation Unit M/Name: Sample 0:Within Veg.Unit:_.�._... Note:ti a more detailed site description is necessary,use the back of data form or a field notebook. ,, , Series/phase: Su�rou R --- Yes N o U deter pined , 1 � d soils list? Y Is the soil on the h nc t rt �,. y Is the soil a Histosol? Yes r.�,,.. .,. No Histic epipodoh present? Yes„ No_Lc._ 1 l• Yes No is the soil: Mottled? �`Yee--�-d No �Gloved'? Matrix Color: °-' !- Mottle Colors: ('4 1 , • Other hydria soil indicators:�..�._. -' �... , Comments: .._. ,. i. ', I HYDROLOGY 1 i' Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes No Surface water depth:....e._r -,..,----. is the soil saturated? Yes_ No Depth to free-standing warier in plUsoil probe hole: — ..._ .1• Mark other field indicators of surface inundation or soil saturation below: ; • ' Oxidized root zones Water-stained leaves `.,"' — Water marks Surface scoured areas...�.. Drift lines 1 ...._„;:, Wetland drainage patterns ' Water-borne sediment deposits Morphological plant adaptations Additional hydrologic indicators: . Comments: 1 a 0 ..w, H i;This data form can be used for both the Vegetation Unit Sampling Procedure and the Quadrat Transact drat'Trans Sampling Procedure rnt ca' rr plink Procedure of the Co e of�the later r date-L.,ekei tans to Determination Poet a or the Quadrat am hertsi�e Cini�i�+I�terntirtaiioat Method, Indicate which rttiethod to used, • r Olassif ication according to Soil TaltonoMy, •. r p r i t i i i i mwnrRrwaa�w+r. auu�k{{k fi i i I i P f' n , . . ' t . e . . 1 Tinard ' , ,,,,.. ., , . . spec' lc ' . . . , . . . „ . , „ . . . . . . . . . Area . ,,,,,,, •:. .. , . . ,„ . . . . • , . ...„..,....,.„,.....,., . . , . .... ,. .. ... . , ,,, . . • . , . ... , , , f fr,•1F�{.r• 4.v:rf%T.. r........t..'1•. .^ vl ::.... r. •]• .i n .ti Ar. ref: . %i •r;••• :'.r•. %::•'•;:�'••• .r.r.r. .•r::.. :,Fn'rr .rf•.•' r:.vr[` :•..F 9i. i.f hJ . . .r..r:..r...:R y..r.• ••:v ♦: r 1 r F" 'h•' •r' ' 'ilTrthispó'rtatiii: ^✓h:wv]r• •.•i:%s{• }' r �::..;.. , .F• %•...•; %S{r.!.r.�} } n{. /r � r.,r..1 % • .J. .r. }rf.Y .{4 • }I i..•'r•{•.:.4` r..n ..�rr}.r. ✓rr r. .•r.•r. ...v v.. •.'!}r•hr✓l::r''%.ri:.{ •+` r.rf..r:%•.r :•.:J^:..{..••J.•:•i.•.•r•.:•r r:r•rrh.�:?i:••:•:,.y:rnnr..J�'Y,r*f{.•r.-r. • L for . ' • p • 4 Or by DKS Associates Siiibtortiiitan t to t \'', ' I ' „ ' ' ,' October 9 93 •�� ��. i I I I i , I ..,.,F-.:.,v...,w:..w�..w.k.a,..,. .�...;..d..,...., r..,c.......... ......c-..'.:.....,rr+u._- ...,:r...:.r1:..w-..-a..ww.. J,..L.a.' 4:........,..,.�I.n.,,..»..-...,. i.... r.i.».a...m,..-w..1. .._- ,.,..- .. ..., ,..,x.wwn+.....,.. .,.-,.._ .r• ....w,. .. .,...a.. ... .a... ......,... .....+..wc... •• I DKS Associates 921 S,W Washsngton Street,Svrte 512 Portland, OR 97205.2824 r Phone. (503 243-3500 Fax, (503.4 243-1934 [ October 20, 1993 t A Iw Ralph G. Tahran b r OTAK, Inc. 17355 SW Boones Ferry Road Lake Oswego, OR 97035 . Subject: Tigard Triangle Specific Area Transportation Study P93067x0 Dear Ralph: • DKS Associates is pleased to submit this study of traffic and transportation conditions for the Tigard Triangle Specific Plan. We have incorporated the comments we have received on our final draft and 1 included the most recent information provided by Metro for travel demand forecasts in the area. If ' there are any final comments, please let me know. We appreciate the assistance you, the City of ,- Tigard and the Technical Advisory Committee have provided during the course of this project and look forward to working with you again in the future. Should you have any questions, please feel free . to contact Kym Diforio or me, 1 . - Sincerely, 1 1 D SSOC ES �.'`�► t•fir • A Corp 112.r►n /w x3,230 ' mss, 0 .. , .. , L.,„. . . „, if .,‘ :„,,,,.,.. ..,,,....F, ,,4&ord1rt, .,1�, ��k:: '•.',+i��f r ,.-,rti"1.j � , •r.incipal� „ �:�,•- "� , rsm 143/utei-st8gata•rover.le� • .r Pr n D i ,, ' .,. ._ .,,.., ..i.u.. _,.,»_ •At.l. ....,. -.,.. ter.,.r.»,.,.....w„I...,-.,.,+,..•.G+:..+...x.._....... v. .:,,_ u.1....,. • , , . , ) , , t i i r i DKSAssociates 1 ...,_._, , .. --) . . 1 Table of Contents , ,r .• 1. INTRODUCTION " Background • . • [ • . . • • • • t '� Purpose • • • . • • • . • • . • f • 1 • [ • • • i • [1• • [ [ • • • • • • • I f o • • • • 1 ' rr Past Studies .' dI Summary . i •. . • • Y . . 0000000000 • • • • • • • 1 • • • • [ 3 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS • u Existing Network Description Land Uses � . . [ [ [ . [ i . . [ 14 Existing Traffic Operations . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . ...... . . .. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . .. . . 1 5. Proposed Transportation Projects . . . ' „ 3. TRANSPORTATION GUIDELINES li t f Streets and Roadways . . 1 . [ i 1 • [ . . . • [ [ I i • f • . [ [ ■ • : [ . i [ • . 23 • Transit • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,ti • n Bicycle 34 . 4 37Pedestrian (, I 4. EVALUATION PLAN 1! • AltNrnat�aes . � i . . [ .' . [ [ , . . , • . . . . [ [ . [ . . [ [ . . i , , ; [ .. , [ • [ . . � . f 1 44 Traffic Performance o•A the Plan • I [ . . • . • . [ .• • . • . .1— . Y . • [ d Project Issues , • . . • • f [ [ [ • f • . i • 48 yi !' TECIN'CAL APPENDICES A. 1993 and Use Inventory 1 B, Summaries of]Land'tlse Alternatives C. Existing Level Service Calc�u ttis,,- �Ex g of Service Calculations i ;, � `D. Unmitigated 2010 .�err latioris � � � � � � � 1 E. ��Mitigated 2010 Level of Service Calculations Tigard Triangle Spec c Area Platt CS tbb � ?0, 199 I xi d �u r .c ) � �T�ffie and�"Trtii�gpt�rt�tuon Element r � p : 1 1 • ' DKS Associates Tables , • . Table 1 1992 Tri-Diet Bus Passenger Activity . . . . . 1 , . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . 12 r � Table 2 Existing Tigard Triangle Land Uses 14 ',.,. Table 3 Accident Summary 16 Table 4 Signalized Intersections 1- Level of Service Definitions . . . . . 17 Table 5 Unsignalized Intersections - Level of Service Definitions 18 • Table 6 Existing (1993) Intersection Operations . . .' . . . . . . Y . . . . . . 20 Table 7 Trip Generation and VMT . . , . . . . . . . . . . , . . Y . . . . . . . . 41 Table 8 Comparison of Other Portland Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Y 41 • Figures • i Figure ure 1 Study Area .Y . . ... . . . . . a . . ! . . . . . . . J i . Y . . . . . . . ♦ t . . . . 6 Figure 2 Existing Bus Stops and Routes . . 1 . — . . . 13 1 Figure 3 Access Relationship of Roads . . . . . i . , . . . . . . . . . . 24 Figure 4 Recommended Roadway Functional Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Figure 5 Typical Cross Sections . . . . { , • . . . . . . .:. ♦ 1 , . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 .. P Figure 6 Typ?•cal Intersections along 7011 and 72nd Avenues : ... . . . . .. . Y . . . . . . 31 Figure 7 Areas of No On-Street Parking , . . . . . . . . . . 33 • Figure 8 Recommended Bus Stops and Routes Y . .. . . , . . . . i . . . ♦ . . . . . . . 35 L r Figure 9 Recommended Bike Lanes . . . . . { . Y . . i Y { . • 36 Figure 10 Recommended Pedestrian Facilities . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Figure 11 2010 Intersection Performance . . . . . . . . . . . .43 Figure 12 15/Barbur Blvd,/64th Avenue Concept . . . . . , . . . 47 Figure 13 ORE 217/72nd Avenue Interchange Concept . . . . , { Y 1 Y i . . . 4 . . . Y .. ,° . . . 51 1 U f Ti-and Truth to Specific Area Plan October 20, '1993 .. l Traffic and Trinisparttttion Eierncnt ii p9V6i/ttgstJ.tad $y:' r , 7 i . s, i , , . DKS Associates i , t. 'r 'I . Introduction , : / 1 . . y BACKGROUND The Tigard Triangle is a 340 acre area bounded by three major . / state highway fa ilities 1--5, ORE 217, and ORE 99W) in the ` northeast section of Tigard. The City of Tigard, working with ODOT, Tri-Met, DLCD and OTAK, Inc., has developed a f specific area plan for the Tigard Triangle area which seeks to . increase housing opportunities,achieve infll and redevelopment, . � . and encourage transportation efficient land uses, Several land use alternatives were developed which fulfilled the goals of the plan. Building from the approved land use plan for the Tigard Triangle, a recommended plan was developed. • PPU RPOS E This document provides background regarding the transportation ., m elements of the Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan. The ' : purpose of the transportation plan was to identify major roadway and lane requirements, street widths, needed street improvements, potential street vacations, pathway locations, transit corridors, bicycle needs and pedestrian facilities. This y p r report is organized into three primary chapters. Chapter 2 ,. addresses the current state of transportation conditions within the ! , i Tigard Triangle. Chapter 3 summarizes a series of transportation ' guidelines to be used in developing the Tigard Triangle. Chapter ' 4 provides i des an analysis sus of transportation conditions with the e recommended land use plan, defining how it performs and what improvements are necessary to support the plan. The Specific • • Area Plan contains more details regarding the development of , alternatives and a summary of the transportation elements of the ,. AST STUD! Several traffic and transportation. " srudies have been conducted in the Tigard Triangle in the p a st seven years, Each study provided . various levels of information and detail regarding primarily the Vii' traffic operation of the study area, One recent study focused on t ' ' )' Tioard Ti file?Specific Area Plan' Octohk�r 20, 1003 I ( Trt ffit eh rronpor'tdt'1on Ititii ht 1 1,03067,higata1.rpt • ' 6 t, , . DKS Associates _ , . . ,,, . ) . PAST STUDIES the alignment of light rail transit adjacent to the study area. 1 ,, , Presently, there are discussions and analysis on-going between I ' the City, ODOT and the City of Portland regarding the signal • operation at ORE 99W/64th Avenue/1-5 Ramps. This work is• , identifying potential intersection improvenn,ents to nn�tigate one of ' , the highest accident locations in the Portland region. Each of the past studies are briefly summarized(below: Tigard Triangle Traffic Circulation Analysis, Oregon J Department of Transportation, Region 1, 1988. This study assessed existing and future year 2015 conditions and defined a . ' roadway plan for the Triangle, At that time traffic conditions ) • were noted to have excess capacity available. Generalized ' . forecasts of employment, housing and traffic volumes were made k • using the Metro regional model, The plan called for four lanes g g p � .'s ` on 72nd Avenue south of Dartmouth Street, four lanes on r Dartmouth from 68th to ORE 99W, four lanes on 68th from Haines to ORE 99W, plus a new north south connector roadway between Dartmouth and Runzker. i Tigard Triangle Tra ffic Stud City of Tigard, by ATEP, October 1986. This study focused upon the 2005 development„ . . in the Triangle area studying traffic impacts from a link volume , . perspective. The study observed that streets in the Triangle were operating below designed capacity, 'F'uture conditions indicated level of service E and F conditions with buildout of the Triangle, Recommendations included widening ORE 99W to six lanes by '. 1995, 72nd and Dartmouth both being four lanes, an " overcrosSing of ORE 217 between Dartmouth and Hunzikex, and TDM measures { Barbur Corridor Light Rail Transit Stud y, , City of Portland, by Pairson9 Jirinckerhoff, November 1991, This study identified i preliminary information on potential ridership, capital costs, L operations costs, and impacts to som eats p ns and maintenance elements of the environment, In both the 1-5 and Barba alignments a ,RT station was located at 72nd Avenue and Pacific Highway, ;. adjacent to the p ro p osed Try-vet park and ride station. The LRT alignments studied terminated in downtown at the Tigard r 11 Transit Center, About 200 parking spaces were identified for the j it 72nd Avenue station site, The study provided level of service a' r , , , data at Pacific Highway and ORE 211 southbound ramps and , r indicated that conditions were E in 1990 and would be 1 In year i l' 2005 (it identified Pacific Highway and Hall as F in 1990), T and Triangle spectllc Area plan betdbe 20, 101 3 �U,,ti Traffic and Iranspbrtation Oement 2 ? 3069ttigorcli.rp! I '� o i �? 1I . h . \ • 1 . 1' DKS Associates . , __,__ . • PAST STUDIES Cub Foods Traffic Impact Study, Supervalu Inc, by Xittelson & Associates, February 1993. This study focused on the impacts of a new '' .. l w 156,000 square foot shopping center (including . Cub Foods) at the intersection of 72nd. Avenue and Dartmouth Street. Updated traffic counts were provided. The study found very limited street improvements were needed to accommodate Cub Foods (not even a signal at 72nd and Dartmouth). For the next 15 years the basic two lane configuration of 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street would be adequate with provision of turning lanes. Upon build out of the Tigard Triangle area, five • lane cross sections on both 72nd and Dartmouth would be required. w 1, .I SUMMARY The Tigard Triangle Specific Plan traffic and transportation analysis focused on three p rimary areas: 1) identification�cataan of n « transportation needs; 2) access needs beyond immediate boundaries of the Triangle; and 3) consistency with the S, Transportation Planning rule. Compared to past studies a different and up to date set of land use forecasts was used for this project. The following list outlines key findings of the transportation analysis= Needs. A balanced transportation v plan for Tigard Triangle was ;' developed which included pedestrian, transit, bicycle and auto access. A YP destrianwa P e plan has been outlined which has three primary elements; 1) sidewalks on all public streets; 2) a recreational/pedestrian corridor running north and south linking key activities (school, residential, commercial, theater, transit ., station); and 3) development of a pedestrian grid ,central ) p p g inthec rl}6r core of the Tigard Triangle to improve commercial/residential • linkages= f=uture transit services will include a light rail transit station at 72nd/Pacific Highway with a park and ride lot and reoriented transit routes within Tigard Trian g le following key pr ..w activity streets (Dartmouth h east west, 72nd/68th north-south). Bicycle facilities are provided with all collector and arterial streets in the study area. A master plan of roadways has been developed focusing on intersection cap acit � at full buildout of the Tigard Triangle and year 2010 capacity growth, Most significantly the core collector streets are programmed multiple turning lanes at two lane roadways (one lane each way) with multip g a j 1 . ► � key intersections, Dartmouth Street between 72nd and Pacific Highway is progratnmed as a four lane roadway due to the significant level of ad J scent commercial dev elopment, Tigard Triangle Specific Area Puri 1993 October a Traffic'ard trais pnrariah EIen7Or ► 3 I,9loSyticordi,rpt P I F a 1 ■, . • DKSAssccjates 1 , , ,. ....___. ) ,, .4 , , ,, ) . f 4Ji� :i SUMMARY External Access. Tigard Triangle has four highway P ) ' ' interchanges and six key collector/arterials which deliver traffic to and from the study area. Significant improvement will be ``cc' 1 1, required for the following three facilities for the Triangle area to retain acceptable level of service for external access. f,- !,t ti r ® Refine ORE 217/72nd interchange plans to narrow 72nd Avenue, retain loop on-ramp and relocate . northbound ramp connection to 'Hunziker. LL.+ ' I a Modify the .1-5/Barbur Boulevard/64th interchange for more capacity, An initial concept has been developed i . ' . to improve safety and capacity which will need further r ODOT study. I. L',.•,, , A Widen Pacific Highway to six lanes, Through traffic ' ) volumes forecast for this roadway Warrant the 1 widening. This improvement is in the 10 Year Priority program for the southwest sector of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). When the widening f ' a occurs, accommodations for LRT,bicycles,pedestrians y and access control (landscaped medians will need to be addressed). Transportation Planning Rule: Many of the guidelines of Goal .: 12 are incorporated into the plan (improved pedestrian, transit and bicycle access). Additionally, increased housing (from 165 t F , units today up to potentially 900 units in the future) provide the ,, ' • starting P oint for improved land use/transportation relationships in the Tigard Triangle. The recommended land use plan would i reduce vehicle miles travelled ('VMT) by over 13 percent 1'.' toning.� Scaling ., than compared to the potential land use development under current Sca ing collector streets to two lanes rather than past '* recommendations for four lanes on all collectors provides a , ..� as balance of pedestrian scale as well as meeting functional . operating standards, emphasis on pedestrian linkages(rather o g dards. The p p rian g than auto linkages with local streets) and plans for future transit ,i : provides a clear focus on 'non-auto related access between ' activities within the Tigard'Triangle„ ; p; HI I P1 T'l Ord''triangle S Specific Area loldti f, i 9 � octt`+b�r zd, 1uua ,4,,i ;, Traffic ehd ±ransperttriion 5Icmcnt 4 Psi 6//tualdi,rpi . ', ,l.' e ,, ,. ...I,,,,,,,,,,,,,' ,..:...,.....,, .; .,,,... ,.; ,.. .., „W, ,..,. ., , .vl..I i..,•.,I,,...,., .,,,,,+.r„,,. ",,, ,,,,I..,,,..„ . .,,.,., a...,,,..,. „u..,r",......., .I.,,, , ,n,l., , . .....I f tr • 'i. } DKS Associates • • I Y I . ) 2 . Existing ConditionConditions i 1 I This section discusses existing transportation conditions in the project study area, including roadway geometries, traffic volumes, provisions for parking,transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, traffic safety, and operating conditions of roadways and key intersections in the vicinity of the study area A ' description of land uses in the area is also.included. EXISTING NETWORK IDESCRWFION Study Area Roadways l The Tigard Triangle study area is bounded by SW Pacific Highway West (ORE 99W) on the 4 • northwest, Interstate 5 on the east, and ORE 217 on the southwest which provide regional access to the study area (Figure 1), Interstate 5 and ORE 217 are freeways and ORE 99W is classified as an , arterial by the City of Tigard Comprehensive Y lr,n,' SW 68th Parkway, SW 72nd. Avenue, SW^ Hampton Street, and the future Dartmouth Street are classified as major collectors by the City of Tigard Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 1 in Local streets n the study area include SW 64th Avenue, SW 66th Avenue, SW 67th Avenue, SW 69th Avenue, SW '70th Avenue, SW 79th Avenue, SW Villa Ridge Road, SW Atlanta Street, SW Haines Street, SW Baylor Street, SW Clinton Street, SW Elmhurst Street, SW Hermosa Way, SW Franklin I Street, SW Beveland Street, SW Gonzaga Street, SW Irving Street, and SW Varns Street,. These local roadways are primarily fronted by residential land use, N_ carrying interstate 5 �(I � is a lane,freeway carry�na approximately 83,000 to 84,000 vehicles daily during week.2 PM peak hour . 100 to the ek. In the 1 n ur (�` 0,6:0+0',PM), it carries approximately 3,200 vehicles per hour j• , northbound and 4,000 vehicles per hour southbound. Within the study area, interchanges exist along 1-5 atIORE 217/Kruse Way, Haines Street/68th Avenue, and Pacific Highway West (ORE 99W). r ° Cdtt eehensive Plan Transp crtation'Ma', City of Tigard, June 11, 1991; Dail, and PM peek counts On all suite f' ways and highways h fro Oregon Department art ent of Trans ortat on Daily � freeways � � P m P 1 Region I Traffic 'Volume Map, May, 1992. { I 1 I I 7i��rd'Triangle Specific Areal Plan' October 20, 153 Traffic and Tranopartatioh Iarnant b P9aoa7/traard2 rp1 I I r . t) ' 1' p' . .. H• A DKS AssociaLes ) f • (• „ifs...a."----: • • o-. al to il. v Pfaffie St, 7 °N. 1161 Vilir , ) , Atlanta St. SW Haines fit. i Baylor sw 1` d4,, kr.'" ) `ii'').k... , .... SW Clinton N d' ; .p, ' , ;,• o- E�Imf��rrst j .......;rte . SW Herrnosbf , / 0 1 �y� rd nkiin • J Bevel and ` :.. l I'41n ' St, ran § m •r • Sr , Gbnzaga to 4111 ai SW Hampton St. iitN a --- SW Parma �. l' i SINVamsSt yN v f !1,1/4„ ) ■ , F i Figure 1 Study Area I, T . � 1 d I • . . , DICS'ASSOC1t9tS II 1 ' , . . . f .. , . , . - In the State Highway Plan, 1-5 has a level of importance definition as an interstate highway3 and is . • a category 1 access control highway,. Within the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), I-5 is defined . , as a principal arterials i between Pacific Highway West�� ORE 217 is a four lane freeway with auxiliary lanes in both directions b g y W and 72nd Avenue. South of 72nd Avenue near the I-5/Kruse Way interchange, it turns into a signalized roadway with a signal at the 1-5 southbound ramp terminals and two signals just east of 1-5 on Kruse Way. Average daily traffic (ADT) for a weekday on ORE 217 within the study area is , 86,000 to 87,000 vehicles.` During the PM peak hour (5:00 to 6:00 PM), ORE 217 carries approximately 3,300 vehicles per,hour northbound and approximately 3,500 vehicles per hour, •outhbound, 'Interchanges exist at Pacific Highway West, 72nd Avenue, and I-5/Kruse Way. The ,w- State Highway Plan designates the level of importance of ORE 217 as a statewide highway and is ' category 1 access,control, The RTP classifies ORE 217 as a principal arterial. Pacific Highway West (ORE 99W) is a four lane arterial g y ( �... with a continuous center turn lane throughout the Tigard . T ,L.-==' Triangle study area. It bounds the northwest side of the Tigard Triangle study area and provides direct access to 1 both ORE 217 and I-5: ADT on Pacific Highway West(to �; be referred to as Pacific Highway in the remainder of this ' `-� ' report) is between 44;000 and 48,000 vehicles, PM peak ' • `-' _ hour volume north of 68th.Parkway is approximately 1,950.. ! vehicles per hour (vph) in the southbound direction and ► r, approximately 1,850 vph northbound. Pacific Highway is .' vy -`_' controlled by signals at the ORE 217 northbound ramps, the.ORE 217 southbound ramps, 78th Avenue, the Tigard p. Cinemas access, the Fred Meyer. access 68th Parkway, 64th Avenue/I-5 southbound off-ramp, and 60th Avenue ; No on-street parking is allowed along most of Pacific Highways and during field reconnaissance, no parking was - i observed for the sections where parking is not prohibited, , The posted speed along Pacific Highway is 40 mph, The „ State Highway Plan designates Pacific Highway as a statewide highway and an Access Oregon Highway, Because of its arterial status,Pacific Highway has an access control designation of category, �� 3 1991 Oregon Highway Plan, Oregon bep airtment or Transportation, June 1991,page A-1, A-2 and A ,i - tiaSed on discussions with,Lidwien Rahman, "obOT Region' t,May 1993,and Oregon Highway,Platt Policy Draft 4dininistrative Rule; Technical Memo #3, Oregon Department of Transportation, by Forester/Lancaster, January,1993,pages 62-65 (*vides definitions for categories of access control; Category 1 is freeway- full control and Category 4 is similar to an arterial with limited control), . - 7r aii p dH a t irn Plan.:1992 Revi.iati'tO 1989 Up daie Metro, 19T2,pages 4-8,4-14 &4-18, , Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Oolabor 20, 1093 1 Traffic and TranSlaartntigngla►'i7ont 1 11 706Dhard rpR ... i ,, DKSAssociates y F . , , 1 . , ', r. 4. The RTP classifies ORE 99W as a major arterial, a possible bicycle route and,a potential transit f corridor. ', the entire length of Pacific Highway within the study area with - along Y ao 1' ' Viet bus number. 12 runs g la Y , Tra g numerous stops located on both sides of the roadway. No bike lanes or routes are provided along .;; Pacific Highway, Sidewalks are provided along the west side of Pacific Highway within the study 1 ' area, except for a small section just south of 65th Avenue, where there are no sidewalks. On the east • side of the roadway, sidewalks are provided from north'of 78th Avenue to north of 68th Parkway, and (, ,; ., • north of 64th Avenue. L y • • • Land use along Pacific Highway is primarily strip commercial., with a large number of driveways providing access to and'from fronting uses along the roadway, The high number of turn movements • into and out of driveways results in more travel delay along Pacific Highway, A Fred Meyer Shopping Center exists on the west side of Pacific Highway south of 71st Avenue. A t' • signal has been installed at the main Fred Meyer access on Pacific Highway West, providing a r..i , • protected lr.ft turn phase for northbound Pacific Highway traffic. The City of Tigard is currently ' " extending 72nd Avenue to connect with Pacific Highway at the Fred Meyer signal6. ; Tigard Cinemas is located on the east side of Pacific Highway south of the Fred Meyer signal. , • Aircess to the cinema is provided from Pacific Highway and 72nd Avenue. A signal has been � . , , ° provided at the Pacific Highway access - however, no southbound left turns into the cinema are :.e• allowed. Instead, this movement is accomplished by a right turn which routes traffic off to the west' side of the roadway north of the intersection (a "jugneck"), Drivers then approach the intersection I , ' from the west side as a southbound through movement. ' SW 68th Parkway is a two,lane major collector extending south from Pacific Highway to the Farmers , . • Insurance Building in the southeast corner of Tigard Triangle. North of Pacific Highway 68th •:. • Parkway becomes 69th Avenue. It carries approximately 5,500 vehicles per day in the vicinity of the I-5 southbound ramps.' North of Hampton Street, 68th Parkway carries approximately 360 vph { `i northbound and about 240 vph southbound Burin ' the vp g PM peak hour.' North of the 1-5 northbound } ramps, the PM peak 'hour volume is about 490 vph northbound and 300 vph southbound. It is i nal at Pacific Highway and b stop signs at Atlanta Street, Hampton Street, and controlled by a s g Y by stop g y signal 66th Avenue, 68th Parkway provides a direct connection to 1-5 southbound ramps at Dartmouth , Street. The roadway is 44 feet wide and has a posted speed of 40 mph along its entire length. Outside the study area, 69th Avenue connects to Oak Street north of Pacific Highway. r ;; ' r ' 6 -, City of Tigard o±��ect, planned f nr i su mtnce CahStnCt� n. Ulili�y � rk h has begun. lh, L 7 - rid on'1992.1093 traffic counts rovidcd by Mike Mills,City or'Tigard on 5/4/9 ; BfS dj by ' a r , Based 'oh IKS Associates traffic counts conducted ucted ,May 25, 1993, ,,ti ° � Areal�'lari o'ctdbnr 20, 1.902 ' 7i drd Triangle p Traffic and Trohsportatiph Element 1'9306711liga,d2,ipt , ry• • „ , . . , ..,.• DKSAssociates ....,_ - . E ., ' Between Pacific Highway hwa Y and Atlanta Street 6$th�A v Avenue . ,�------ is newer roadway and consists of two wide lanes, with a left turn lane for an adjacent office park. On-street i - parking prohibited g arkin is rohibited near Pacific Highway no on- y and n • ,. street parking was observed anywhere else between Pacific 'y"` •---• " Highway and Atlanta Street, although in some places there,, . is adequate room for parking. . a , - 6 Between Hampton Street and the 1-5 southbound ramps, \ • a 68th Parkway has striped, p av d shoulders approximately Y 6-8 feet wide on both sides of the street. No on-street �:• `-�" parking restrictions are present in this area. Vehicles ' '. currently park on both sides of the street north of Franklin • �,',� in the vicinity of Landmark Ford Service and Parts. This ;� • L. 1 1 . _ shoulder' provides adequate parking space for smaller vehicles, but larger vehicles often extend beyond the �E . • shoulder into the travelled way. 4. Parking is permitted on 68th Parkway between Hampton Street and 66th Avenue, but no parking was observed in the field. A ten-foot wide landscaped median is present south of Hampton Street. p 'f ri-Met bus number 78 runs along 68th Parkway between Atlanta Street and Hampton Street with r. numerous stops on both sides of the roadway along the way. 68th Parkway has sidewalks on both ' • sides of the roadway between Pacific Highway and Atlanta Street" Just south of i3aylor Street, a small • section of sidewalk is provided on the west side of the roadway in the vicinity of a bus stop.' 1 • s are provided on the rant side of 68th Pa • � Sidewalks � Parkway and ��� � �� ��� � �, S"dewalk p w between the I15 southbound ramps ` Franklin.Street and on the west side of the street north of Hampton Street, South of Hampton Street, • 68th Parkway has sidewalks•on the west side of the roadway all the way to 6th Avenue. No striped bike lanes or bike routes are provided along 68th Parkway. ' 68th Parkway is fronted primarily by commercial land use north of Atlanta Street and a mixture of residential and com mercial land uses south of Atlanta Street. A large Landmark Ford service and •t parts center is located on the east side of the roadway north of Franklin Street,'' a, • ' - - 72nd Avenue is a two lane north-south major collector between Villa Ridge (near Pacific Highway) and ORE 217, with direct access to both the ORE 217 northbound and southbound ramps. 72nd Avenue continues south through TT ig and to Booties es Ferry Road 72nd Avenue carries approximately ximately .l( vehicles day just south of Pacific Highway'and is controlled b y si gnals at Hampton Street,i ORE 217 northbound ramps, Hunziker Road, and ORE 217 northbound ramps, A stop sign controls 72nd Avenue at Villa Ridge Road, The PM peak hour volume between Hampton Street and the ORE ; , �w W B ed on 1992-1993 traffic: counts provided by Mike Mills,City or Tigard and on 5/4193. .. Tigard Triahglc Specific Area Plate October 20, 1 098 x Traffic oriel Transportation remerit � � �� � � � � � � � � � � �� � � t*�atit,�rt���rd��t�f �' , ,• • aV` z , y ' - DKS Associates a, - ______,_, i , , , , )), ) . , , , ,--- , , , 217 eastbound ramps is about 730 vph northbound and 610 ) 1 , - vph sout�hbound.'0 ,�, ; " The City of Tigard is starting work to connect 72nd I Avenue with Pacific Highway (see Programmed '1, • ,�x }� Improvements section of this report). Today, access L.:: : , , between 72nd and Pacific Highway is provided by Villa '` . 1 `" Ridge Road, which runs' parallel to and just south of , i'' • ' `„ Pacific Highway. 72nd Avenue is a narrow roadway, ` { ' 4 r >>. approximately 24 feet wide in most places, with no ' ` ' shoulders between Pacific Highway and Hampton Street. s. , A. Between Hampton Street and the ORE 217 southbound ramps narrow striped shoulders are provided on both sides ) I A,.., ' , of the roadway. The posted speed along 72nd is 30 mph �' --- and no parking is provided on the roadway within the study area. , Tri-Met bus number 78 runs along 72nd Avenue south of Hampton Street: No sidewalks are provided between Pacific Highway and Hampton Street, A L sidewalk is provided along the West side of the roadway south of Hampton Street, No bike lanes or routes are provided along 72nd Avenue within the study area, , Land use along 72nd Avenue is primarily residential presently, Tigard Cinemas, a large movie theater I ;• with approximately 2,700 seats, is located on the west side 72nd Avenue just south of Pacific rH 1, ' Highway. One entrance to the theater is located on 72nd Avenue north of Baylor Street, A large Cub . 1 , ,� Foods shopping center has been approved for construction just south of the theater along 72nd , Avenue, Phil Lewis Elementary School is located on the west side of 72nd Avenue across from Gonzaga Street. •' I Two access points to the school are located along the west side of 72nd Avenue - one just north of 1 , Gonzaga Street and one just south of Gonzaga Street, School crossings(crosswalks)are located across 72nd Avenue just north of Goi aga Street and just south of Elmhurst Street, A school speed of 20 mph is posted in the vicinity of the school, The school has 404 students currently enrolled",. Hampton Street is a two lane east-west major collector between 66th Avenue and 72nd Avenue. , , Hampton Street consists of two 16-foot lanes and a 12-foot center turn lane/landscaped nrediana It,, , carries just,over x,400 vehicles daily peak 1 car " �� � ' enicles dr�i1 in both direction�r The PM eak hour'volume east of�68th � � � i 0 - lased on D1tS 'Assocktcs trafrie rousts.conduced May 25, 1993. l t' - gaged' on a eonversatian with sebnoil,statt om May 4 1993, Y b . ' " 8aaed on'19924993 traffie,eountt, provide by Mike Mi11s, City of Tigard on 5/4/93. , 7%7atd'Tr/ahgrle Spacdf/'fc Aroa 'P/a October 20, 1993 ',_ Traffic end Transportation Ek niiertt 10 t93O61It,oard .rpt • l w, t • II I ,4.' • r. • I DKS A& ociates ,..,__, . . .,. , , , , , , , , .. . . ,......�...._. -�� t jr r • Parkway is approximately.l$Q vph westbound and 40 vph ' T' 'L/-- eastbound.'3 Hampton Street is controlled by a signal at : '� 72nd Avenue and by stop signs at 68th Avenue and 66th , • ' / N I Avenue. The posted speed is 35 mph, Hampton Street primarily serves as an access route for fronting office and • • V•.. s commercial land uses. r` a,. s , i • a r x ri-Met bus 'number 78 runs along Hampton Street between 68th and 72nd Avenue with. frequent sto ps. �.. .., I Sidewalks are provided along both sides of Hampton Street • \ within 'the study area and no parking is allowed along � ' either side of the roadway. No bike paths or routes are \ � , �, provided along Hampton Street. , 1 :': .i. Atlanta Street/Haines Road is a 44-foot, four lane roadway (Haines Road) east of 68th Parkway b , i and. a two lane roadway (Atlanta Street) west of 68th Parkway. Atlanta Street carries just under 900 I � 1 ' a ti vehicles daily west of 68th Parkway. The PM peak hour volume on Haines Road just east of 68th • Parkway is about 540 vph eastbound and 410 vph westbound. It is controlled by stop signs at 68th ' n Parkway. Haines Street provides a direct connection between 68th Parkway and the 1-5 northbound ,•,. ramps linking to Lesser Road which accesses Portland Community College, sake Oswego and . Mountain Park. Parking is allowed on both sides of Atlanta Street, and no parking is allowed on either side of Haines Road, The posted speed is 25 mph. II Tri••Met bus number 78 runs along Haines Road between the 1-5 northbound ramps and 68th Parkway, ,, Unpaved sidewalks exist on both sides of Haines Road just east of 68th Parkway, with paved sidewalks on the 1-5 overpass, No bike paths or routes exist on Atlanta Street or Haines Street, • Study Area Bicycle/Pedestrian ac! t es , . No bike paths or designated bike routes exist anywhere in the Tigard Triangle study area Pedestrian .. sidewalks are limited and riot continuous, Continuous sidewalks are found along most the north side of Pacific Flighvvay r Sidewalks are provided along some sections of the south side of Pacific Highway i , but are not continuous, Sidewalks are 'present along both sides of 68th Parkway north of Atlanta , Street and along n both sides of Haines Road, However, along the sidewalks alon Haines Road are not paved. Sidewalks are also provided, on both sides of Hampton Street within the study area. South • , of Hampton Street sidewalks are present o the side the roadway, and sidewalks exist ou the • on west side'of�th roadway, sidewalks �+ east 'side, of Parkway southbound m i A • ;°• � � �;� ���� f�'6�#th Parkw y b�etween the ��I�S ound ra. ps�and Franklin Street, few other sections of sidewalk are provided within the study area, but they are generally small, discontinuous ' _. sections: 13 - used cktt DDS A c cis.te$ traffic counts condu,tud May 2 1993, Tigard Triangle Speci6c Area Plait October 20, 1098 Traffic and'Trahsportatidh Elertiant 11 I 1133067itigord7.tpt 4x . ' ; 4.• , l t DKSAssociates r ,I �s. „ , ,„ : „ : „ i i,... , , : , . „ : , I„ : :: „ : , 1, „ " , ) . , , ; ; ; Based on field counts and I observations, both bicycle and pedestrian,activity is low in the project� , vicinity, but typical for suburban areass. Much of the existing activity is associated with school r` : trips Y� Yp existing Y s and access to Tri-Met transit stops. Recreational walking and jogging also occurs, although there are only limited facilities which are continuous for these activities in the study area. � , f ' Study Area Transit Services Tri-Met provides bus service on two,fixed routes (12 and 78) within the study area.' Table 1'shows 1 ,, )' .. the daily bus activity for the two bus lines'in the study area in 1992. Figure 12 shows,the bus routes , ' . .. . and stop locations within the study area. ,• •. . Tab 1 'T 1 . . X1992 Tri-Met Bus Passenger Ail Day Ons/Offs 'Stop Location Inbound/ Outbound/ Totals i ` South°t East North to West Ons Offs Ons , Offs Oa Offs '1 fiiii :iii: i', i�Si� ��if iii;iii?ii?i�;,..,.i'�iiiiiis?�iis�7i�ui�5�c`''1'.,.,�'�i� iiii','•i?j<�si!ii�:�•',.;:.•..::•,•, iii'�i iiii`: iii ; 64th Ave/65th Ave': 17" 2 4 , 37" 21 39 1 b.� t a„ r' •69th ve 12 16 13 - 24 40 Hi'Hati71 st Ave 21 10 �._�._._4 42 w 25 52 Fred Meyer 4 10 _ 34 �10 ' Near theater access 6 2 5 16 11 18 .,f Piatfle Str 14 3 5 21 19 24 East'of ORE 217 10 0 1 1 19 ' 11 20 . ��j :iiji it yi: ':•t�' ri:•r;iii:�,�: d F,•'•. ,iYl`: ••I..:wiWl•. ._._. Atlanta/68th _ 0 1 0 1 • 68fh/0ay1brI 1 0 3 2 C? 2 3 ........... ��; 6$th/Clinton/1»5'SC3 2 0 nu '. iia„ }! fi na. nn r 68th/rranklin Q'. 0 2 : 0 3 ' i ' ! 68th/Haen ton 1 0 1 8 t-lti to 12 ni n/7t�,h 2 5 6 7 8 • Hampton/7211d 6 15 4 Nu but klti�'t,E 11tiItatick, ru y � del s�:ri�b�foe tjri�Ic�t;u, � , T/ tc1 Tribngle 5pdci19crAr d 'Nall Oot+oher 2C), i 993 ' R. ' Traffic,and'Trnwhsoorta-tiot ,iorrierit 1 Z ; ,' Pg.3O51/tt0ard2.tpf 'i r�, • 1 .._p. .. , , ,,;.ti , , • - Q.'.i.icy' 1 T - ` `--`` • t.1_ G 1„ - _..._ *;6 =_�i•-_---_: -,-- ="� _,-s- �,.. ...__�..- --1- �..- _—.�'�_ - .._ F / s, _ ` t j --1_« t' ' -_-`• -=ice --..�— , _ •--'_^,�"_ -,-- __ - ---.-=,-t.t:`f-...{, .- - -. - --- - *1 "�- - - -- "'---- • .f°_' +—r- ��.5. .�_"-'.'_'_, , .cY�'eC2H'A � --•. .._mss_ �s - •r_... - .- s=0.0 if{ (1-11- 7s.!� t 1 t. `�',,', .�. (-fin_— _�-, :r." ,r :_ r ;tom �_ _ -. ' _ - -- ` *---,T14,---"_-_ I. _ -.-1- - - t a-r tCTQ? }f"``�1tl' - F 3 �a_ - ! - - 1_f .i+ i -' - - -'�y•_••Q - - - __ _ -. -- _s.r•'�* t. - i�ti-- - ^t -94'--_741.----. -j�,_i�� r I� !- .L._- 91-1-4 ai-,.,v CCF,, i _ I .+`t' = i 4 - - __1 -_ - - - - - 'n_S �a +t)y)�}� ` ._ .-i-.2,17,---;-;.-- `� 1� _ s'{* �f' `} +3 �� (.yt���'�t`j1'� _I,"_°, ) . � t„...--________;_m______.,..1,! .,,,,ii,{ s �t r +'' r ) _ _ ='� :J i.J� tT -). r•�I I _ - ,.i'-;. a:Z+'�+. Ff,rt. !1�e�. ii}3 -erj1 ` - -f+_ _ :.{ _\_ tiyj- ._�-vii! _ -_: !t II Vt....rs ..LS.-‘\:!._'.0.c.l.:a asats't YIIle•t {c.4• `.f..,-'" ..cc�;LJS�-� .4::l - ja• '`/' --....4=E_,‘„,,,,-i+ .6.-o,rt..4'tF�i 5w bail}-Pitw —'. V * .a r o, ■ ;: ".L't 17 WY'_M NKI�. (1.t-`GLeQ) •if I •1 0 11,P-' _1_- 1 t J- .3` - -- - _ 1C� -, i 4 1t;4' F !K..a7fa?_stet w6_ma. �T v■ a _=f a�— e- i `����� e (�(' t _man \..; �j\G}`5 � .f�*�}at�` dJtsrt �. i' t/ 't1� ? l�T� ��rt,{{ fic_� >a ,�, --- l"�- - -SST/f i_ _,, _t 1 t a('Y` N '.•a'r�Ti ,.0 t,x,1 `t 1 -cc 43 `?3. l 1 - .0. 1' f{,,,k-�,� �: ` , - '-,.---. - - --. ti 4: !1 - " �:a .7 k_•:__-3 1_ -.-e}L�f' -..-:a-i ___�_... i _�*,.1++ t'i '� `�..j r ti+2� «� , th r •(ue lam..:-'i - ( f7..�y{-t f7+f._,_,_-' -'_n-,---i`- _:�.+._-.- ! — -- i`1` +. '• '� • t 1�� _ ...i. Y.,.....' t - 1 L"' iN_1 } __j `u}ci pt -7c n_s, :N...1,-;,4---,)..,--: ,:., t' • } '�_ .` �u' _ s'.. tF ‘Ca- ., } .`{ ` i`'�"(�o 'ate �t Y _- ' �`j, �'t -' �� j l.` t-N t .H.- Nt('13------"----°t t 1-'. Z-1 - 'k l_) pt-_t-,$n li 4{ ,r`S ` [le.- _--_ {- - rl•-f f�.. "�f''� _ _r �� ^44,i�rI Zif u�•• ! f 4- J• 1"�' f ! `!I- - It _ - '- - - /;l ` f y _- 4_1� ,s '} -E�.- C ... ` - 4; t Tn.' _Ll 1 1 - 4-'!- ''./ L�- - _ - -r 11• - '-0 a� -:t "? a`` `�r- .. SJj -.41,1�i�i Q n ` a a� u 1J_}yi .t, - ,ivT1-4,,,i 3•-• C •�.- �•�-I _� -'r - l�j Y. - n.1.lt]] Ea�}{��1 _7 t� Q�E. Z.l«J�'--I '1'.j- .. ew Ctj�j`f t•--F-i•.... i.-- 1.1• }' a e�'-`v bale. �: 13� 1I, 4_�_rl.:•1 d..,,+ 1 ' C� _�sl c 4� o +, r�GO'!"' ! / - '--- �' _ a_� 1 J Y". �-a tit [ � _ �``tl`' P, B■e -, , 'i L-`� - -- - _ --- --- - -- _ - --. .j - - t,�1.--_• I _----15 i/�' ... .I•Jf•!t f € r` .... ` -p si �I:,,,•t ''r- .. - - - _- _ -- _ - _ -- _ _ _ - - _ e' L I- `it V-I! 1 - `f.'l ��7 s} )(r_- '(q�If^f-1 }-_'��:_i'l C.__-«-1i ! �__.,�__��� _ _ _ -__ -- _ - - _ - j ~t ` .t -,.., -a"4+j-t--�, }� r.... 1P 1 �o' -,i- C ' e_c 4 0 ��r-� ,•t _ - _ - - _ - - , - _ ----2‘..),9•..s.45,..„,_„. _ --,,,.--4 1 t•-..—,...-1,---„, 1 , dl a „jc.,,. - ,_,n.. . ksg-,,,,„.......,,,,,,-, _ 27 t F r •� if iT�r� --- -- _ - - - o`°(tom.91 :+ �''r-'t .-tr yd..-i_-Sfiat t'; l_ j G - C i `_ft - rim:•r`- ` - - - - - - _ �.."14'''t i=_ '- -t rt _ - -..-- .r,... i_ (J)4 1�—}_ _ I]f6 •� (� .' t 3' t� _ti ,,,—, 46_,=-: t3_,t-i-fv----___ _-,..„ t.I i ,...----..-,-_,..'?-r ,-- ---*- ••?-. .. _ _ c:.---,---/ ..-::::;-:',?"---- _ - - ' -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - •rte-t ~„- y - ,, t•--', --.= 5.;;;:.1.1": - - +iZ -- - -- - _ _ _ 'N'.k‘ip\?Clf§ 4 -giq ••• o' - -- /f! �..a -- - - - - - _-_ - -- _ - --_-_ - - - - - - -- _- __ -- -- -- _ ,__1�u1 - - -- - __ --_ - _ _ - _ _ - - - - - ' . r!i'-r� .-`"..1 EXISTING BUS STOPS AND ROUTES . t. 1 _ i+s. _ .-+.N TRIMET BUS g12 ' E r SU ..:EaW V----:J- TRIM T BUS e7$ d 1: Q 1 - �s STOPS :f T GARS TRIANGLE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN ;. • • • • • DKS Associates : Tri - M e t u b s line number 12 runs between downtown Portland and King City via Barbur Boulevard y regularly, stopping at the Burlingame, Barbur, and Tigard Transit Centers along the way. This service is extended southwest to Sherwood on a limited basis throughout the day. Headways between • buses en route to downtown Portland are less than 15 minutes in the study area during the morning peak period (7:00..-9:00 AM) and bus headways in the study area traveling from Portland are less than • 15 minutes during the PM peak period (4:00-6:00 PM). f. Tri-Met bus line number 78 runs between Beaverton Transit Center and Lake Oswego Transit Center, , ;�' p • stopping at Tigard Transit Center along the.way. Bus 78 travels along Hall Boulevard, Greenburg Road, Hunziker Street, 72nd Avenue, Ham ton Street, 68th Street, Haines Street, Lesser Road, Kerr • p 9 , Road, and Country Club Road. Buses run about every 30 minutes between transit centerg during the peak periods. I J LAD USES Table 2 i A complete inventory of land uses Existing Tigard Triangle Land Uses in the Tigard Triangle was undertaken to provide a basis for `` ' estimating existing trip Land Use Quantity generation. The study area was broken down into 14 subareas. Single Family Housing 163 units Table 2 provides a summary of land uses in Tigard Triangle. Multi-Family Housing 2 units The existing ,land uses generate trips General Retail over 3,00'0, vehicle taps 1n the � a �47;300 SF evening peak hour. -34;300 SF Land uses along Pacific Highway Gas Station/Fast Food 4 units "' and Hampton St re et ar e almost i Commercial-Office 577,493 SF exclusively commercial/industrial within the Tigard Triangle, 68th Commerc,ia6wService i5S;400 S F Parkway.. is also fronted� by -- ; • primarily t;ontrnerclal/industrial Special Generators 14 bowling limes; 117 hotel rooms; , i i i the'ter 8cireens; 404 elementary land uses. The reina�,ning roadways y } roadw dd den 5,'700 SF ehurah; !. in the study area are school Stud • Y ��. SF 80 F residential/ I commercial l or exclusively 1 residential. A detailed exists SOURCE:'DitS Agsdciates { g land use summary table and an sp Square Feet existing zone map are provided ir1 the appendix of this report. i • Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan October 20, 190'3 Traflie and Trcncportation Elarnent 14 1 P93067/figtird2:rpt Y • T ,.. ,,,•, ., ..a .,, n i, ., . , .. ' T f,.., • I • OKS Associates I 1 ' h ' 1 1, , I ______________ .. 1 , . 1 . , 1 IEX.IS+TING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS , t id Accens . ,. I Based upon the most available data, there were a significant number of accidents along Pacific Highway within the Tigard Triangle- 78 accidents were reported along Pacific Highway in 1991 between Interstate 5 and ORE 217,14 According to the SPIS (Safety Priority Index System), the • intersection of 64th Avenue/Pacific Highway has the highest rating in ODOT's Region 1.15 The SPIS rating is an indication of accident severity, frequency, and rate. The other location along Pacific Highway where frequent accidents occur is at the ORE 217 southbound ramps. See Table 3 for an accident summary. I Intersection Operation I Capacity conditions a t 12 key study intersections were evaluated in the PM P eak P e period: I Nt 0 ORE 217 southbound ramps/Pacific Highway I R • ORE 217 northbound ramps/Pacific Highway p • Dartmouth Street/78th Avenue/Pacific Highway ' , m I tt n street I , •• 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 Northbound ramps • 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 Southbound ramps , i t ti s G. 68th Parkway/Pacific Highway , 1 68th,Parkway/AtlantalStreet/Haines Street 1 1 . ® 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street/I-5 Southbound ramps ® 68th 'Parkway/Hampton Street p • ' 0 64t Avenue/Pacific Highway/1-5 Southbound bound rdm s • 1-5 Northbound ramps/Haines Street t I Counts were performed during the evening (4:00-6:00 PM)P eak period. Additionally 24 hour counts �. were used to provide daily volumes in the study area. Review of the daily variation of traffic in the i __1 study indicates that the evening peak period is the time of day wheti the.greatest level of traffic , is on !study area 'roadways I I I , ''� , 'While analysis of traffic flows is useful in attempting to reach an understanding of the general nature i I of traffic in an area, traffic volume alone indicates neither the ability of the street 'network to carry • I orcgon Dept rtMCrt or' rtnspetirtrol, 199/ State Highway.5ystnt Accident Rate tables, Au�flst, 1991, Based oilletter to Randy VV ca 1 oy (Cit of Tigard) from Oregon 1]C iiim.t t of Transportation, Region k''on March 21 1993. ' a 7itard Triangle Specific Area Plan Oct,ebor 20, 19b3 • ' I I Trffio and 1 rrrt ;prrtal, on Elorncrrt 15 P4J30e71tigdrc2.rpt I ' I GI , I I r;ti I I 4 I I' , , I�,t l • • 1,,;° ' DKS Associates . , , ,, „_ ) ;, ' . , , , , , , „ ,, , . „ , , , , iI � ,y . 1 i, .. , additional traffic nor the quality Ta.�le 3 � � � ) Accident Summary of service provided by the street ' ', , , facilities. For this,the concept of ' ; ) T --- -- � J. level ofl service has been ` � developed t o correlate traffic rl' W 0 0 volume data to subjective ) ' , rn�;refl1ghway+ 64hAvcouc 55 descriptions of traffic ' �.,1. 68th/69th Avenue 10 performance at intersections. ' ') ' I � , ,— Intersections are the controlling li'I ,;, ' ' �� 71st Ave/Villa Ridge 15 �' �� bottlenecks of traffic flow, and 1'. , I Fred Meyer 33 the ability of a roadway system to i villa R - carry traffic efficiently is nearly i Ridge/Theatre 30 1.) , always diminished in their $I Vicinity. ' ' ' ' ! – 1 ' ' , ) i'! : . Plaine street 78th Ave/Dartmouth St 17 Performance of intersections 1 measured through analysis I of ) , ORR'217 Northbound 1 { -- __: capacity and level of service. 1 ORE 217 southbound 14 ' ' Capacity is the maximum flow ' I y, ;;,d , • ►—` rate of traffic 'which 'can pass �-, P. , ! 6Sh Aivenue Pciic Hi hway _I 4 C through an intersection, Capacity • ' I I tia► cs Street 2 is evaluated in terms of volume to Baylor Street 1 capacity (v/c) ratio: Values for r n I v/,,r ratio can be from 0.00 ( o 1(',5,ratnpt I 2 volume) to IMO (when flow rate ' ia>n�;t�,stmt s equals capacity). Actual v/c ratio �. cannot exceed 1:00, however, 72nd,A�'ct►ue*'.I Baylor Su eel 1 , projected demand to capacity ratio 1, .I a �:. r Vic 1 12200 block 1 can exceed 1,00. 'V*�he Where / rat ratio W--' = exceeds 0:90, changes lin Hermosa Way : I i ' geometry or signal design should ' !I �� r lievdand$frat 1 be considered: I II pith C c vri!t School 1 l:��vel of Seirvice (LOS) 1s 'a S ,^ Hampton Street 1 I measure of intersection operating � performance and vehicle delay. It ' I + i li � � G. t I a r g ..._ d rating �., ORI,717 Interchange 13 is Slmllii to a report card" • � � � with a range from A (best) to F �_j ' I 1 . (poorest). Levee service A, B �Cun�tkt r 5t l� of� 1 da 1C IIatxtNlan btt-ec�i 6th AVenuc 1 I , � � and C indicate satisfactory `'�� 7to�Mock 1 conditions where traffic can move I , l relatively freely. Level of service 72nd Avenue I ' 1 I 1) describes conditions where ! , I 1 -- _ __ ' delay is more noticeable, Level , I Saurecs: 0 ODO'r accident dait(base(1585-19501 - I 1 p.Ic."ity'of Thad hOeIdetit tlidithast:(3/89.1/931, I I 1 I 'Tigard!Triangle SpeciN8icAr'a4'PIa I I I Oatbber 20', 1903 F u•Traftia atid'TaiSporttieh,EIdrnatit 1 r9a067°trtttd2.rot l r 1 I I I 1.I j2 I 4! • i it, . . . - 1 DKSAssoc&tes '. 1 of service E indicates conditions where traffic volumes are at or close to capacity, resulting in , ' significant delays and average travel speeds which are one-third the uncongested speeds or lower. F ,Level'of service F characterizes conditions where traffic demand exceeds available capacity, with very . . slow speeds (stop and go), long delays (over a minute), and queuing at signalized intersections. Level ' of service D during the peak hours is the generally accepted standard for planning of transportation facilities. Tables 4 and 5 indicate the LOS criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Table 4 y Level of Service Definitions Signalized Intersections • Vehicle a 1 e Volume me k o , Level o f Delay Capacity Service (secs.) Ratio Description ' ', A <5.00 0.00-0:60 Free Flow/Lnsignificant Delays: No approach phase is ' fully utilized by traffic and no vehicle waits longer than one red indication. % ,„ 1- B 5.1-15'.0 0.61-0.70 Stable Operation/) inimai Delays: , An occasional , ! approach phase is fully utilized. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within platoons of vehicles, ' C 15.1-25.0, 0.71-0,80' Stable Operation/Acceptable Delays: Major approach phases es fiilly utilized. Most drivers feel somewhat , restricted. ' I' D 25.1-40,0 0:81-0:90 Approaching�Bcstableolerable Delays: Drivers ma y have'to wait through more than one red signal indication, (J Queues may develop but dissipate rapidly, without excessive delays: E 40.1-60,0 0,9l-1.00 Unstable O eratin /Signifant Delays: 'Volumes at or near capacity, Vehicles may wait though several signal ' cycles. Lying queues form upstream from intersection. [ '' F 60,0 >1.00 Forced FloVilExcessive Delays: Represent, jammed 4 ) conditions, Intersection Operates below capacity with low i ,voluines+ i7ueues ma. may block upstream.intersections. .,_ /. t source; Highway Caprtaity Manual,Transportation Reseatch hoard,Special Report No.2o ,Washington D.C,i 1985. • „ I 1 , Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan October 20, 1908 .i ' ; Traffic and Transportatioh Elemeht 1 7 pa 3oe7Itiburdzapt �” a A 3 " ' \. .■ ■ „ ' : A 1 . . ' ' DKSAs oc.1ates • , , ' , ': , , : ' , . 1 , 4) ., ,„.... . 4, . . . , „ „ . . . . , . . , • „ . . ,) , . , . 1, 1, , , , • Table 5 � � } Level of Service Definitions : , Unsignalized r?Itersections , t Reserve Capacity a t Y 7 Le v el o f Service Expected Delay' (Vehicles/Hour) ' A ' ' Little or' no delay >400 B Short'traffi delay 3C0-399 Average traffic delays 200-299 ' ; . ' D Long traffic delays , : 100499 ;' , Very long traffic delays 0-99 .1 F l Extreme delays:potentially affecting ' C•0 :i °�" . other traffic movements in the intersection source: Iiishwry'Capaciiy Manual,Specinl Repdt 209,Transportation i.esearch Board.Washington,D.C., 1985. ' .. i o� Intersection Analysis s Metho��l �� �y . . The evaluation of intersection operations, in this study uses techniques described in the»1985 Highway, '' ` .\ Capacity Manual signalized, intersections, � Each study intersection is,analyzed during the full peak - s v volumes) •. hour �fhe hour with'the' highest traffic lnnles) ,of'operation d�rinig the PM peak period, The �� � � , • . . , operations rnethod1 was Used and specific field 'nieasuremef s lof saturated flows in the Tigard : ' ang area re e Verify computed saturation'. flr For this study four Measures of ; • 'S'ri levee read to' 'fy puted JwS. i performance were analyzed as noted below. Intersections not meeting the criteria in the table below . were analyzed in greater detail. D, ,r1r { IA::„'Pa'r1'1i.i1:1iii,rii'r.i1Tiir1,:r1i1i:f'1.ii •fig ri'• t� �r� r : 1 ' Level of Service D or:Better :� l olonne-to Capacity 0.90 la acit Ratio or less , Aver e .• '� ��� : ���� �� � • � � � g�� 'Vehiele Delay , , '. 40 seconds p'er Vehicle,averaged stopped delay or less�� �' � •� �� � Queued Vehicles at Intersections less than 15 vehicles per lane 1 t - Nighwriy C�pddty A9anurii, Special Report No. 2O0,Transptttntign llesc..rch Board, 1985,Chrlptrr 2, r : : : , ' 771:26fd T,riarrplo Spooii'ic Area elan , , , , � October 20,�1 998 ` ,i' e ' Ttetll� d n d Tr e ns ort ti tiot7 wlament 1 , 1 8 p3057f t i rd2 tot ' Tf 0, bKSAssociates rf - _, . . . , . Intersection Operation Table 6 presents a summary of existing intersection operation at each of the stud y intersections• , • For the specific plan area level of analysis, intersection evaluations were performed during the PM • peak period. The evening peak period is the time when the greatest number of vehicles are on the ' „ study area roadways (see attached sketch of 24 hour profile). At the ORE 217/Pacific Highway interchange, the queue on the east leg of Pacific Highway at the o E 217 southbound ramps backs 1 ;b up nearly into the intersection of ORE 217 northbound ramps/Pacific, Highway. This causes vehicles "' travelling southbound on Pacific Highway to stop abruptly. Also, queues on the east leg of Hall . ' ;. Boulevard/Pacific Highway sometimes back up to the ORE 217 southbound intersection, preventing ` ti• the last few vehicles on,the ORE 217 southbound off,ramp from getting through the intersection at j; •.. Pacific Highway. A key bottleneck occurs south of the study area on Pacific Highway at the yi intersections of Hall Boulevard and Greenburg Road/Main Street. Long queues (10-15 vehicles) of left turning vehicles are present on the north and south legs of 68th • Parkway at Pacific Highway during the PM peak period. The left tunas are not protected and, impacting I although not presently mpacting operation,the left turns can have Problems clearing the intersection. (. N ( The northbound approach on 68th Parkway takes longer to clear because of the uphill slope. ,,,,LL Though traffic volumes are heavy and queues are long along Pacific Highway at every intersection vehicles proceed through each intersection without large delays. While,volume to capacity ratios at two intersections exceed 0.80, average vehicle delays are typically under 20 seconds per vehicle on • Pacific Highway, Queues from the south leg of the 72nd Avenue/Hampton intersection sometimes back up to the 72nd d Avenue/ORE 217 northbound intersection during the PM peak period: The intersections of 72nd .avenue/OR]E 217 southbound ramp and 72nd Avenue/Hunziker Road are so close together that the queue on the south leg of the Hunziker Road intersection sometimes backs up to the ORE 217 southbound ramps intersection, preventing all of the northbound traffic from clearing the queue. At •. the 1-5 at Way ` g , the westbound left turn lane at the I ,t ne signal ORE 217/Kruse wa ii: ercha tli 5 southbound ramp 0 , terminals consistently overflows during the PM peak period, and does not clear the queue in one signal cycle, Also, the westbound leg of the 1-5 southbound ramps/ORE 217 packs up into the 1-5' " • r northbound ramps/Kruse way intersection,preventing the 1-5 northbound offs ramp traffic from turning right onto ORE 217. Queues of traffic extend back Onto mainline I-5 freeway. Traffic travelling southbound on ORE 217 exiting to 1-5 southbound typically backs up beyond 72nd Avenue in the i ,, morning and evening peak, i. Tigard Triengie Specific At plan dothber o, 1993 , Troftid dnd Trtari"Sporthtion I Iet ier t 19 09308 riicinrd2.rpx . h'� v a ,4 D n ,b rS v , F Aki . Y A r., , • • . , 'DKS Associate. ' ' ' ,,,, 1, . , i : , , .:____ , .,... .. , ,., , , , , , ,4 } �� . , , ,„ , „ „ „ : 1,„ , :, „ „ , „ . „ ,TaWe 6 ; ' Existing (1993) Intersection Operations ' '' , ; , ' , i`fi'i rJ. }if: n , i'i'i��ij'�'�'•'i!i!i!:!l�!i!.!�'i•:�•:::'r'i i'�•i i i i i�i•i;i i':'i'i i��i�'.'i i�'l''i:�I'J�'.�:'��i'�•�'i•:•i i�'i J•'�'� i'J'i � 'TAT. //�y;;j'���J':����!�i�'::•,'y''�'�'�;.4�i i!�..•, , Ti•� „ r. , • • ii%ii i ij,ii ,' JJ •. iM1 � tl'• •• J:iii , �''�Ifi i 1 'i�ppnnw'i': ii )tiii���� I I 1 „ . ' . ' ' 1 i ORE 217 southbound/Pacific Hwy 17.7 ,0.81 � C .. ORE 217 northbound/Pacific Hwy 8,0 0.70 B t , Dartmouth St/78th Ave/Pacific Hwy 16.E 0.82 , 72nd Avenue/Hampton St 13.5 0.53 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 . ___ 17 northbound 11:9 0.62 B ' 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 southbound 21.5 0.82 C . • . 68th Parkway/Pacific Highway 19.3 0,87 C ) 68th Parkway/Haines St/Atlanta St: N/A N/A C l'...; , (unsignalized) ' _, ;) . 68th Parkway/Dartmouth St/I.5 ramps NA INA E , •r (unsignalized) 68th Parkway/.Hampton St (unsignalizer1) N/A . ' N/A C ' 64th Ave/Pacific Hig hway/1-5 ram p , 24.3 ' 0.83. ' C . ;i , I-5 northbound/Haines Street ' N/A N/A� C (unsignalized) �, , r . vac v u a) me to capacity,Yrado , ,LOS, . Level of'�Scr ce C ” r "1 NA = Not applicable for unaignallmi,hitersectitt ' , i' ' DEl..A` = Avcr•►ge vc}ucle delay'(becantld/vehicle) ' r PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS ' li Seven projects have been proposed for'the.study area in the future, These include an extension of t ' 72nd Avenue to connect l y, extending'Dar month Stmt between 78th Avenue ' nne�t with Pac�fir: lligliwd at Pacific Hi hied and the - southbound ram a 8 y 1�5 southbo 'ramps at '69,th Avenue, rebuilding the l'..5 at ORE , 2I7/Kruse Way interchange, Modifying the,Pacific Iighway/64th Avenue intersection,construction ' • of Cub Foods Commercial Center, construction of a park & ride lot 4Ion,g Pacific Highway just 11 ,, .? west of 72nd'.Avenue;' nd a potential tight rail transit alignment in Harbor Corridor. 77pa,d TNarlgle 5pechti AreO Plan ' October 20, 1958. ' ' i Tralf,,ic and Transportatlori cletnertt �, 2C� � I i'9365,�1 t� ard2.r t I � � Iii , r , , r r �ar � � � � 1. I t' { k • • 1 ' DKSAssociates,. , , , . . , . .. , ,-- The City of Tigard has initiated work extending 72nd Avenue to Pacific Highway at the existing Fred , ' Meyer store. The existing signalized intersection at the Fred Meyer access would be moved approximately 80 feet to the southwest." Two left turn lanes would be provided for westbound left { • '\ turns from Pacific Highway onto 72nd Avenue. The 72nd Avenue approach would consist of one left, one right, and one through lane. Crosswalks would be provided on the north, south, and east legs :. of the intersection and sidewalks would be provided along both sides of 72nd Avenue near the intersection. Villa Ridge Road would still exist, but direct access between Villa Ridge Road and 72nd ? ) would no longer be possible, as Villa Ridge would turn into a dead end on both sides of 72nd Avenue. i This project has been funded and is scheduled to begin late 1993 or early 1994. Dartmouth Street is proposed major co 1 lector which would d connect the 1-5 southbound ramps at 68th Avenue with Pacific Highway at the existing 78th Avenue intersection. Dartrnot'4,W, Street would consist of two 16 foot lanes and a 12 foot center turn lane.'8 The project has been 4`inded and will be constructed in 1993. I ODOT's 1993-1998 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program lists the reconstruction of the 1-5„ at Kruse Way and ORE 217 intochange as a project for the fiscal year 199.5.19 Freeway to freeway connections between ORE 217 and 1-5 would be provided, allowing traffic travelling between the two ,t freeways to bypass any signals. As part of the project,68th Parkway is proposed to be extended south f ' to ORE 211/Kruse Way, and a signal would be provided at this intersection. The ORE 217 at 72nd I Avenue interchange would be reconfigured as a diamond interchange,and Hunziker Street would cross ;,, . - over ORE 217 and connect with.Hampton Street. The old section of Hunziker Street which currentl y ' connects to 72nd Avenue south of ORE'217 would become a cul-de-sac. A design hearing map of the proposed proje ct is supplied in the appendix.� �D OT is currently y ieassessi n g the design p lan for . Iµ5/ORE 217. Supervalu, Inc.'is proposing to build a community commercial center with a 79,455 square foot Cub Foods grocery store as the anchor tenantl, ' The commercial center, which would be located just northwest of the proposed Dartmouth/72nd Avenue intersection, would consist of approximately ' 150,00 square feet of leasable floor area, Two access points would be provided along 72nd Avenue , `` l and one access would be provided along the proposed Dartmouth Street. Construction has begun with ..t occupancy planned in 1994• I n < . 2 - Based on City or Tigard 7?nd•991,�' Intersection Prr�pcisr�3 C0' nfiguration 'pr,�:,, April ''3, 1993. �'' 18 - Bayed ryn Di►itn1outh Street pions supplied by the City or Tigani, 2/25/93. 4, J5,93•1 :98 Sias Year Transpo iar1r a Irnp eot,empiif Progrrittt,Oregon eput t vent of ;'ransportation, July l9 , pg•�3. Cub Foods Cominercial CerileN 7"rarispotlatiou 7tripacl ,Study,by Kittelson and Associates, Inc.,February, 199 . Di and TriartQle Specific Area Plat? October 20, 1 09 93 Traffic and T rans or n `br Element 21 �8�©b?!t l dP.r p i i F . • A ,4 . ,M! • . ' , DKS Associates - _____. , .. , • , its Oregon Department of Transportation is proposing a modification to the intersection of Pacific Highway West at 64th Avenue to improve the safety at this location21 This location received the i highest SPIS (Safety Priority Index System) rating in all,of Region I. Studies have been initiated to .� , investigate potential short term solutions including a proposed modification which would eliminate the ,'4: . ability of southbound 64th Avenue and southbound Pacific highway West traffic to access 1-5 at this location. ODCO' staff are proceeding with development of a 1HES project which is low cost and ` would restrict certain intersection movements to improve safety. The Cities of Portland and Tigard ' are working with ODOT to refine the project which may move toward implementation within the next . year. A proposed park and ride lot has been proposed by Tri-Met to be located south of Pacific Highway between the entrance to Tigard Cinemas and 72nd Avenue. The lot would contain approximately 200 , N parking spaces, five of these being handicap spaces.22 Two points of access would be provided to , i; the park & ride along Pacific Highway West • In addition., a conceptual light rail transit (LRT) alignment for the Barbur Corridor is under ''.' consideration as part of the City of Portland's Regional Rail Program.' The Barbur Corridor would , 1 ; i'' • provide light rail between 1-405 on the southern fringe of downtown Portland and downtown Tigard. Based on initial analysis, the alignment would run along the center of Pacific Highway within the , iv' , study area, with a transit station at 72nd Avenue. LRT would operate on double tracks separated from auto traffic by raised concrete barriers. However, the exact route and location of the alignment has ; ' 4 not yet been determined. Optional alignnnent concepts are referenced in later chapters of this report: U i o . I , 21' Letters to Randy VVoolcy, Tigard from Doug Anderson, oDOT, March 26, 1993 and April 2, 199.34 i . r Tigard Part: & Fide *radio plan provided by Tri�Mtt, lim inu 1'1 ixl Based an re by� p o City or Portland Office q`Transportations Bdrbur Corridor Light Roil Transit Study, November, 1991. 1 • N Area p October 20, 1993 !. Tigard Triangle Specific d.re Plan Traffic and Transt Ort.atioh Elarnenl 22 P93O671t"gard2 tpt . I . r R o- rr ► n • • . ' DKS Associates _ . 1 , ., 1 1 \. r 3 . Transportation Guideline ,,. , , ___________ _....._____.....,___._. ... } , 1 1 ‘,., The current City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan' has a number of transportation policies which cover many issues within the Tigard Triangle area. This chapter uses the existing policies and refines them for the specific area plan and address issues in light of the State Transportation Planning Rule. The intent of the policies is to provide a framework for transportation decisions in the Tigard Triangle i. today and in the future, Policies for the Tigard Triangle have been prepared for streets and roadways, transit,bicycles, and pedestrians. Each of these transportation areas contains explicit policies to guide '" . . - - • ' I the city, While prescriptive measures can be outlined in some cases, site specific information will need to be provided and reviewed on a case by case basis to assure compliance with the intent of these xis r guidelines ry I STREETS AND ROADWAYS Functional Street Classification . Roadways have two functions, to provide mobility and to provide,access. From a design perspective, � • these functions can be incompatible since high or continuous speeds are desirable for mobility, while low speeds are more desirable for land access. Freeways and arterials emphasize a high level of i mobility for through movement; local facilities emphasize the land access function;and collectors offer a balance of both functions4 Figure 3 shows the relationship of the functional classification to access ' • and mobility; The classifications in the Tigard Triangle area a classified Into a hierarchy system of streets, These h ese I ` ' ' , [ are freewa s> arterials, major collectors, minor collectors, and local streets, Figure 4 1 • shows;the recommended roadway classifications in Tie Tigard Triangle, The specific plan does not s Y change city comprehensive plan requirements for arterials, For major collectors, requirements for s p widths, but • medians are provided. For local streets, the specific plan Ietain,,th wide range of street t , ,,. ,, recommends the low e .y the sides end of the residential end o ben range for short, local vial c ec:trot�s and the high e range for commercial streets, ,. I CrArd Triangle D r t Comprehensive c Plan, May 9, 1993, p Tigard Triangle Specific Are a Plan October�r 7 0 1 993 Traffic and Trersporthiidh Eierrert • ii - . DKS Associates 1 1 .. ,, , .......___________. . , . Freeways in the Tigard Triangle provide Ithe ,r'- ,� , .. 1 e highest level of mobility and lowest level of access �,I''' °°°' °(y�`t t of any of the roadway classifications. Access is • �;- ` only provided to and from select public roads by ,' k t prohibiting crossings at grade and direct private, h . o tet,°t ` driveway connections. Interstate 5 bounds the a l Io° 1 Tigard Triangle on the east side, and ORE 217 bounds Tigard Triangle on the southwest side are U si the two freeways in the study area. Ita ri ps`ss�°� �� The primary functions of an arterial route are t o ° as I serve through trips entering the urban area rea �=,:, , � —. I (metropolitan area) to provide a high level I of canba/Noln.�pn,' /nucc:incf1::::7,46::':1.4A, NA/u:o/ , :rclhe rro/Garnuetltlrpsp0od. rroll'Je I mobility for travel Within the entire metropolitan MdvEMeNrFUNGr1oN � ` zgure 3 �'� - region. All trips from one community,or subarea ACCESS RELATIONSHIP OF ROAD „w ' '' through an adjacent community traveling to other ; po'its, in the region should occur on a major arterial or principal router It is desirable that it be is ,. a'multiple-lane with access/egress awry ess,traffic controls at carefully selected intersection points. Access ") is critical on these facilities to ensure safety and smooth operation. Direct access to arterials ' control , I from individual residences or commercial or industrial uses shall be prohibited unless no other ' practical access exists. The only arterial in the study area is Pacific Highway West (ORE 99W). 1 ` • Pacific Highway Startdards.',l , Right-of-way width: 90-120 ft _ 1 Pavement width; 12 ft per land Through lanes: 4-6 `'Volume: 40,000-60,000 vehicles per day 40 mph Parking: Not Allowed I A . ,� �� � � New Access: Not Allowed; unless consolidated I Median: Landscaped median'to be provided • . I The primary function of a major collector is to collect and transport traffic from a number of local . neighborhoods to one or more arterials, in addition, these facilities are primarily oriented toward travel within and between adjacent subareas, and provide connections to major activity centers withil the,area, Major collectors should have a minimum,number of controlled access points, have two or ; more travel lanes, have fairly direct,. r o arterial connectors, and provide for relatively rapid HI movement for traffic. Emphasis shod d be placed on consolidation,of access of use of cross streets for access, For example, between Oa tniouth an the'theater driveway, a parallel roadway to Pacific „ , I , I II I , I F, Tigard Trttrfg/e Sp t i((ic Area pl:h 1 , October 20, '1903 i , Traffic and'Trerisoortetioh Clement 24 993757/t,ord3 tPi v 1 • , I a r i I n • n 7 A........-'-� :.mss 0.''''''''''' �..,•-»...� IOW'.". - ; .� � �,� � s- __ n .-- "'r - - /' tom.,_-----i.0- ... -"'.- � Y r ' .. •f '`S-c t}�S`'.��•1 !-x' - - - i.�-' - -$"t o- '�c c .` � ; _.t....-s• .,vg- w^'-^^:.rte .•• i t• f \a t ,rS;�{.t� . s Jam! I''.\-\:''140/537-'0(-,1 4 '- z a j . nom i s t f" 5- "a p°c A_' �..._.:. ,�R� t � .,t t,�. y ‘} v -s. t♦t 1 �CZ. �}��" / `: 5� Cr �. sp;i.�.,, p r X`� �. t�{ k ,rj r 'E_" ` t.. `+"' " ., ¢tStlas�.�w..• �- �, '6- f` Q�. O L' •spa-r",.� �_ _ - k-5; j• •t'`k C,,.15 6' -. l ' fFt..••s. ----"�1,...- .,y .• ik" -, ./s�4 �yy�,.^ ^':.='- , '' ! ta'i'l •f,�,{{ */• i -i _ - � ���,,+�,�t.'i�+ t, N�wwes j--N., -7. 'Cc- tiVeSTa--.-_,- 1--4. --- ) (---\ 00-11 s.,h.iVi , . -1,1-- , ,4,.....-z...\ - -- - ') r--14ii -'f t •-'%- '�...K f 1 r -.t;-S_t .31L .:" kF� .11..�t • (.. •�(� ' ;„‘ d'` as t.11 -/ :l�•j. ^"" - .4- 1311' . f . (1 : E-- , , ,,..„,...4...; r•�_jt. _1 U „ . % rL= �i,' - -fi. t� .°#. t-'«:-yY�.a.'•''3'-"S�'°?"J' t h'oYe.,,.5;yr-WI!,.. l`,^r �;rl"et"'l �"t •w ` ' _- ; �=."%'�fy fly- Ci\,.. '.a=''' 1.Y: :\.'-',‘ •-„.:c, ,- t�-� -� v fl o ' t t9'' f' �` y �,��G+ �•.• a -- `tti.( t '"� ,"' 4. , '-} :•..,' '_1,% i t tQ Y ti t t ,-' t \, �' � A ' - - - - ,+ ..--'t i T s�° `..ria. 4 iZ ..•" 4 w �sL'C� •L•.-^ ° •.,�t � r� '.'1_1Q �,\ ; •asp _c___, ._a^} '~tr •�• / - �� E{` G °' i" tCsj sl S �! 6 zf 1 .t. C��} +;.. r=t ," �j •.t 1.. ,_,- t F ` . � y *-J/t-'M41 {tF`- A f•�*�, "°-ier;IV' ." `"1 +.- ,'`t�, �y ,'i 41\gcr,S4r-$�,•t„� �( � L ♦ "� }�'�.{� ;'� +A cy.-ilk -y s 4:y,�a7)� nr,_ - s`� �� .4 Y� 1^5�• i`et ' t�„.„,„5„.. • v3 `�, - 4^i��ll:''✓. `v o i,p` t 3 'L- ,” (( , �• - - -- s"., 'yy }, ¢ sr wn...►.1. tj .--''1 i� �s1+.,•^y^'.-C, •S is 1 `� a f ciG-�pytim _ v�;: _ - - '`. fig• j 1E.'t3*`!'sta. . 'l1�'i'' l ,y d \",---.- 1:i ,-j /-jam `( I / - - - _ . a - - - _ ..`'�... t �;.�,s-T r'• �4 6 r �c"a i'e •« (i=t=• ,_ ,1, i-'... }(�'�,_,-{�.t,7 � y�`j ,��lJ f'~ . a• 1-- � �+�vS.I-' }....�T .- f+� YK'.�tCts� �,�L.�.•� } �'L,..'.14-4:� � r - _ _ Nf �• \___---, = .,„...4- ‘0,0„., -,--,...;,-..,,..._t t t_,. .:. L.,/. ,---1:- •.' _...--------"Zt‘'"\il i 4..4;:tt.r__.,..,4 r vtc‘...„,_ S art' � a �=,, n1' 1 -; Jf'" °;� ' AaT�R�A` TEA - -htT .-:', .. \A . -_ G s ''7J( =iYft`Y�t W470- l t/fl� '��s ���;' ��ss*e=���t (elk- - - }\•- 1�c\N,-. '�61/\1 *j ---` 1-4. �` *syaa i4yl`30� �t� �G.r it ' i e.,- rI`_ _ " � - � C - - Ct-Sk 10• - � � __ �mo11014 ,{ . ..... - _ _ 1,-,.,..... . ., , _ _ _ A--,..,e, ../..- _ ____------fkg— . _ - ...,. .......,,,,,„:„.r..._, ,,,Git_. .,- 5°t ,,_ __ _ , , t r - - -.....--------,,ive 4 - , _:,.----,**-:---.1.'-1;,'.. .,, ._. 7. . 1-?..1, . .. .. ._ .. . . _ ,_. ,•,„-„, ....„. _,,,„.. ,,G,,,,,,,0 .... _... __ _ Y ...., ._-_ ,,-..--.-. . - - _ . , .....„. . _ ___ , _ . . . , . ..• .......— - - . .. _ _ _, .. .„_. ,.. . . ._____ , __ . .. „.. . .....,r, r . , . . . . . ,. _, , . __ _ __ .. . .._ . _ _. . _ ,._ . _ ._ e.. ...._ , . . _ _ _ _ ., . , _ _ . . _ _ _ . ... . . . _....... , .. .. . .. ......._ . .. ..._ ,,.. _ , ____ . . •_,_ , . . ..._ , . ,_ • ••• . .• . ____, . . , _ . , __ __.,_.•...• . . . _ ... . .... , . ,. _ • _ . . _______ .. _ . . . _ _ . „... • _ , _ ._._ ___ , _ . . _ .._...„, .... r ,, ... _ . r _.,_..._.••„_ . . . _ __ •..._ _ __ .. . . . ,. __ ._ __ • .. . _ .______ • ....__ ... _____ . . . .. _ • . . .. r,,.• • S ■ ^4.„ DKSAssociates ; ,1 r . , . . i ,. 1 r , 1 • . , . Highway(a few hundred feet east)may be considered to allow fronting uses access a fronting roadway 2,'':a rather than ORE 99W. In doing this, the likelihood of local streets being utilized for through traffic and cross-town travel is lessened. Traffic controls should be utilized at intersections with arterials, major,collectors, and minor collectors. Another function of this classification is to provide a means , for pedestrian and bike travel. Parking may or may not be provided. major Gollecfsi b ' ..• area include 68th Avenue/68th Parkway, Parkw ay, '21d Avenue, x�art L.S ,Hamtn Streetan�in.s.r ,,, ' , .St i B 68th/72nd/Da nouth/Ha/npton/Haines Standards: • , Right-of-way width: 70 feet (all except t 72nd= 80'& 4 lane Dart m ou th � 9 90') ) ,, Pa v emen t w idth: 44 ft (all except 72nd = 52' & 4 lane Dartmouth =66') • • . Through u h lanes: 2 (all except segment of Dartmouth outh 4) , , Volume: 1,500-10,000 Vehicles per day , i Speed: 30-40 mph w..j ' • Parking: Generally Not Allowed 1 ' , ' Access: No Residential, Limited Commercial '' Medians: Use on 72nd Avenue and Four Lane Streets The primary function of a minor collector is to collect and transport ort traffic from local neighborhoods ,,F' p Y p and abutting property out of the neighborhoods to major collectors and,arterials. The roadway should ,, .,, provide an efficient circulation pattern within,the'neighborhood for distribution of traffic to local i r (� s , streets as well as the arterials and major collectors, Use of chokers to narrow streeta,at�ntersectron., , , ' or other traffic management measures may be considered where street alignments are long and ' , • straight. : '"" finctiort IS to provide a means for pedestrian and bike travel. Parking may or provided, Minor arterials study area include Atlanta Street 70 �� ay not be pro ' Dino ials in the stud ar incl t and. m Avenue,' '' Atlanta Street is extended to connect to 72nd Avenue, fit Atlanta and 70th Standards: 1 11 , Y 1 ��d Right-of-way width: 60 ft l Pavement width: 36 ft Through lanes: 2 500 e: • Volume:y' 3,000 vehicles per day Speed: '25-30 mph Parking: Permitted Access: Permitted, if spaced properly . Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plarr I October 20, 1993 .., r.. '930f37ltig rrdl rot ...� � Traffic and 7 �hspcsrttat�uh Element 2 6, 1 a r a + . { 'a. 'f '^_... 4"'''•. r 'I _. J+; • .. . ,' DKS Associates ' - .. ,,,..,i c The primary function of a local street i s to provide dir ect access to abutting property to allow .. -; traffic movement within a neighborhood. These street networks shall be designed to interconnect neighborhoods, access to commercial or institutional uses serving rving those neighborhoods, safety,fety, street and utility maiiatenance efficiency, and residential quality. For the Tigard Triangle area, these connections may be through high density housing parking areas or through commercial centers. Traffic management techniques should be considered for any long, straight streets. Local street ,tip networks should emphasize and provide for pedestrian and bike travel. Streets should not be straight, long(500- 1000 feet) and steep (greater than 4 percent) to avoid high traffic speeds and neighborhood disruption. Spacing of the local streets in the area bounded by 68th/Hampton/72nd/Atlanta should be spaced at least at 500 foot,intervals running east and west, Some of the existing streets may be .. retained, (snch_as_ .ailor-)whii.e. others„ ay, . nd._,t 'n vacat r le ocated' or reused (such as Franklin . The implementation of these local streets should be flexible to accomino ate unique • development opportunities. The pedestrianways discussed in following sections must be provided ' every 200 to 300 feet (with or without a local street). Narrow street widths for local streets are possible with low volumes. Streets with less than.500 cars per day can be 24 to 28 feet wide with , ' parking. This creates a "queuing street" where on-coming traffic may have to wait at a driveway or '' intersection to pass if cars are parked on-street. This street width,particularly if not straight and long, . : ,.- . i is effective'at controlling neighborhood traffic speeds. Direct lines of pedestrian travel should be • • provided using access through high density residential are or cul-de-sacs if necessary. t Local Street Standards; Right-of-way width: 36-50 ft '... Pavement width: 24-34 ft (low range for residential, high range for commercial) Movin g g lanes: 2 Volume; 0-1,500 vehicles er da Speed: 20-25 mph Y Cul-de-sacs: 35 foot radius turn-around and 400 foot maximum length, Parking: Permitted Access: Permitted .: Access Control It has been estimated st mated the 2 . . � that about l %d of accidents on major urban routes are related to commercial driveways.' Access control is critical to ensure safety and smooth operation, especially on higher • . • order roadways where volumes and speeds are generally higher. Within commercial, industrial, and multi-fa" y as driveways and Internal between uses are encouraged to reduce the multi-family are , shared d access number of access points to the higher order roadways, to improve internal,site circulation, and to Guidelines Pct' tfrbret Major Street Design,Institute of Transportation Engirlecrs, 1984,page 49. • ' , tgard l Triarttle Specific Area Plan octobor 20; 1 903 a Traffic and Transportation Elomon't 27 P$3067tiafjard3,,ot S' i . . ,. . : . , , 4'.' DKSAssociates1 . . 1 . . , . . j ,. .. reduce U th • e e number of local trips • on the street system.' Roadway Section Drivways e It is recommended in the City of ORE 217 Ito Dartmouth>' C yo O mo 1 ' • Tigard Comprehensive Plan that Dartmouth to Cinema 12 . direct access to arterials from Cinema to 72nd/Fred Meyer 1 . 1 , ,. individual residences' or 72nd/Fred Meyer to 68th Parkway 2 , commercial or industrial uses shall 68th Parkway to:1I-5 ramps 4 I be prohibited unless no other 1, '' I practical access exists. This TOTAL 20 restriction applies to any new , commercial activity along Pacific ' • Highway West, The existing number and location of access points (driveways) along the southeast side of Pacific Highway West(ORE 99W) is shown in the table. The following access guidelines will apply to arterials (Pacific Highway West) in the Tigard Triangle in the future: ® No new access will be provided along Pacific Highway West; I e Cross streets should be used for access where feasible; ta, ,< ' . .' • If cross street access is not feasible, access should be consolidated with other existing • I driveways, l ' Fronting or parallel streets should be developed and used for access as long as the access points .• ''. remain more than 200 feet from the intersections with Pacific Highway: The best ortynity for this • ..�.en where fron p + it•; '..'_,,. exists between]Dartmouth Street and the theaters, tin�l�nd uses if redeveloped could move • :,.. ,/,'' • access off ORE 99W. . i According to the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan, direct access to major collectors from I individual residences shall be discouraged unless no other feasible option exists. Commercial access 1 1 . or access from multi-family housing should be limited and consolidated whenever possible, Spacing between major driveways should be approximately 300 feet', where possible; Direct access to minor collectors from individual >+es ldences shall be discouraged access should be . sib, Commercial driveways from lower order streets whenever Peal i e. ,Com eways should be consolidated whenever . . ' possible, with a driveway spacing of about 150 feet. . .. I Access from individual residences should be provided along local streets whenever possible, • 1 i , 1 I 1 City of Gresham Ordinance, station S:U58 Dn���ways. 4 Forcater, ?1, and Larleaslet, T., Oregori Highway Plan Administrative Ride, Te..ahrltci,l Mtrmortandunt #3, t' "/• itcnuuty, 1993,p, 65. .., • I 11 1 v s I 1 1 n . i• Specific Area a Tigard 7'rtartg�la 5p��'rt'r.,Ar � f�l ri1 � C7txt�b.., 20, 1 , , I Traffic and Tr��risporteiii�n trlerionl 2 1)93001,6 td3.rot ,.. : 1 1 . I 1 II I 1 I I iI • ' - . 1 E ' ... ,.. . , ' . .: . , , .. . . .. DKS Associates } For arterials and collectors, driveways should be located beyond the queue Iength for traffic from I ;L• ' nearby intersections. Site traffic analysis should be performed for projects to review assess driveway ;-'.'.''' r,. placement and queue conditions. For commercial and industrial land uses, the minimum distance from •• driveway to intersection curb return should be 100 feet for arterials and collectors and 45 feet for local ,' , streets unless this prohibits access to the site. Exceptions may be made for residential land uses' p p • : /J where sight distance to any intersection is a problem. • Spacing between median openings should be at least 240 feet on arterials and collector's.' Spacing between signalized intersections should be at least 1/4 mile.'` Signalized intersections are identified "' .. , for the Tigard Triangle area on Figure 4,the graphic indicating recommended roadway classifications.' } Unsignalized intersection spacing (minimurris) should be 300-350 feet for arterials and 150-200 feet'' ,,.. for collectors. These spacings are aimed at provided ,adequate left turn lane storage, improve , opportunities for signal progression reasonable space between signalized pedestrian crossings and to I limit the conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. • w ^' Driveways . . • „,,l' For industrial and commercial land uses,recommended driveway widths for commercial and industrial .J• ' land uses fronting any roadway type should be between 24 (low volume) and 36-40 feet (high volume, • } 200 to 300 vph), Residential driveways should be between 12 and 24 feet, Street Cross Sections f,: Typical roadway cross sections are shown in Figure 5, The 44 foot roadway width for the major collectors is the same width used on the recently-constructed projects for Greenburg Road and Durham Road, This cross section would be used for Dartmouth Street,68th Street, and Hampton Street. 12nd . • Avenue should have a raised and landscaped median at mid-block locations where a left turn lane is , l not needed. A 15 foot travel lane and a 5 foot bike lane are preferable (see 72nd Avenue cross ' section) to provide,enough room for emergency access (winter conditions),in case of a stalled vehicle '• or other problem in the roadway (this also provided flexibility for potential use by LRT), 70th I, Avenue, a long and straight minor collector, shall,be "choked” at various intersections along its :. „, length, creating narrow sections of roadway to discourage through traffic and reduce vehicle speeds r i (Figure 6), While traffic analysis indicates two through lan es are typically adequate for study area , roadways, two conditions should be reviewed for each roadway in design: r * Provision of turning lanes at intersections (right ;grid'left turn lanes, as well as auxiliary lanes); and , . ._ '.�,,�. Provision of a median with four lanes streets. ,, ' , t(/'.. . .. S - 2 f�utd��rnes .For Urban Major Street Design, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1�i'�,pate �1,Table 1...f, Transportation and Lund,Development, Institute of Transportation Engineers, p,'93,Table 4-3, l , ! il ]lpard'Triertile Specific Area Plan October 20, 1993 ' Traffic and Transportation 'clement 29 „ P9;1O57ttioatd rot • a r ' . I Av,,,, ff ems""' �*"' . : I i2"center[urn tan 5 I $.B. S I. e I 5` `warA / swewa sidewalk bike pal( bike lea RIW 70' Typical Street fuss-Sections - Major Collector at Intersection Dartmouth / 68th / 72nd 1 Hampton { Haines ,f , . . ...,. .., . ,. r\ , :: „..5„......\_st____, oh. d.„.. . .., .. • i . , .1 1 . 1 4...._,...,.. ,, c===‘. :al, , 9 . . _ _ ii..? a .i3ae=. , t - - r;,,��. .:. ...._ ..• . ......■.. .- _. .4.B. 5 5' r 15'- r 12'landscaped 15' 5' S'_8, I s�tewa bike median i,,pa s'4dewai pat RJW 80' is 72nd Avenue Cross-Section - Major Collector at Midble c I' -_ £ _ tip _-�d�..: - - __ __ __ - - •— - _-... - .•- - �- `s"__ � .__ - t..,.* — s "` - — =� " — - - •—• ___ —_ _- DETAIL'::, P. 1146:-_s ... - . • T -----.-:- -VAIINC;‘. ......n- /MS . -, - I_ - - i\07- - E=R1 - - , rte- •�_, E : t =.-- - - - ... i - _ —_ nPt 5a - a �: _ i i f- d . Typical lnterscctions along 70ti RvenUe _ - i - - - DETAIL"g:. i t - (c lS . . .... _ \ ,\_,_,_ ,. _ ,,, \I -_ . . . .._ . �� _ .. . ,_ .__ _ r_________. =__ :... F' . _ _ _ .„ .„: __,.___ ___ _ . ,�s I _ . ., . , . _ , 1 - . . _.r ,I It am . ,..... . ,. _,. ,_ ) . ,, . . . , _ _ ...,„ , , _ . , ...____ _ . .. ..•_.. _ ilivr"fir46. is t _- _ - - . ' _ • - g t - i ww is-aa - Typicat tntBrsections along 72nd-Avenue Figure 6 T v �, 4' , .£; Associates _________ . . , .. , ,. ., %,.C , . .,71.4 t' Traffic Control 1 I.. MUTCD and ODOT traffic signal warrants should be 'conducted for all intersections involving .. arterials, major collectors, and minor collectors to determine if a traffic signals needed at the " intersection, Any intersection which is not controlled by a signal (including local streets) should be , stop -controlled l((either a four-way stop o r two-way stop), with the lower order street being controlled in the case of a two-way stop controlled intersection. Figure 4 (shown previously) summarizes the ,':. • . potential signalized intersections in the year 2010 Some specific land use driveway configurations may require consideration of signals if hi h volumes occur. � • Parking • " , Nationally, about 17% of all urban accidents are known to involve parking or parked vehicles on- ' street.' Parking on major urban streets, though desirable for commercial and uses, is costly in terms ,, of accidents and reduced roadway capacity* The total street capacity is reduced when on-street parking is allowed due to stream friction between parked and moving vehicles and by the congestion ? • • which occurs from vehicles moving in and out of parking spaces. The greatest problem is a "traffic ,' shear" effect caused by higher speed moving traffic with slow, maneuvering parking vehicles. r i ited on all arterials and major collectors, and art-street reet parking may On-street parking shall be prop b 1 P , or may not be allowed along minor collectors in the Tigard Triangle. In the case of minor collectors (70th Avenue) and local streets, on-street parking can be provided on both sides of the street due to ' the presence of residential land use along the street. On-street parking can act as a traffic management ; " •• measure on 'these streets. Figure 7 shows parking restrictions in the Tigard Triangle. ! , r guidelines. For the basis of comparing new , Tigard 1 4 follow the City of T a g ' parking should fb1 o P Off-street ark 4 Off � • y g development provision of parking against the 10 percent reduction on parking requested by the p p A g Transportation Planning Rule,the comparison base should be (the starting point before reduction): , + ' dl S ' ft r, 4/1000 SF i II� e.a , ' • Commercial: 511000 S I Single Family Housing: / ,4 ,. fik Multiple,Family Housing:1ng4 � I I ! 1, li } r s , . A - Guidelines For&ban Major Street design, Institute of`1 runsportatien 8nstrieers, 1954,Vitt e•47. L 1 . , Oc hba r 20, 109* i rk'7vfahgl Specific Area Pion ' Traffic and Transfiortatibt1 I*arent 1 3Z O67itigatd3M 1. + ` . ='-- �aratm. - f '-�.•' "�____ __ -------- • •iL�.� - - _- _- _ _ -r 4 . -%- �- .. - srk `i c t}_ ---.2 f: {t^ �.�_ -tl_� T i1 r.__..(.....-�4..,_... -•T J � �: -_-..;- __ _ - _ - - -f`` }-}v �Q-'.JIl " _ ti� 'a�. ,_`- --,.r�._ 4iL�M—f�•�i_:«-��•�.:. r ' __. _ _-.._-= T r"- _a.... a __ - __- _- - --•_�-t_'._� -_ _ _•__ _ - '`- z, _ - _{---i. i _ � lV o-E t±. ran,-.•-, ,--r.— = _%1X.97!)•{{: •�-��---- --'�___' ` __ _. -_ - ! c__ -i et ,+ �{i'r aN S t - -! ‘..F.,._� �t, 2 �T[ __ }f �`� :! F.j�-�111:3�� (� ar Y ��_ .,_-{ �f rl:� 1 /,.. l 1 { tC3±•� t`a•)-..1- t° -�L._.�L �_;. - •` ya}v�.,_, , -' '- ,,ti i .,i. {: - ) t. _ .t - - - j _- j{ _ ,� !J am• ' •�' ._ •j? ry _ - _ .a _ - - •t4 _-� r-i ` - �` ' �.Cl.`. fl� .� __-!� ,_ C_`'. lll__,��—_, �J1)�t�±t 1-+--1..q .� ,t•-` /I_� 1��'. t •1 C``, ,/ ` - - - L r-� t� , � .-�.� ewoar{_yr�d;.` ,.. tlt .,`�-j �f c� } 'sue= __ } u t - .� j. ., ' _ �[-''{{ S 1 \ �q r r e1"`Z;z }�-.. } - t : }•(,�tia •v»_.}..,.:"--•t-9 a.1 S i 9 - ! i t+-+ - {� f}`� { �' t to e 1 - - - -- T T.F �, ,,/i. 1........« .l I t tlqs, . SJ•• ,,... ".,'.... ........s e..tMIa ♦a�L� ttdj}{,./944:E ��St NZ 1 7 f •j{ti)' •_ a ,, , ),1 j 7kiYr "t,% `+f i1 '-' i (I !r h•-.{I 3.t�a� -, r•--tey,"'".v-ezr:`�^J.�.j ti, '-`- + ��'_'1 - _t ''.- 1•(- .�' *•• , -- - - - - S�'+.�--L' +'•% - . 3 �r 1 . Y f: 11� I— it' L- , - 1 ` ,.{•- •a - - - - -t7 ! cr• 1`yie, [,� r-1h- .:'i-i \ f{� 1 + r`•:Iilr. }}}���- '.-„,. ---x-�.,,._'n,„r•'� /4,-..'' a•_ J _-- - _ - -- - - _ f •„-t _ _s- ! tt,! t;.. ••t-i ... �_k T 1. -r ,a 1 _-+--0..x;"1.�•\, t t t �R¢ ,. {p r` 20J -- i[H_� '•'k.. 1 '! .j - ll=:- l•�. - ! a ` . 1� ��. =�., F `-�•'iCI= .y.:,.--., I °�y�{ r � `� lV(_� t: � 1' - - �1+” i - f :.}' `�! f/rl-a 1 .._- ) i 13- t. - 1„_'!! i � 11t J_ -i�� - }a!°t3� c C ! (1;..1 t is -' '�i{R7f`t�'a -_ - - "- ��- _�('j(ajl '1:�! rff�as--'1 R""'•'c-7`•aJ �";_..1 1 ,� �� c l � I`� �- • •L•�!l-�J �G,yr 7 - - -_ -_ - ,t 1!�, <'[ 1 11111{ 'x •ii: 4` j_ o Q :•-,[- �4 1`�_` j-_-11-1 j• t i � _..?�1��` .__ - - _- 'I2 „S_ ; __'...t 4,, ; S` `; f p L•f'Wi{t u{ k'. ,, jt rj 1(S-LCi p p ?t' t -�_�i' - - - • - •± s:Fa ftP :8 r _t` i .i'-•1_w,-ci - a#4- i ! 1l<-` `;-�� 1 f '-'--'11,r1 .- .,, . _ hrl�• ,,,,,,t„, ;e�f j.41-:.,,-...4.1:-.1.-:-.2?j X34.w .,• ,_j; C� 1��e U�4'-,i n 1N f,� 1 [z ''� ,1 Ft:�r • ..,...” J i l t , ,t - : .ul.}F.t. .li - .•.j avi4`"T;•�°i°d \ } A j` 1 ,-pl �j 3 'a ,'F:' `'-f,....\:-..-,,,-. lE a� fe -it .fi�jr'�t �3r�.iz�� _14'..:,,,, t,�'t ? r,_'�?f{t� -`4=-114-.;,..,`,..,,,- --i.---..{ i'�` !,.3 ti�! ( j' _``' {S•_ t t h 1 •t \s-- .-4,,c _ .- ,,"r.`. {j i ''i% 4�1 % k [ 12 j `- _-.. -1-a••r� - a '_ �ts�� s e k� a� a/=� �, 1 4i a=lj !(- � .f t r + �S�3-3f��,• }_ l' �}r.Fia{� )t{ [1�:? t \sty �G--=. -� ;' :s 1. ''�._ .., �.tr.f, ��l , \v"'co-- _ - _ - _ .� .,,,e__, i—_µ '[ _� rt.- : ._,- no. S�,: tj(,�t - f J / - -- �`: Z� :iP-;--",-1\... It ` 2-�. ,,.r..,-,. (; L:, t-�0 0�[ s dip (, ;-y.�'•a nl�•H -- _► _tZ yr+" rte �_�<' \1 ~„,.,_�- -_ --- 1{}t `<.,°_;�0..--_oi.. �._ � _•..----- -_-I ------��:-,�y -_ _- - -_ --- -- - I.0 .:\r-,- I ' `` C7.-., ~- -`rf _ .4,..A ;, • ,:::_, , ,. a.‘„,...,:::,:7- r--- . .,.., _ .-,=--1 jt� t�7f,'47'-1 j �j4j-�ta1'' � p J s;!ysh 1 _-- - -- - - _- -- ,5� t x ,,75- t (] __ •♦x / ... ,, __- - - - _ - - - - - ; , ...,....\.,,.......,„_,,,,,_--_-_:...„:„:„...,„:::,A,_.:-, r, ,, _ _ - --), ),--:.17, ..,,.....k..-..-..-,-- ,e_ _ . .. .... - it-se fT sr• .c, lad � • ... ,- _ __ - - <PI 5' li - 1 -;a AREAS OF NO ON-STREET PARKING TRIANGLE SPECIFIC E Figure 7 ■ , . . .: . J .I ,• , OK Associates , , . . 1 . , ., : /• ,•, 1 __.. .., , . , , , . ' : Y R1�1 srr 1 . Existing Tni•-Met bus routes and stops, along �a with the location of the planned park and ride �' lot are shown in Figure 8. Current transit . ' accessibility is limited to two bus routes. In the , • future, with a greater number of residents, ■N ' . '' different transit services will be required. Tri NIB • . Diet's proposal of a park and ride site provides 011, .�},, '", • •"",.•..'P P P P „ •r� ' a transit station opportunity within the Tigard .. �� Triangle, Additionally, the Portland Regional r mit ,1 lt '.... 1... . Rats.Programs proposal to locate a LRT corridor >...p.. , " on Pacific )Highway provides a greater level of ' transit service. The pedestrian trail ail an d grid , n ' Typical,Corner Bus Stop system f o r residential areas proposed in the Tigard Triangle provides direct . accessibility to the future LRT station. The Pacific Highway corridor will be the major transit ' corridor for the study area, ' ' „ Beyond these services, transit routes may need to be restructured as land uses change in the study area. Creation of an axial bus route system (using 68th/72nd as north-south and Dartmouth as east- , . .� ' west) in,the Tigard Triangle could further enhance transit accessibility. The Dartmouth route could • . be used for access to Lake Oswego and PCC while the 72nd route ";ould be used for access to a southern Tigard,the downtown area and Durham. 72nd Avenue right-of-way has been sized to allow ...�» for its potential future use by LRT (to Tualatin) if future planning indicated this corridor is desirable, 4 Focusing transit on these corridors would allow development,to concentrate along station areas and route alignments. . , Access to the planned park and ride lot for pedestrians and bikes has been provided. Specific details have been identified in the.Tigard Triangle for transit development. In,event that a bus stop is located on a roadway designed with a planter strip between the roadway and the sidewalk, the landscape ' , '' should be relocated to behind the sidewalk (see figure at right) and the sidewalk should extend out to the curb for transit access. Shelters for current bus routes should be incorporated into the design of • fronting land uses as sites develop. 'Sites which develop along streets with transit services must identify a direct path from the primary pedestrian access point of their facility to the nearest bus stop, This pedestrian path should be direct and without vehicle conflict, where possible. { BiC�'CL1C Figure 9 shows the recommended bikeway locations for the Tigard Triangle. The roadways in this figure,provide a 5 foot paved bike lane on each side of the street. Where bike lanes exist, a painted� • .. stripe should separate the vehicle travel lanes and the bike lanes, A bike lane symbol should be painted on the bike lane itself, Bike lane signs and "No Parking" signs may be considered used as ;' • w i I 'Tigard T r inn le ec f/c Ares Plan October ��9� l I �. Traffic and Transportation lernelit 34 P SOVit"oa"is3 tpt , d - - -. _ r �-:� t--� -- _--- _r. �ii..>>i _ (EL.,I --{ _ °._ -1{ (ra�Y`.':t -•--�="-.-rCw�•:.f -,--�— -61Y-eent-A�- --r ----- •..-•-•- ..� -i-+:-,_.t=_ _ - .� - - - s A E F t ,_ 16:::.-t0(�r�{ r.�1I� t \�'tie- ' -3.`� =t 7-7.--7.71.1--'i _`rr=r; '.r.== -^^j_ r- _ -.1 "'_"-'t. `, j R µ � + t..... ..,_ I tt i=1.1 t `1.P'l�ial .-,,-. { \,` ~i{ -� , ' i�� � ~ �: _�f ,+ `c'` � a _ --- .t' -�tt�=i - # -i'I�•' LAP�°�°�'4 a'• U., �?f�';'t 'ix......_...i'. - =Lj'lr_3iii--f^ai F-i-e..� �]�--•�y(���.-.(���':- C �sw�1�.I''i- •4 ,/- r Y�l•S� _ - __- - _ _ � R 1 3 _ ei t. ---- ll 1 r f T< t ((--T� .1 •°---41 -..f/ /•.`:` I `G i --- - t@ \a.- .S -- 1�-7QW OBIS S'1CW`{d�.<` _ r.r ��" !° ': L O {'x� ! B« ^��{�i `,ry 6` 73. .IT�! t` L ",- .. - - - -•i. _ _ F({1Ft vaaf aQra,Om,_ i Q aargg f -� -') -NJ al 41,-,,,,t `7..., r -..,�.. + S r `� ��� "3`� 'a,.Q :i 1 1.� :� ,i fanadsL- .e �isePefA_r �1ait,l�t71 dlf$8 t11ii U'i.IFCtt�S3'}�` sir«-�jlr '- `�i :lt 1� (L- . >>-t °f tE:E� �s fly-� y i g _ t+:nffe}aasa ffav ti vas °J,�..;!C��.l�rk�:..s— i.--1;;I:t j r. '' - - - _ -�,'�\„,„.. `'*" ({-t3 tx i ! ?- C}'t`if 61. Airy / .t..� 1 i cz-�y. d`t r 4 .R�� v. t q., � ��� � - - - ,;\ +• l _.-€_. [ - .t,i 7c" _�-;3'.-I �','a.'F" 'aC..L, "-�-Ea'_ (0 1 --•-i��' i t, ,.1.''Z'5.;,` ' .• - (}%!.f -v\ ---- 3 �� jL�tr 1.-F' "� )it 1 daf O cs t 'mot/ t '`�i s tj _. • i ALL { (� ,v--,....� , i/• \ �St „ _ {��y,..-.-.l}} s - _•y �----=.., - P- R.- • -t�! t� �+ p. - I l^1 • _e_.,,•• _ - - - - -`` Wit^` '3r �_Tif! 11i1T ~p•••.'-�'��•- 1-�=1—= ��j� 1 LItY. }(\�4 .__ fJL • .1.T - _- - - _ _ __ �/,,��v3".. s if}('��� {!F^'{ , •i 111,= -{QT S��v + �•^ `` -'�-S. s�,• ,c.-E. 1- .'._,;' �;: - _ - - x:r"T R` 't i'rU p ,...)g.,.-4. -Y: s Gt, iJ ig,.,_,} t Y°�}-}�- i 9 !��fs�f I/._///' �' - ^r'.,.t}-i - - i` �f,, b. y t L..`,t ,-� ♦ r 'a Qs ;h" O .- .i. _-_,}' Y I ?!1. --C 1 .... fir i J'�.c-!'- -_ - - •��_ - '- .C2 r _X.ri t ,. .f iS. F-_ t.t x ! 1 ,J !.t - ' ..}_}.r.. s f f7t i ,i fi r - - - _ -; - d `�fS�,.�::tl{_ ;-,;-4 - M.{ �]i}-}rd t. J _l `f*' E' .- J ---`a-'-=y` --3 E� is }�i_ .. !4\ E� El'1%74 d''17 E'r-`'{1 f. - .'.r'.411 rQ. ° V k ri n '- 0��.,f—,f o �..'. -. 1:i Q °ri- ;,f_.;---�,i� �' ' j 1 1 ..- \ �` 4- -•tt tl.f t F..1_t.f':+��6iim'r.I .4 ' tea- ��. „_ q - �t7 ,�,r• i�F - _ •y `e - - - 4- ` -y m '1,„---;-'---- P [ -to �}eft E'•^J(c- �1�` O !�9• „fa�� ° ,(,)\-\„.....,..,,,,! / ' - - - - - - ?` 3--.). C T T a r 1 i C _ II ill+ - Q- ... _ �' + f f11)-411--T-41 t- '- 4--.—,-” 1�- yob :-IHi 1 l..yin Ff _ - - - - 'j'� •; _ T •i:Fx. - a� }_ _ ..r Q =i• L am, .,,i. u- - -F%� •• - _ - I [�[ h . \ '-'"-----5--:-..--:.:rr _..J., 1 ,,...---'t kt:-- - - 1.3.7:- O c:` s'%: - - X1.,1, ,Cs %,.,r-z',,,,,„,,,.;,..15,,.�f j \• ._ -rte'i y - - - - - . ' � _h � =fr_ BUS STOPS AND ROUTES� x� = ,,_,..::: _ _ • - x ■f xffi f ifff EX lSTi4a BUS - -- `i . _ N. "� FUTURE TRANSIT _N�l---Lj BUS US STOPS ...fx:‘,$,_:-_.,-`'��t t -7-11... * PARK AND RIDE i TRANSIT STATION `. __ - _ TIGARD TRIANGLE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN ure8 • IA • • - . • --: a� , t - - .' �°- _ i 1 .� ���k`� 3� •- -''` E ._ . . -- _ : -—� ��: Q� : ___ __ . .. .. ....: ;� 0 s , t � '__ _ . .... i ! ., .- ‘1 la ' 3-'‘'It-- --' -- - • 3 f..• "• , , -cz�o.",�k 43" .( ,, '-'t rs _ _ _ _ - - - _- { y�rf rj`!� 1 Qi sf � r�,,, std; 1' l'A.1-S� _ _ _ . - _ - _ -::-,--".tV/3;:t.-;'/:;4'.-.,',.. .„..„,.;-" \I- - r. „.„;:.--,..,..:-.,q,..*_.„ _ _- - __ --.. _ ,.... 't. . c 3:-.... f� ‘ ,- 3 it r�\,:ai;� __-_ - - i -_ 1 i „' 1' ;- s � G�+�is (3 L t . e. 7 > � .. _ o - ' --*-''' '''.'' ,.i!'j \. .;•,';;'' ''.''%..' ' -• - --- ',,'!'" s - ,..L " • ,'`s-1°- -'`` :lam-xsi"'-r _ - - - e'`''j •,:'S I- C:3 Y? 1y 1:.1i1�"y; L L:,. ' _ %:! - "• A'S, t, A - - "� '-%',/3---_ ,.., 9 A L? `1 _} A.•:;"ii--0 p-1 „„ i'..' i �e+'+� `*� A� s t'3 -^'y L 1 3'1{ • _ - - - - - "'fS`,, , . aii`"�.,,..13 St+^�f�q ..•1'•i�_/;.ice a �_i J,,• i-...„---♦1. ; •S`�_S�.';'..`n' - - -_ _ _ _ - "� 1'.„Y r+r {'- y r ��- tt a ci: �a A(''` {a �jt .,2",:._f'i '�•'i"'6•-''-" -`t�-a- a. ay°.+ ', T ;: { - - _ _ x, ..,• A� '-ky1�3 CjS,T---.I w _:;S-,,..... ..;t:n.l\ } ti-•"'0'q - . .mot ""'f(i. ', ...c„ 1%---,..; : . .,, - - -i - - - __ _ L .11.4-! + � �1�� � 9 t` �n�• -��j'".,1�.`►„,0-1` vi,,,}.N1s�,i�.'•y`Ktt a " x'f ,, nt� r+ -.s.,.. ........c\T3_‘Y,s r.�r s \^a. 11 ti •i� { -'-tLt 4 is+'sue s } C���fi. }" "Y i Sr`T 'S'"4 - - - - - - _ _ .�- x f{(Ku.? 4.t I � 1, 1 - t «i'` f ; S-.!; s.. 1 p y . .2L. f„.....1: ,-.1. - ,,11..,,,..,;;;;,,,,liv..,-:r-1-,-;\”" , „.\Alf _ -_ A =-1 ' ,o. -'-\,\-4-il • - - - - - - . - -.- tikp\INu;i'll ) - . P:01,I 1‘111"C131413%:ta. 1,---k{(y y ;� f� r s •, amp I1` r r D = �'^ - : :- -:., -..- - _ - G�/t�`llj:,:}~s - -t { '"i{��C�' s a"'M$'�`l�/- t `��1 S� `�i 1{••�S - - Y _. �A �t-�;�•s!''` _. _ - _ - %.7,�`Ai I t t.,. \\\.. �' -.-.s ,'j.�.fLla-c,:,-m-:Y•►"' ; `•..33 _',.t C'y f. `•�\i..„, ='t. _.. '°4, t lls,.4+��.. ..cc �., :- _ _- j ?t�..1l =Q ' .'' :� t - _- 'xrs G i, "s _1/,•r+i.y(�` ;` ,1y��3` 14. e�,`4' sq i S o L -, Cj: ryt ,� irf 4 '� y f~t i'' `!,I` ,-s4. � ;-. _ o,J` E▪ I !_ n lot,..-'"'",a t.•• ' � `.3, 7A,-..--, ) } sa r`x• '(� _ _ - -•z i • -.- - ( t fir[".;f"�.'♦ 4%s,.."} ' -.. • t •r �-, - .. - --„..,11.‘..%-..,jA ..& : 4. g.»•�' ,;,;, `f,� •"1°. tT�`�.- - _ , _ --- _ 4 .r t i i •tom —�Y'3 �` ,.s q- 1 i J ✓ f. �7,.�i•S 3` i,t' �A .G ' r _ r _ �" s. ,.'s- Std �� 3r' - - - .£ f it -`� .t .� ;, t"` ! 'fP:`'Melt:,...,41 -'�`',k� tY-"T Vie ' -- - 3 3 `- _ - .!S _ j •�y 0.r. 1- ••lam �., " :74 1 _'� Ssk '�.-' �' - _ - I/: {$ _ $ '.r.c. f''''''''''...4 i n? j� °1.: {1 �)♦ 1 ��. 4 -,:Z'__;. ,.,,k lye I� _, _ .i.3 i.-11\ .a-A,. 1t -A �L .7' f� ;�' ' ;• 01,`t lt"' 7„4" \▪ ..0 �,;,0un n4 S` : --'d.0 1: '> -t + . -. vI �' r4 ` -t\' -a'iY�-- 8 � , ;-. "�ice," ∎,` 'F +0 ,i {J`'� :!�d:,�i -.i i2. "�'`�ir s ;� ,n•✓.y�tLC94�'i' ri. ,'ti% iai' �.t•.i } l�.y='�1•,.;-'� -k_.._-k - - - - - - _ °t-.., ny- :ir'a1+i ‘1.-8:‘¢.ma„"-' j ly.t•i••1011 "t.- V i -,• ' r ' •ti Lt- '15r .,., ""S- -•1 1`.r .t,.w„ t' �: ? :-” _ _ _ _ - -.. .:____,--,---.3.-A, X -Aril -_ _ - �^ • e�•i'•'.. _. �'�.?•t' ^fy q � � ",':3�it•'' - t'• .a�••"3.s'r'\Szj '- .....t"'� fit':' - - _ - _ - . ..-. •.. _. _ - ��•.�-,'1,,I Ff y; t s{i ;f_ _is st�� - t st,"•f" }T,'1.. .. _ - - _ - _ - • ' t J f� __ t 1- .ti 4 .- ..." ii : _ ,. Y • • • DKS• Associate ,. . . .� n eed ed to k eep vehicles f r m'parking n the bike Bicycle,le racks shall be incorporated into s ite planning for all multiple family residential and commercial uses. Placement of the racks should be I convenient, secure and near buildin g access.access , PEDESTRIAN • Sidewalks should be provided on both sides of all arterial and collector streets to be built at the time street construction. At least one sidewalk should provided along local streets. An• of st construction. 'be provid . lion to off-street • .xr pedestrian pathway will be provided as shown in Figure 10. The off-street paths are aimed at provided connectivity and recreational opportunities within the Tigard Triangle. Recommended on- 1 street pedestrian facilities are shown in this figure, as well. Pedestrianways link key activities in the '" study area: residential to commercial, commercial to recreation, school to recreation, recreation to residential and residential to school. These pairings were used to develop the pedestrianway plan. •. A grid of pedestrianways was created in the residential core area. These pedestrianways are key • 1� elements to improved access by non-auto modes of transportation. The pedestrianways are indicated on, the pedestrianway plan, where local streets have not. It is more important that the public . pedestrian accessibility be provided through these areas rather than the vehicle access. In the case of .,r. P Y P through C.. ' • local streets, both modes can be provided, however, the spacing for pedestrianways is more frequent i,• . (200 to 300 feet apart in the east west direction), Raised pedestrian crossings should be provided'in parking areas along pedestrian desire lines (also shown in Figure 10 on key routes). The raised pedestrian crossings should link pedestrians to building � y ) � � 1? g access points and be used to control vehicle speeds in parking lots, creating a more riesirable r pedestrian environment. Raised crossings should never be used on collector or arterial roadways. Sidewalks should be 8-10 feet wide along arterials, 5-8 feet wide along major collectors, and five feet r along minor collectors and local streets,. A planter strip of at least five feet between the curb and the sidewalk shall be required in the design of any arterial or collector street where parking is prohibited • adjacent to the curb, except where the following conditions exist; dlih/N There is inadequate right-of-way; e The curbside sidewalks already exist on predominant 111,49e,:. portions of the street; �` J • e It would conflict with utilities, ;\ � 1 • In 1 situations where a new sidewalk and planter strip are 1 ;4' r • • constructed on a street with existing sidewalk segments adjacent to the roadway, a sidewalk transition will be built to connect the I two sidewalk segments as shown at right, TypiaaiidewallC Transition , I I , Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan October 20, 1993 • Traffic and Transportation Element 37 P 3 r rrtl,94,ra1 tot • I ' _•• --- _ j - • J ;s1Y�j({ I .,„..„..c) • sd,,,/ ._ - e)VC:i 1 U , .,- . - -. -- --..-., -__."---- - .3-1,...., - '1.'1-1-- - t.---,,,,,c,,N, '.-. „.. . - ` ERs« ;'� , .... 0 A ' *i,z::- : • '' = ,e,,_,__ -..---i /IA-4' ■.-1)..,‘/:/*.t'4 1' ..1,-<\... >2)..--1g ,----' t�'f o s r7 x ��1h %q i' X sS f S � // ' r T.\''''''P'.s.;,',-::1:i...:':: !Is'i .4.•,,,,,,,,..:1, _..... ‘ :7:1;_____„_4-(5 e_.., :„:4,,,.-:"' ....:, '.2')- 1,4\1V6-1- . G.3 , % • i 1j ..�`_ _ ;�r. 4V qt-li S ({fi\ i�[�Y[/} tom' ti�- e �'• ' !s���.�•� i Y 7 4-Ct 4- ..5�� --, ..4 �".• {{ sn"ct i lEt ,,a� '�.. _ �+4t,.../'S f,thir..i A' '3 j_� 3 -Sl�.;;+s i t a w/',,.+'?.`T�°. -�j s ` 1 _".. .t ff i++mot ('_ ,y .vs /_1". +s+t _y .'•Vic't Yj�21 91 t'-'.. '7\.° ► t 3-/4 '.' t i;'t�i S�?, -'t "," t \±ii*i. i _ 1, ' r i / i.r .C..,•t 1�'�'-f i � ji .., #• '�"� �g >" si. �i,� �,�•� Il` �X11' t c∎i?./,i'∎.,.!sue",`�....=1 h'�A � ii e?.4p �.,:"_ _ .'y' 'ate,�•3..x.•r :_ �}_ • ' l .r-- `lri` y,- ,`. ti- t ,,r� 3 3 t r'�1`j�?;r:,, t- -* --f•. y j�?••j `'', 1's,,.-'tr*N• - �+ *t i=�1• - �'�j:_ :' ,,, ,'jw ' I .� �� ? C� 4 '� q Mkt'" �`�10 �i �►,� -''i*j3 \..,',4 '' a j •s ff .�. N ' ,t t �rte' ;y �c} 9' i s'" fir- "''' =1 i :::f lt ` s 'C 1� �L' I `= t 1 r•o z •,._ .\)'i. 'i l Q.'l' .., .`���U A _.' ?t?/ .C' ). 'c+._�i . _ . ��,' t:Ir . ..' C ., ..i•'- -�,' i:I:::i* 1.`�T1 4 fl '✓ j .a•1 �y -y:1 - '`.' 'r i, - i -e *.. -t ...., .n•�''Y. s z!L f -_4s •oC1'• "1 "•� ti• �.h i- �' e v � a .1�� � ��{,y ,j . yr;�,°` �4.�•i ,^` � : 4 t �' - f iY�11 J ,,T� 't'�"' �ri:"i 1'-�' ,'4` ' 4 {'liiA _ t '-->` - ---.1 _r` 1 , i y',A M` , ,- ij _A r I�. , :1 iy �i} i 2 �` jV �. � (�' r" i�f ��y.y y-'x Ct_ t r=A= ��` ° t-,(� _vigpvl.°� \ = -� 't `� : .--a== -/ Vii. �\00,.,_• ▪ '- +,e r - t` -� ,.L�\ __ - �- •=J r t (�'.�"••R'j'--'Vtlrw-{ it• _ ;,l�s,. s:...1�,n t�i(i+}+. a), -1� 4: - ✓1- - - t}x"U 4,-,',*1 - - _ •/: �-A. - •1. 1 ' , •t`"_ `- _ ' '" •.I'`y-9*'^L +C' ,' 4D. }�. '1 - 1 +i L .s,, .' r�Y r�r f l r • °1�' S t'*�� �"�;' *)' _ jr i� f t• i { ' ' _ 'j'r. � '~ � �x � •L tom _ 1• '{� l,+ - ,_.c�-;w •- YA--It -� - �,. .7,, X31 --`._" -_ Z).---:-..-s,t _ -�. ,0; „--;`.-- t e.,...; 1.\1 Ud 4. it-�{�y� t, tU +. -, 1.Il r i G o\y tr ` , y --, •y� � •\ ""VV✓""-\\ ,p,v.t ,M— - ,ca-3-',4-Y- ---------‘.4.-'-.• 1 ros y+,r y`, ` , . z ,1�e� -_-- 1-i0'` b,,�,-,\,f`i\ , 1 a� � '_—'—°.-* t ' ti=t +'',.A.: - ,1 �: �fi`5 ,}, l l',t`-' 1J -1, 1+ to --------,-:----21-._ •-;I„,,\fr,' '.,,' ......„,„-,,,r,, i'''�:i� 4 r' j ^_`` 1 ��iC� %=-!.....--r...- -+�-;$'!�°'-• .--), .,-..... - \rs. ‘,,. ... „f, • , y—` ,..�-'sue—' - -..- • i --'?�'., ,,.. -, may..-'*" - , .•,. I/-..-- -,‘-- — _ - - - - -"-� y j ■ . .f. . ) , , , , , .•,-,. 1 DKS Associates .. 4. .a... s . ,, i. . si , is As site plans for development in Tigard Triangle are prepared, they should: • Define pedestrian paths to public sidewalks, free of or with minimal conflicts with autos; y,` e Determine desire line of pedestrian activity from defined building access points to adjacent activities (such as commercial areas, theater, restaurants, residential, schools, natural features/recreational pathways). Uniform Building Code access to public right-of-way shall be provided. , • forth • Identify conformance to the pedestrianway grid set orth in this plan for the core area; • Provide accommodations making efficient use of sidewalks, paths, raised pedestrian #' crossings and handicap ramps. g p p f The four primary elements of, improved pedestrian access in the Tigard Triangle include: •• 4 • Sidewalks on all arterial and collector streets. 1 { • A direct linkage from the Triangle pedestrian network to the I-5/Kruse Way interchange via 66th/Avenue. • A pedestrian grid system in the central core banded by 68th/Hampton/72nd/Atlanta. • A free standin g loo p trail sy stem starting g from the ORE 217/72nd interchange to 68th j Parkway. The ODOT 72nd interchange project and private development should incorporate i the south segment into project development and construction, ` ' I I I I , • L , ' r ri gard Triangle S ecitic Aria Plan October 2O. 1 gab �, ,.6 9 P Traffic ond fibs arttiorfri7�nt 39 a� ��g fd .f t ' ' ., � � � �, � • DKS Associates 4 . Evaluation of Plan r • The Tigard Triangle Specific Plan outlines several alternatives and a recommended plan. This chapter reviews differences between the alternatives and provides an analysis of the preferred alternatives to y determine roadway sizing, This chapter has three main sections.' The first section reviews the trip generation and vehicle miles travelled (VMT) of the specific area plan alternatives, The second section reviews the traffic forecasts and the capacity conditions with the recommended plan. The final section reviews several focused issues raised during the study. These issues are presented in question ` form followed by descriptions. This section does not attempt to address every issue or question about the Tigard Triangle area, but touches on a few traffic issues which were discussed during the study ',, g g g y , , process. ALTERNATIVES • The Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan evaluates three primary alternatives, in addition to existing- conditions, and conditions that would likely result given current zoning. Each of these alternatives ' • were compared, and impacts were' based on changes in trip generation and vehicle miles assessed bas ,, travelled, Additionally, comparable' land uses in other districts within the Portland region were , reviewed; I,. Trip Generation The number of vehicle trips generated by each land use alternative was estimated based upon the 1 ru detailed land use definitions (see a pp endix), Tabl e 7 ,c."3 mmarites the potential trip generating characteristics of each alternative. Five conditions were evaluated. Each of the three Specific Area Plan alternatives were analyzed, plus existing land use conditions and future conditions representing the potential land use growth under with existing zoning. The existing zoning would generate the �. s most new vehicle trips due to the extensive amount of commercial (retail) land uses allowed. p ( ) Vehicle Miles Trav el e d Based on trip generation information and the Metro regional model average trip length data for various ' land use purposes, a''sketch estimate of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) was made for each alternative, '0 Existing zoning would result in the highest level of VMT (Table.7)• . TipePd 7'rienAle 5pecifir. Aria Pier)' October 20, 1983 ' , Traffic arid Tranaportatton EJernani 4() P93O61/figard4,tpt ' #. r h FI ! . 1 ,. . )L DKS Associates , .,,,,,. ... f Table 7 Trip and Veh i cle Miles Travelled (VMT) } �PM Trip Generation Daily rA T Alternative Total (In/Out) (Miles) . Existing Land Uses 3,118 (1,215/1,903) 96,084 . Existing Zoning 9,600 (4,304/5,296) 347,306 I ,..•. , Scheme 1 - Original Plan 7,283 (3,251/4,032) 272,069 Scheme 2 -Recommended Plan 8,000 (3,508/4,492) 300,590 [, Alternative 3 High Retail 7,7.12 C3,39514,317) 285,483 i Other Comparable Areas �I ' A goal for the number of housing units in the study area w determined 8 g s was to znzd based�on. a comparison 'of y F other traffic analysis zones in the Portland region using the Metro travel model data base for 1990. C Table 8 shows some existing Portland area neighborhoods and their corresponding level of residential development. While the Tigard Triangle will not likel y become a Hawthorne District, the number ot.` residential units proposed in the Specific Area Plan would represent a "sustainable community at the 500 to 1,000 dwelling unit level and are within reasonable range to be better served by modes of ,F , travel other than single occupant vehicles. Table 8 x Other Portland Districts I . 'Location Metro TAZ Number 1990 Households Beaverton (Walker, ORE 109, 1 t0, 111, 112 1,160 . [ 217 B-H Hwy, Cedar Hills) John's Landing g 49 940 ! Lake Oswego Downtown 327 870 ' i 47 � Barbur sou � • .Bar south of 150. 182, 308 640 Downtown (Lair Hill) k' Sellwood District 834, 835 1,690 I �Hawthorne'District 780, 787 2,360 , I Tigard 7rierr le Specific Area Plan CTetberf1, 199 • T r f kc and T r �hsr wrt a k ry rm e h t 41 ad s�t a �i a 4 ,r p t c , 1' ., ,, , , I , , , ,, ,1 , . I ., . DAKS Associates ' . . t�. F . . , , . . i TRAr r IC PERFORMANCE OF THE PLAN . A significant effort was made to produce detailed traffic forecasts to appropriately size the roadways i .. 1 in the Tigard Triangle area at buildout of the recommended plan. Many past planning efforts have 4'' . recommended four lane roadways and new connections. This study focused on justification for : roadway widenings and started from a premise of two lane roadways (one lane each way) within the Tigard Triangle area unless the future demands could be proven to require a four lane facility. 1. Year 2010 Traffic Forecasts .' ' • Future year 2010. traffic forecasts were developed using the Metro region 1189 zone forecast model, ' , Base RTP data(network and land use)were used in the 2010 scenario with the exception of the Tigard Triangle area (traffic analysis zone 311). For the Tigard Triangle area, full buildout land uses reflecting the recommended plan were analyzed. The Metro model data were used to provide I distribution of Tigard Triangle traffic and to assess increases in through traffic using Tigard Triangle t,: •� ,r roadways (by comparing modeled 1990 to modeled 2010 forecasts). These data along with the specific .-w trip generation of new land uses in the Tigard Triangle were used to provide detailed PM peak hour intersection information at 16 study area locations. Since intersections are the constraining bottlenecks { in the system, if additional through lanes are necessary they would,be distinguished at these locations, 'L :,I I , The base year 2010 roa dw ay systern assumed existing roadwa y with the followin g � • • ext,..pzi7ns. •',Dartmouth Street extension between 68th and Pacific Highway; • • 72nd'Avenue direct connection to Pacific Highway (at Fred Meyer); • Interchange modifications at ORE 21.7/72nd, as currently planned as part of the I-5/ORE 217 Kruse Way project 2 10 Intersection Performance ' 0 Operating performance is significantly impacted by traffic growth in year 2010. Several mitigation , measures will be required to bring intersection performance within the desired operating standards. :Figure 11 shows the comparable levels of service and lane configurations for the unmitigated and mitigated conditions. The majority of mitigation needs within the Tigard Triangle area are additional • I turning lanes: The most substantial problem area would be Pacific Highway which would operate at ' level of Service F conditions from I-5 to ORE 217, Pacific Highway through moving traffic would 1 dictate the need for a six lane cross section to serve the projected volumes. This is necessary no , matter provided 8th, 72nd and Dartmouth, what of street (even five lanes) is rov�ded on. 5 at width o. r The 1-5/Pacific Highway interchange would require significant modification to alleviate existing safety . ' - future growth. Since this interchange is at the north entry to the ct of futures traffic y I • problems and the tm a o g •p {� study area, it is important to develop access, circulation and capacity to serve the Tigard Triangle, ' Tigard rritnyle Specific c'4rea Plan October 20, 1 i Toffic and'Transpmrtetidn lemant 1 ' ' 42 P930e7itigardd.tot , . Figure 11 RECOMMENDED ROADWAY NEEDS- YEAR 2010 INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE • FUTURE- BASE FUTURE-MITIGATED ATED . INTERSECTION V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS • ' ORE 217 SB ramps/Pacific Hwy. 1.25 >114.1 F 090 22.0 C. ) 1 a c c ._ „i. P �. •. , rte...n•�.�.... ORE 217 NB ramps/Pacific Hwy 1.21 � 72,2 F 0,86 13"9 B Dartmouth Street/Pacific Hwy. 1,48 >120 F 0.20 ' 25A D Crosswalk eliminated on west leg 72nd Avenue/Pacific Hwy. 1,37 >120 F 1 0,84 31,2 D rr" t . . t i r. Protected phasing Ni3 And SB, Crosswalk c hmrn At ed on West leg 68th Parkway/69th Avenue/ 1,19 >99,4 F . 0,90 27.4 D Pacific Hwy, E. 4 c H • t 64th,Avenuc/1-5 51 lamps/ 0.93, 66,5 F 0.74 I6•18 C Pacific Hwy. 1 L' • Y i Y S.,U7 t . Figure 1,1'(contiued) ,, RECOP�ICMENDED ROADWAY NEEDS-'YEA.R 2010 INTERSECTIO PERFORMANCE '; FUTURE-BASE FUTURE I-MITIGATED � �' INTERSECTION V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS m, i . 1-5 SB off-ramp/13arbur Blvd, 0.87 19.7 C '� .k- ' 2 i Does not exist a' 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street 2,47 >120 F 0.77 13.0 B ' k Four-way stop Signalized,p ermissive phasing all , D 72nd Avenue/Hampton Street 1 0,89 36.0 D 0.77 26.7 D t i P e - _� ., 1— �--4. i 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 NB ramps , 0,84 26.1 1) ,, 4411 11 A I'l t t� No longer sign11zd �,r, 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 S13 ramps 0,70 24.1 C 0.81 2616 D I .: 1 c . c� 1 , 1 I r t 1 with i ��,}I ° 0,91 31.6 i) ORE 217 NB rarnC.y ' ORE 2 s( � � � � .. � 064 ���6r6 C� 1r Hunziker Street , Does not exist �. '" ' 1 i 1 s ., I , i + V • Figure 11 a RECOMMENDED ROADWAY NEEDS DS-YEAR 2010 INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE FUTURE-BASE FUTURE-,P/MITIGATED INTERSECTION V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS ORE 217 SB ramps/Pacific Hwy. 1.25 >114.1 F 0.90 22,0 . C . : . . , I 4.- ',.*"..4.:i !, , ORE 217 NB ramps/Pacific Hwy. 1.21 72.2 F 0,86 13.9 B ---� ' T'` ,`t `'` .)Y' Dartmouth Street/Pacific Hwy. 1.48 >120 F 0.90 25.4 D 7 0 . i 1 Crosswalk eliminated on West leg 72nd Avenue/Pacific Hwy. 0.84 31.2 D �_ • �,/1' 1.37 >120 F �� ' t i„ -- it r* Protected phasing Is.rB and SB, 1 1 Crosswalk eliminated on West leg e. 68th?arkway/69th Avenue/ L19 >99.4 F' 0,90 27,4 D !,, ,Pacific Hwy. i r- T . 64th Avenue/1-5 � ramps/ 0.93 66.5 P 0,74 16.8 ;C , , f Pacific Hwy, y , r • Figure 11(continued) 6 RECOMMENDED ROADWAY NEEDS-YEAR 2010 INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE a, FUTURE- BASE FUTURE-MITIGATED INTERSECTION V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LLOS' , y i 0 68th Parkway/Haines Street/ 1.69 >120 F 0.80 19.6 C Atlanta Street iel Q -.4 tit(4' 1 Pour-way stop Signalized,protected phasing Ea and WE y 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street/ i�/a n/a 0/F 0.91 39.5 D I-5 SB ramps in i + 1 tlnsigrlati ed Signalized,protected phasing all legs r 68th Parkway/l-iampton Street 1,19 27.9 D 1 l'' ��..,• " oc.,.. 1 �. q• `�' Four�way stop Four-Way stop , 68th Parkway/ORE 217 0.68 101.2 B . Does not exist t 1 --- 1-5 NB ramps/Hairtes Street n/a n/a B/F 0,75 13.7 B ' �i ' it Unsignalized Signalized,permissive phasing all legs ' 1 [ i I n 1 l ;. ii I i , 1 . a ' 1 1 DKSAssociates v: • .. 1 , , 1 1 intersection away from the 1-5 southbound , . A concept was developed which l breaks the 64th Avenue y • • ' I off-ramp f_ m �(Figure Further,studies'will be c o nduct conducted by at th i s location n as they pursue a I /j y current Hazard Elimination System (BEES) project. The 72nd/OR£, 217 interchange, as currently • contemplated, w uld have substantial operating problems associated with queuing. Between Hampton Street and the northbound ORE 217 ramps there is only 160 feet in the present rebuild concept. This segment 1must store vehicles for three movements: southbound through, northbound left and I ' northbound through. The stacking',requirements in the PM peak hour based upon 2010 volumes would be: w I • Northbound left 340 feet I Northbound through - 270 feet . • Southbound through _ 320 feet , conceptual interchange configuration was developed which eliminated the queuing problems and capacity deficiencies. Figure 13 provides an initial layout plan which should be developed in greater' detail by the City with ODOT as the 1-5/ORE 1217 project moves forward. need for a five lane Dartmouth th ne o 1 create the East/west traffic demand due to commercial land uses could ,,. Street between I-5 and Pacific Highway. An alternative concept was developed by extending Atlanta ' "4 - ' Street from 68th Avenue to 72nd Avenue. This would allow Dartmouth Street to remain one lane each direction between'68th and 72nd with turning lanes . The segment of Dartmouth street West of I 72nd Avenue would need to be five lanes to accommodate large adjacent commercial users. ' 1 Based upon these problem areas, an action plan was developed specifically for the roadway, • • 1 . improvements in the Tigard Triangle. The list is organized by each of the key streets in the study • .. area. ' 'High Priority Roadway Planning Actions 1-5/ORE 217 Kruse Way Interchange,Project - 72nd Avenue Interchanges The City of Tigard should immediately begin,working with ODOT to resolve capacity deficiencies associated with the proposed 72nd Avenue interchange with ORE 217. The concept identified as part l of the Tigard . Triangle Specific Plan could be lower cost and operate more efficiently. 1-5/I3arbur Boulevar h'Avenue Interchange:e: The City of ` �� d/6�t g � y Tigard should work closely with ODOT and the City of Portland in developing'a long term master plan for this interchange. This , ' is' 1 should occur concurrent with the on-going ODal' Hazard Elimination System (HES) effort at this y I I location to assure improvements are aim ed at l ng term as well las short term needs. �i of a and ODOT on the development auiic lFia shwa . The,City of.Tigard should work with Metro Pacific g �' y g roadway widening plan for Pacific Highway. This project is listed as a 10 year priority project ilil the I .. southwestern,sector plan of the RTP: Planning for this project will need to commence Within five 1 years if the project is to occur.lr I ten years. 'i I Tigard Triangle Specific Area plan I I i October 20, �3 I i w ', I 1 Traffic and Tans cartatirr IS mertt 4�I F9 3 67 ii�0 r d 4t p t x . I I I i -�±S• _ A __ -_ __ _• _ _-. _ _ _ .- --. _- •- - - _ -_-" - - - _ , _f�`�^-mow sa4�ese+w P.{+'.m.++ Jw.........�. - 4 _- .-."7"."./...?""771. , • ..i . i S., . . ,„ ' - _ .... - - . • -- - e e a __ I - R, j $4�eti, Srn roved - --� 8€p0 ....... - I Transit �... --- '*�.. �` Stop dam; w.....-. : _ - "".....\ ,..,,,,. --• . .:,\,,, . .- - Enhanced Bicycle-and p'�C/pie�!IG Pedestrian-Facilities: . Wqy y - -=2-5`Bike Lanes Cam" - �. Sida. alk= I Z---1-I"Lanes t ll -C . 1 0 j 1-5 / BARBUR / 61st ONCEP L , _ Not To Scale Existing — Proposed Signals -- f • 1 • • „ }l llf d, rl, DKS Associates ,1 I High Priority Roadway Implementation Actions .• u1 • Dartmouth Street. As commercial development occurs along the frontage of Dartmouth Street, the four lane plus median roadway cross section should be implemented by expanding the yet to be built ' three lane cross section. ' Turn Lanes. Each development in the Tigard Triangle should set right-of-way aside (through • dedications) for turning lanes at each intersection as recommended, M . Pacific Highway Access Roads. As redevelopment and new development occurs along the frontage of Pacific Highway, cul-de-sacs (with through pedestrian public access) or short through local roadways should be built for access to Dartmouth, Tigard Cinema Access Road, 72nd and 68th, , PROJECT ISSUES w' • During the course of the Tigard Triangle Specific Plan study several issues were raised regarding roadway and transportation conditions.. The following sections summarize these specific issues and how the plan address these needs, Do the main collector streets (68th, 72nd, Dartmouth) have to be four lanes (two u lanes each way) with the plan? Several past studies have recommended that 68th Parkway; 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street be two ;+ , , lanes in each direction with turn lanes. For the Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan, a detailed traffic ' analysis was performed using year 2010 future traffic and build out of the Triangle area to determine the requirements of each study area roadway. To accomplish this task, detailed existing land use plans were inventoried and developed for the Triangle area. The Metro regional model was used to forecast year 2010 base traffic conditions, and traffic generated by build out of the Tri angle area was project .+ i ' on the street network. Based upon, the intersection evaluation summarized in the previous section roadway can o d^ a with one lane in each direction exceptions At each y operate adequately wi on with Some key exceptions. intersections, each street will add separate turning lanes (for left turns and right turns) as needed, Additionally, the segment of Dartmouth between 72nd and Pacific Highway would be two lanes in A each direction due to the substantial increase in retail land uses accessing Dartmouth in the future, important to understand that 68th i r nd. Avenue could. � It is based upon this analysis, Parkway and 72 remain one lane in each direction unless these streets receive greater amounts of through traffic than �forecasted by Metro in their 2010 model, This could occur sh ould state highways such as Pacific Highway congested in the future and improvements are not made to these ay and ORE z 17 become more co • w facilities. Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Octobor 20., 1903 ' Lit Traffic and TranapertetI n 'Elai„ent 48 ins oetifi etd4.kpr • • ..i , . 4 ., I ,w_ . . DICS Associates . E _ . 1 1 1 , Within the Triangle, where would future light rail transit be located? �; Conceptual light rail transit(LRT)alignment analysis was performed in the Barbur boulevard corridor as part of the.City of Portland's Regional Rail Program. Two alternatives were studied, one placed • LRT in one median of Barbur boulevard/Pacific,Highway, and the other in the 1-5 right-of-way. Under both alternatives, adjacent to the Tigard Triangle the alignment was in the median of Pacific ' Highway, While other alignments could be considered to the south (along 1-5 or along 72nd Avenue), these alternatives would not have the potential for the level of ridership that the Pacific Highway alignment have. Comparisons of existing ridership on the Tri-Met 12 and 78 routes indicate substantial ridership levels along the Pacific Highway corridor: For planning purposes of the Tigard • Triangle Specific Area Plan, the'future LRT corridor was assumed to be in the median of Pacific Highway with a station at the same site as the proposed park and ride lot at 72nd Avenue. The right- of-way selected for 72nd Avenue was developed to provide a roadway to meet the requirement of the . 'I . • Specific Area Plan, but also flexible to accommodate LRT in the long term future if that option or . additional alignment is considered. , Is the connection from Dartmouth Street to Hunziker:1 Street required with the - 4, ..,. Specific Area Plan? Many past studies of the Tigard Triangle have included a new overcrossing of ORE 217 south of , ' Pacific Highway connecting Hunziker Street with Dartmouth Street in the Tigard. Triangle, Some studies even contemplated this overcrossing of ORE 217 as a full interchange; Based upon the traffic, analysis of the Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan at full build out in year 2010, this overcrossing was not necessary to mitigate traffic deficiencies in the area. Other improvements can more cost effectively mitigate adverse traffic operations with substantially less environmental impact. In particular, the connection of Hunziker Street to Hampton Street as part of the 1-5/ORE 217 • ? interchange project produces substantial benefits for capacity, circulation and access (particularly,with • the recommended modifications noted in this.study).° Additionally,the widening of Pacific Highway in the study area is more effective in serving are traffic needs than a roadway to the south. It is ' • 1 important to distinguish between the need for a roadway connection and the need for pedestrian and bicycle connections, The need to create a pedestrian and/or bicycle connection along this alignment should be studied further with development to the south of ORE 2174. For the Triangle area, connections at Pacific Highway, the new Hunziker Street overcrossing of ORE 217 and 72nd Avenue provide adequate access and circulation for the Tigard Triangle with full build out. Is a connection from 68th Parkway toward 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street ort f , Atlanta •Street re, uired aloh �.with tepeifiic Area Plan? • As with the Hunziker/Dartmouth connection, the Atlanta Street connection was studied and not found a mandatory element g � � ��r at t � �� to be y, ent of circulation within the Tigard Triangle. The segment of Atlanta Scree from 69th Avenue Yvould be extended to 70th Avenue with the recommended plan. However, to retain .:, Dartmouth Street with a smaller cross section east'iof 72nd Avenue, Atlanta Street can be extended , west to 72n Avenue: With this extension, both streets (Atlanta extension and .Dartinoti. th) would be, ETigard Triangle Specific Area P/ ii October 20, 1993 ' r` Traffic Trah8pidttation 51ernerq 49 i ' 1 F' Jb i r d � , � 57't �d .t t p I I ' • • I r • • . 1 rf f DDS associates • one lane in each direction with turning lanes. The Atlanta Street connection should align to connect with the Tigard Cinemas exit roadway at 72nd Avenue (this intersection should be relocated north of , • the existing Cinema driveway to be shared with the future park and ride site). Without this connector, additional pressure would be placed on Dartmouth Street to be two lanes in each direction with additional turning lanes to provide comparable level of service. With the Atlanta Street connection to 72nd Avenue, freeway traffic from 1-5 and Lake Oswego traffic from Lesser Road can access 72nd ' .: . Avenue without making a series of turning maneuvers'and further impacting Dartmouth Street. The ' Atlanta extension provides a convenient access route to the freeway, Lake Oswego, the cinemas and the future park-and-ride lot for vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and has potential for future transit routing, • Will the proposed 1-5/ORE 217 Interchange Project improvements for 72nd Avenue be adequate? ODOT'has be developing plans for the 1-5/ORE 217 Interchange project over the last several years. • The project includes a rebuild of the 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 interchange. This rebuild includes up to a six lane wide 72nd Avenue near ORE 217 with a diamond interchange. The most critical feature of the new interchange is the new connection of Hampton Street with Hunziker Street which provides a significant improvement to local circulation. However, the spacing between the northbound ORE 217 ramps with Hampton Street is barely increased compared to today. Presently only five cars can • stack between the ORE 217 ramp end and Hampton before the queue of traffic blocks the intersection, In the future, greater traffic volumes will result in a substantial lane distribution and stacking problems at this location. Traffic queues of 340 feet would occur in stacking areas only 160 feet long. To ' mitigate this condition, the City of Tigard should immediately begin to work closely with ODOT to refine''the 72nd,Avenue interchange design to retain the existing northbound loop ramp from 72nd . Avenue and relocate the northbound ORE'217 ramp pair to Hunziker Street. The revised plan shown .w• previously in Figure 13 substantially improves the traffic operating characteristics of the interchange area with fewer lanes and narrower structures. ,Without the revisions, levels of service would be F in 20110 and queuing (stacking) problems would be significant, connection t, O, E 217 needed? Why is the 68th Parkway � o R eede�, The ODOT plans for the 1-5/O.RE 217 interchange'show a new traffic signal on ORE 217 northwest of 1-5 at 68th Parkway: This connection provides local access to the Tigard Triangle area, However, from a functional standpoint, intersection performance in the Tigard Triangle is adequate with or without this connection, Additionally, with the circulation,improvements to 72nd Avenue noted • above, there is no need for added access to ORE 217. The new signal on ORE 217 at 68th Parkway' has the potential to operate at ver.ylpo creating new queuing problems e otential t or levels of service crew for ORE 217 I ''. not. experienced today, mandating more lanes on ORE 217 (as noted in current plans), Since 68th, already connects to 1 aya y , ` would Parkway k 5 it wo not be recommended that 68th also be connected to ORE 217, By removing the proposed 68th/ORE x,17 signal from the 1F5/ORE 217 project, vehicle delays n traffic performance, eve with full build out can be reduced for the Duero]l system withoui�impacting p fora even Tigard Triangle Specific Area P/ail' October 20, i 993 I I Traffic arid Trer�spartr�itgn �ferrterlt r�0 '' r,93067 t'Sordd tot I I I II I \ . - Q \\N\ _ -V • • _ - F s, j • • - _• 4 • E s 00..OOP ON-RAM �wo 1.... ' °.'"".. a a. • - b.- - - - - -- • -- - -_ - .- •- min..b......... - _. - - b :a.5.0-ald mo V C•• 00....-•- - - - - t3RE.Z17 • ii 4I OFF-RAMP O V cs. __, . • • i r - , ORE. 1 72nd INTERCHANGE CONCEPT_- _ 0 Signais - Not To Scale .. FIGURE 1 r. • � _ - _ .- _ • _• _ - . . i , ., ., • ''''- ,'. - DKSAssociates _ .- l ,..._ . . . t . , . 1 . . , of Tigard Triangle. Additionally, the potential for diversion of traffic or intrusion into the Tigard Triangle area is reduced. ' Al Does Pacific Highway need to be widened to three traffic lanes in each direction? With year 2010 future traffic and build out of the Tigard Triangle, Pacific Highway would need to `, ' be three lanes in each direction plus turning lanes. Widening Pacific Highway from 1-5 to Main Street in Tigard is recommended as part of the southwestern sector strategy in the Metro'RTP'. This route is a key link from 1-5 to ORE 217 and ORE 99W to the west. With the widening, future level of ' service would still be no better than D. This would be the case with or without full build out of Tigard Triangle. Therefore, along the frontage of the study area it is recommended that. Pacific ' Y c Highway be three lanes in each direction. A greater degree of access control will be necessary when % , this improvement is performed. Some driveways should be closed and a median installed. The median should be landscaped to provide refuges for crossing pedestrians, and reduce the scale of the .4o street. The need for six lanes ort Pacific Highway is not diminished even if Tigard Triangle roadways , , are widened to five lanes (68th,72nd and Dartmouth). yr , If Pacific Highway is widened, should the jughandle turn into Tigard Cinema '' • z . � g g enema, be i:' retained? , rllt{ Th,i existin g "jughandle"hen dl e turn acre s to Cinemas for r c outhbound Pacific Highway traffic should , be removed with a widened roadway. The jughandle access point creates a significant pedestrian., conflict point. The left turning traffic can be more efficiently served by double left turn lanes, if ` needed. 0 How will properties with the Tigard Triangle gain access to Pacific Highway if ... I, access is controlled? The Specific.Area Plan calls for nolnew driveways onto Pacific Highway and reduction of existing driveways as sites redevelop. It is recommended that a frontage roadway system of access be �'.., developed for properties fronting onto Pacific Highway which allows access from the signalized cross (Dartmouth; Tigard' streets( Cinemas access roads 72nd, 68tli). These frontage acc�ess roadways should . be designed as local streets and should intersect with the cross street 250 to 300 feet away from Pacific Highway to avoid influence of stacking at signals. These roadways do not necessarily need to be °. '" through routes from Dartmouth to 68th) and should only serve a limited number of land uses. , ' ' Pedestrian access provided adways. 'hese roadways should be required as 1 development along must be rovtded� on these roadways. be between ibaxtrnouthjand'r�ag Tigard occurs, The most desirable frontage roadway connection would' L. Cinemas access road, } k I Regional Tans p o rtat r f Fla n evasirr e�the l9�S Update, Metro,January 1992, page S-t , list of tan year }, priority projects, t ',< Tigard Triangle Spa ific Areal Plan 'AO' ' Tr&ific end Tree§portetlon Elern nt 52 October' 20, a s as � p930E7'tig6id4.Ppt , • li } • 1 DKS A . , . , , . , . , . „ . .; , , _ .... . How can the intersection of 6arbur/Pacific Highway/64th/1-5 ramps be improved for future traffic? ODOT is currently working on a short term solution for this intersection as part of the Hazard Elimination System (HES). Capacity will become a major issue at this intersection in the future. To resolve this problem, several alternatives were analyzed. A do nothing plan, ODOT's plan to restrict. , • certain movements, widening and realignment of 64th were considered, ODOT will be doing a reconnaissance study of this location to assess long range solutions in greater detail: The present ;. ( ODOT plan would impact Pacific Highway and 68th Parkway, potentially shifting the problem location ` and creating new neighborhood intrusion impacts,. As part of the Tigard Triangle, a scheme to rebuild this location to maximize accessibility for all modes and improve capacity was developed. Figure 12, shown previously,present,a concept for the master plan of this location. It eliminates'the existing five phase signal and long cycle lengths by . . creating two signals: a two phase and a three phase signal. The reduction in phases provides greater i, flexibility in serving high traffic volumes. The la n does the following: , O Improves pedestrian and bicycle to 61st/62nd' street by provision of sidewalks and , ".... 1 bike lanes along the new connector road; • 0 Improves transit stop areas for patrons waiting for buses; 0 Eliminates conflicts with on-ramp traffic; O Provides left turn access off 1-5 southbound onto Barbur Boulevard to serve PCC, reducing pressure on Capitol Highway interchange; 1 • . ' 0 Improves capacity of ramp area to serve year 2010 traffic with full build out of Tigard I Triangle, ' . [.� 0 Improves vehicle safety; ' � Eliminates driveways. onto Pacific Highway and 1-5 ramps; . E 0 Reconfigures land adjacent to Pacific Highway into more valuable redevelopment parcel with access only to new connector roadwa y to 64th Avenue; Provides space for a small park and ride lot for carpoolers and transit; 0 Creates opportunity for entrance gateway signing/treattnerit'into Tigard.. 0 Can be built in phases, allowing the existing 61st to 64th Avenue connectiori to remain while ramp improvements are made first . Tioard Triangle Specific Area Plan o�tober 20 1993 Traffic and Transportation;�r'larne t 1 ' 53 P9 O61/tigard4lilt , • • DKS Associate x ; , • I ' h i1 Does the intersection at 68th Avenue/d-damptor Street have to be signalized? • The intersection of 68th Avenue/Hampton Street is currently four way stop controlled. Based on the recommended plan level of development, traffic signalization would not be required. However, actual levels of development in the vicinity of the intersection and provisions for access to adjacent land uses may result in the need of a traffic signal. As these land uses are developed, project level of analysis should be performed to ensure that the intersection continues to operate at an acceptable, • level, of service and to review the need for a traffic signal. • • tj n: • • • • • • H I ^, pl Tigard Triangle Spccilid Area Flan October fib, 1993 Traffic end Transportation Element 54 P9iO67r11gdrd4.tpt • r • • • • • • • • • • • • ' 3 • rI • IS li •�Ir APPENDIX :A , . H , ,... f 1.... ., „ . .. „ . , •': r , : : } , t ..fpr..; : .;.;:;{.•.;.}}'f:• :'•n;,•:.. J ..y.r :: l. r: J •r r.•, 4 _ f,:'' •;;;....;•: % ' f'••'4:'7:• r r•.4 r }•'r:'; r.1r !l ':•✓::•::%•,:�f .• •••�ry,..�. ,.;,,• :•r 'J•J .. .•11•J• r f:':':(i:':''•:::•:'}Y , r, .7 . •f ,. • . . . r•r.•.nv.v 3•,1'1:.. •.•f J':•, ' '•.4 r:rr;: 3.•i • :G: .•.•'':<%::;.r(:S:f:•:•.:}'% }; • r/. . . r:f.....r.A••.:: .r:,r}• r✓ L �$� 'r %'Si J I, 1. ■ • • • I • r • r. • • • r , tl is 2 i - 4. ,-'°"-- _ _ rte- g.+ r-'s'.-°_'� _ - . - -__- .r --ii:--- - ,- _.-...._ -'-_ "°^`°`a _ 'r - - i' 07/07/1993 16:06 Filename: TTEXPM_OUT Page 1 07/07/1993 16:06 Filename: TTEXPM.OUT Page 2 1 TTEXPM.CMD Wed. Jul 7, 1993 16:06:46 - Page 1-1 TTEXPM.CMD Wed Jul 7, 1993 16:06:49 Page 2-1 - Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan - =-Existing Volumes - FM Peak Hour - Existing Volumes - PM Peak Hour Existing Geometry Existing Geometry Impact Analysis Report _ Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service _ 1985 HCM Operations Method - Base Volume Alternative Intersection Base Future Change *******,max*.*,*>******** >r*******************iti*********************************** Del/- Vf Del/ 1// -- _--_ in Intersection #1 ORE 217 S8 ramps/Pacific Highway LOS Veh C LOS Veh C _ **************,r************,e*** ********** ********:roc**********************•r*** 1 ORE _217 SB ramps/Pacific Highw C 17.6 0.806 C 17.6 0.806 ± 0.000 D/V Cycle (sec): 120. Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.806 . Loss Time (sec): 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): 17.6 A 2. ORE 217 NB ramps/Pacific Highw B 7..9 G.702. 8 T.9 0..702 +-0.000 D/V Optimal Cycle: 83 Level Of Service: C A 3 Dartmouth Street/Pacific Highw C 16.4 0.814 C 16.4 0.814 + 0_000 D/V Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound = Movement: L - T - R L - 7 - R L - T - R LT - R . A 6 72nd Avenue/Hampton Street B 13_2 0:497 B 13.2 0.4 97 + 0.000 D/V _- i-- I I Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected . A 7 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 NB _8: 12.0 0.629 B 12:.0 0.629 + 0_000 0/V ( Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 15 15 15 0 15 15 6 21 0 # 8 72nd AvenuefORE 217 SB:_ C 21_5_Q_822 C 21..5 0_822 + 0.000 D/V Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 A 9 68th Parkway/Pacific Highway C 1 93. 0 -9_3 0.871 C= _1 _ 0.871 + 0.000 D/V Volume Moduli: - Base Vol: 0 0 0 594 1 - 371 0 1491 270 70 1572 0 A 10 68th Parkway/Haines Street/4t l C 12.2 0-812 C 12_2 0_812 + 0.008 V/C Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 594 1 37.1 0 1491 270 70 1572 0 • it 11 Bath Parkway/Dartmouth Street/ E xxxxx 0_0O0 E xxxxx 0.000 + 0_000 V/C Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = Reduced Vol: 594 371 270 5 Re weed oC:` 0 0 0 94 1 1 0 1491 70 70 1 7 A 12 68th Parkway/Hampton Street C 12.1 0.821 C 12_1 0.821 + 0_000 V/C User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ' • PNt= Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 A 14 64th Avenue/L-5 SB: off-ramp/Pa C 24.2 0.832 C 24.2 0.832 -I- 0.000 D/V PHF Volume: 0 0 0 594 1 - 371 0 1491 270 70 1572 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1_00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ## 16 I-5 NB ramps/Haines Street C xxxxx 0.00G C xxxxx 0.000 + 0.000 V/C MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 Vol.: 1 371 ---0 1566 270 70 1651 II Final C - 0 0 °0 594 0 11 1 - - Saturation F ou Module: Sat/Lane:. 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.84 1.00 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.99 1.00 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.99 0.01 1.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat_:_ 0 0 0 3024 5 1515 0 3564 1515 1693 3564 0 _ =--I1----------- - II - - it 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vo / Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.24 0.00 0.44 0.18 0.04 0.46 0.00 • Crit Moves:. _ **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.00 0_00 0.00 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.05 0.60 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.81 0.00 0.81 0.33 0.81 0.78 0.00 Level Of Service Module: Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0..0 28.6 28.6 36.3 0.0 18.7 1.1.6 69.6 15.2 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.3 2.4.3 30.8 0.0 15.9 9.8 69.6 12.9 0.0 t= Queue:_ 0 0 0 18 18 13 0 44 5 3 42 0 - - - -- - -- - -- - - - ***************************************`r*******ittk****************fir************** - -- - - Traffix System Version 6.,5 Cc) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po _ s- - r • 07107/1993 _16:06 Filename_ TTEXPM_QUT _ Page 3 07/01/1993 16:06 = Filename: TFEXPM.QUT Page 4 TTEXPM__CMD Wed Jul 7, 1943 16:06:49 Page 3-1 TTEXPhi_CMD Wed Jul 7, 1993 16:06:50 Page 4-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Existing Volumes.- PM Peak Hour Existing Area our Tigard Triangle Specific A ea n Existing Geometry xtstl Peak Hour - ng Volumes PM Existing Geometry Level Of Service Computation Report port Level Service Computation Report 1985 HCA Operations Method 1985 HCM Operations Method Base Volume Alternative Base Volume Alternative - - ic�kik�k*yricik*�t�Y*fir.#�r.�r.* #�cAAIcA. **�E**** �k***************AAA.**.ie#�F:t�Y.�k�ic*Yc*:+ret*4e**ate*Ye*#zSr�cic zY***-)nk*******?kie:Yet****************st;tr******#**it*ir***********:t***k****ir**********7Y# - - Intersection #a ORE 217_NB. ramps/Pacific Highway Intersection #3 Dartmouth Street/Pacific Highway -- -_ ****z***AA.A.-:..FM.A.0,.**i-t******Akk TA**A;.-A***************** .****************A kAA**** - *******ink*************_ter****************,*********fie*********#*a*****i-*fie******tF*+--- --- ----- --- - . Cycle (sec) 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0-.702 Cycle (sec):. 120 Critical Vol./Cap.- (X): 0.814 Loss Time (sec): 8 Average Delay (sec/veh): 7.9 _ Loss Time (sec) 16 Average (sec/veh): 16,4 Cycle: 50 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 96 Level Of Service: * C #iciedc*ik�ie**:**#ie t.k.k.A-A.A..i1.A.**A*A-A-AAac:t9c�E*�k7ktk�k�k;kak*#***dc******lt**ic�kie k�k*1AA-A.+hkit*�kic*yti�it*ir - - *�k***'****ie****:k****elr�r7frtk*ir*****it*7l'**#*�k***it***7k**kt*:k*iri;***ax*3r***#**#*yr***#****ir* -- .. Approach: North Sound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound ' Movement: = L - T - P z _L - T - R -. L - T _ R L - T - R Movement:_ L - T - R L - T - R _ L - T _ R _ L _ T - -R 1 if---- 1 ----1i it �1 1 Control: Split Phase it .=Split Phase }I Permitted. Permitted f Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected - V Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: _ Include _ Include. Include Include Min. Green: 15 0 15 0 0 9 0 15 15 0 15 15 Min. Green: 4 6 6 6 15 15 6 15 15 6 15 15 Lanes: _ 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 .0 0_ 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 =1 1 0 1 1 0 -- - Volume Moduli! - if I, II __�_ - Volume Module: ii C E ii I Base Vol: 246 0 123 0 0 0 0 1730 355 0 1396 634 Base Vot: 5 5 5 205 5 90 70 1535 20 5 1815 20 III Growth Adj: 1_Q0 LOU 1_00- 1_00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1_0O 1_00 LOU 1..00 1_00. Growth Adj: 1.00 1_00 1.00 LOU 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial-Bse: 246 0 123 0 - O _ -0. 0 1730 355 0 1396 634 Initial Bse: 5 -5 205 5 90 70 1535 20 5 1815- 20 R-Reduced Vol: 246 0 123 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �du�-t Yo l: 0 Q 0 = 0 Q- 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1730 355 0 1396 634 Reduced Vol: 5 5 5 205 5 90 70 1535 20 5 1815 20 User Adj: 1.00 100 1..00 1,00 1.00 1..00 1.=00 LOU 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 100 1_00 1-_00 1_00 1_00 = 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1=00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 , PHF Volume: 246 0 123- 0 0 0 0.1730 355 0 1396 634 PHF Volume: 5 5 • 5 205 5 90 70 1535 20 5 1815 20 PCE Adj 1.00 1_QO 1._00 1_00 1.00 1.00 LOU 1_00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1.00 PCE Adj: ._ 1-00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_05 1.00 1_00 1..05 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 . Final Vol.: 246 . 0 123 0 0 0 0. 1817 355 = 0 1466 634 Final Vol.: 5 5 5 205 5 _ 90 70 1612 20 _ 5 1906 20 _--_ l i - 1 J Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flcu Module: fi [I - -II f Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 0.94 1.-00 0..84- 1.00 1.00 1_00 1=_0O. 0.99 0.84 1.00 0.99 0.84 Adjustment: 0.94 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 1.0C 0..00 1..00 0.-00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 T.00 0.00 2..00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.95 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.98 0,02 Final Sat.: 1693 0 1515 _0 0 0 0 3564 1515 0 3564 1515 - Final Sat.:. 1693 1782 1515 1693 81 1452 1693 3564 _ 1515 1693 3527 37 11 11- -- ii i - It It I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis _ Vol./Sat: 0.15 0.00 0..0S 0.00 0.00: 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.23 0.00 0.41 0.42 Vol/Set: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.45 0.01 0.00 0.54 0.54 C.ri t Moves: **** **** **** Cri t Moves **ir* **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0,.21 0.00 0.21 0_00 0..00 0_00 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.73 0.73 Green/Cycle: 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.63 0.63 0.05 0,63 0.63 Volume/Cap: 0.70 0.00 0.39 0_00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70= 0.32 0.00 0.57 0.58 Vo1ime/Gap 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.86 0.41 - 0.41 0.86 0.72 0.02 0.06 0.86 0.86 Level Of Service Module: i _------1i 11 li- Level Of Service Module: Delay/Vein: 37_8 0-.0 31_6 0.0 0_0 0-0 0-0 7.6 4.5 _ 0.0 6.0 6.4 Delay/Veh: 42.1 41.3 41.3 56.1 35.8 35.8 80.9 12.5 6.5 41.3 16.4 16.4 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0-85 1.00 0..85 0_85 1,.00 0.85 0_85 1_00 0_85 0.85 - ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 - AdjDel/Veh: 37.8 0.0 26.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 3.8 0.0 5.1 5.5 AdjDel/Veh: 42.1 35.1 35.1 56.1 30.4 30.4 80.9 10.6 _ 5.5 41_3 13.9 13.9 Queue: 8. 0 4 0 0 0 0 34 4 0 23 10 Queue: 0 0 0 8 3 3 3 3T 0 0 54 54 *********-k*******1 1-**yr**-*y=ri-tyk***********!c*****.**ie;*.-i**********.************.**** ink k***********.*Ar***********tk************"k****ie***********7k********************qtr* Trailix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po " Traffix System Version 6,5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po l . . �- --' - - �.g • 4 . • 07/07/1993 T6:O6- Filename: TTEXPM_DUT Page 5 07107/1993 16:06 Filename- TTEXPM.OUT Page --6 -" - TTE`XPM_CM[T Wed Jul 7, 1993 16:06:50 Page 5-1 TTEXPM.CMD - Wed Jut 7, 1993 16:06:51 Page 6-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area.Plan --- ---- - Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan _ - Existing Volumes - PM Peak Hour Existing. Volumes - PM Peak Hour -_ Existing Geometry Existing Geometry Levet_ Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1985 RCM Operations Method 1985 RCM Operations Method Base Volume Alternative Base Volume Alternative • - -*'** **-*r***sir'yr***-r***-k*******-A-******-*A.£kA*****xA.k*A****.********-*************** _ *k********************************t-*****************************s4**************** - _ _ (ntersection-f6 72nd Avenue/Hampton Street Intersection #7 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 N3 i _ - **?***************Z******..A.&i.A****************=**.k.AA,:*k.kA-k****************A LA.4.A :E****-k***********.**ik******************-****************Jc**************ik****** *- Cycle (sec) 80_ Critical- Val_/Cap_ (X):. 0..49-7 Cycle (sec): 80 Critical Vol.ICap. (X); 0.629 - Loss Ti;�te tsec); 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): 13_.2 Loss Time (sec): 12 Average Delay (seclveh): 12.0 Optimal Cycle; 48 Level Of Service: B = Optimal Cycle: 49 Level Of Service: - B _ *ire***'*Ytit.'l***-**********7F.*********'********}i.*.`X***it-:-******ir* **fir**.**********A.k**** =*Sic**********.***Ic******************************************'*******************'*dry- - Approach: +;.jrth Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R -L - T - R L - T R L - T - R i 11 II 11------ 1 ------------I -i I- I{ I I- i Control: Protectea Protected. Sptit Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Split Phase _ Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: include Include - Include Include Min- Green: 0 15 15 6 15. 0 0 0 0 - 15 0 15 Min. Green: ti) 15 15 6 15 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 15 Lanes: 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 i - - =' n 0 =0 Q 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 Q 1 0 i 1 0 1 0_0__ Q - 0 " 0 0 " 0 1 0 0. 0 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 I -- -- 1 I I I I --11 - Volume Module: _ - Volume Modular_ Base Val:. 0-"160 22G 20 145 0 0 0 0 450 0 20 Base Vol: 0 327 490 179 415 0 0 0 0 179 0 53 = Growth Adj 1.00 1.,0G 1_00 1_00 1.00 1;.00 1.00`1_00 1.00. 1.00 1000 1.00 Growth Adj: -,1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 -_ Initial Bse: 0 _160 220 20 1.4-5 0 0 0 0 450 0 2.0 Initial Bse: 0 327 490 179 415 0 0 0 0 179 0 53 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: - 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced.Vol. 0 160 220 20. 14-5 0 0 0 0 450 0 20 Reduced Vol: 0 327 490 179 415 0 0 0 0 179 0 53 - User Ad.j, _ 1.00 1000 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1_00 1.00 1_00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - PHF Adj.: 1.00 1..00 1.00= 1.00-1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1_00 1_00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PI'iF Volume: =0 160 220__ 20 145 0 0 0 0 450 0 20 PHF Volume: 0 327 490 179- 415 0 - 0 0 0- 179 0 53 - *. PCE Adj: 1,00=1.00 _1.00. 1.00 1.00 1_OO 1.=00.1.00 1.00 1.00 LOU 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.-00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1:00 MLF Adj: -1.00 1.00 1.00 _1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Va..: 0 160 22G 20 145_ 0 0 0 0 450 0 20 Final Vol.: 0 327 4.90 179 _.415 J 0 0 0 1.79 0 53 1 �I I S 1 Saturation 1I 11 I I Saturation Flow Module: aturation F�ow Module: Sat/L3ner 1800 1800: - 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 - 1800.1800 1800 Sat/Lane: - 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 ' =- Adjustment: 1-.00 0.99 0_84 0.94 0.99 1_00. 1.00 LOU 1.00= 0_94- 1-,00 0.84 Adjustment: 1.00 0_99 0.84 0.94 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 LOU 0.84 Lanes: 0,-00 1.00 LOU 1.-00 1.,00 0.0.0 0.00 0_00 0.00 1.00. 0.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.00 LOU 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Finat at 0 1782 1515 1693 17682 0 0 0 0 1693 0 1515 Final Sat.: 0 1782 1515 1693 1782 0 0 0 0 1693 0 1515 Capacity Ana ysis nodule: - -II eI II I Capacity Analysis Module: I{'__" (I--------------=I{---___ I Vol/Sat: 0_00- 0..09 0.15 0:.01 0_08 0.00 0-00 0=00 0_00 0.27 4.00 0.01 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.18 0.32 0.11 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0_11 0.00 0.03 Crit Moves' ***>~- **** - **** **** crit moves, **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle 0_00 0_-27 0_27 0-07 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.50 0 z0 0.16 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 • Volume/Cap: 0_00 0.33 0.53 0.r6 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.00 0_,03 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.37 0.65 0.65 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.19 -I -- I I 11 i I i 1 - 11------ 11- - 11- 1 Leyet Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Delay/Vfl: 0.0 17.8 19.8 26.4 14..I 0.0 0.0 0.0. 0..0 10.8 0.0 7.7 Delay/Veh: 0.0 9.5 12.6 27.4 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 20.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00= 1.00 LOG 1.00 LOU -1.00' LOU -1000 LOU 1.00. 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctrr 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1_00 0.85 0_85 LOU 0.85 0.85 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 AdjDel/Veh: 000 15.1 16.8 26.4' 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.8 0.0 6.5 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 8.0 10.7 27.4 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 17.7 Queue_ 0 3 4 0 2 0 O `_ Q 0 7 - 00 Queue: -- 0 4 8 4 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 - - *#*ic* **iF****iR;:***iii:****************,-mitt****-_v**A A.*L A.k******ri•******************** - *********************k*******k**********err*Ski************************************ - - Traffi x System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po _ -Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po - - - - _ -_^i- - -_- - o-•. 0 7j0 771993 ib.Ob Filename 3itXPhs_OEIT Page 7 07/07/1493 16:06 Filename: TTEXP.f_OUT Page 8 - TTEXPK,CMD- Wed Jul ?, 1993 16:06:51' Page 7-1 TTEXPM.CMD Wed Jul 7, 1993 16:06:51 Page 8-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan , Existing Volumes PM Peak Hour Existing Volumes - PM Peak Hour = Existing=Geometry _-_-___Existing Geometry Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report - - 1985 HCM Operations Method. 1985 HCK Operations Method Base Volume Alternative Base Volume Alternative - *:_ _-* ****-**********3r***********..tA AA x**.*****ic********************t,lr#vrir******3****** ik*********************.********t********.********************?f**********k******** Intersection #8 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 SS Intersection#9 68th Parkway/Pacific Highway : - - ***'+C***.*********-*****IF.iF********-******************:****'**********k*****************_ ********************JF***********************************************************Cycle (sec):- 8th` Critical Vol /Cap_ (X):- 0_822 Cycle (sec): 120 - Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.871 Loss Time (sec): 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): 21.5 Loss Time (sec): 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): 19.3 Optimal. Cycle: 76 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 105 Levet Of Service: C - ********* ***********ya******-****** ****w**r******.**x*******************t** ***************************-********,r*******qtr***,t********-****-*tit***:t*******,r****** Approach: North Bound.- South. Bound East Sound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: - L - T - I R L _- T_ R L - T - R L - T. - R Movement: _ L - -T - R L - T -_ R L - T - R L_ T R --------- I II I I =---11 Control: Protected Protected. Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected - Rights:- Include -- Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include - Min_ Green. 6 15 15 6 15 15 6 15 15 6 15 15 Min.. Green: 6 15 15 6 15 -15 4 15 15 6 15 I5 ? 1 0 1 0 1 1 '0 - - _ Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 0 0 1! Q 0 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 - 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 -- ____ II II II I II- - Volume Module: II II (I Volume Module: _ --_ Base Vol: 3 662 161 30-7 283 21 9 1 2 255 5 60 Base Vol: _ 252 83 54 238 67 32 41 1561 158 - 66 1842 41 Growth Adj: -1_OQ 1..00__ 1_00 1_00 1.-00=- 1.00 1_00 1_00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 3 662 161- 307 283 21 9 1 2 2.55 5 60 Initial Bse: _2.52 83 54 238 67 32 41 1561 158- 66.1842 41 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol:= 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 3 662 161 307 283 21 9 1 2 255 5 60 Reduced Vol__ 252 83 54 238 67 32 41 1561 158 66 1842 41 ` ' User Adj: 1_00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1,0Q 1.00 1_OO 1.00 1.00 1_00 _ User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 PHF Ad j:- 1.00 1_00 =1..00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1=0.0 1_00 1,00 1_0a 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 3 662 - 161 30T 283 21 9 1 __ 2 255 5 60 PHF Volume: 252 83 54 238 67 32 41 1561 158 66 1842 41 PCE Mj: 1-_Q0 1_00 1_00 1_00 LOU 1_00 1.00 1_00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1_0G PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 , MLF Adj: 1-00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1_0.0 1_00 1_00 1_00 1_00 1_00 1_00 1.00 - MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 Final Vat..: j 3 662 161_= 307 283 21 9 1 2 255 5 60 _ Final Vol.: 252 83 54 238 67 - 32 41 1639 158 66 1934 41 - Saturation Fl ow Modu.leF 161 J 307 II_ II-- I Saturation Flow Module; II II ) Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800--.1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment; 0_.94 0.99 0..84= 0_94 0_98 098 0_51 0.51 0.51 0.99 0.99 0.84 Adjustment: 0_.72 0.93 0.93 0=64 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.98 0.98 0_94 0.,99 0.99 Lanes: 1.00 1_00 1.Q0 1,00 0.93 0.07 0.75 0.08 -0017 0_98 0.02 1.00 Lanes: 1_00 0.61 0.39 1.00 0.68 0.32 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.96 0.04 Final Sat.: 16.93 1782 1515 1693 164.2 122- 694 77 154= 1748 34 1515 Final Sat.-: 1 1301 1015 660 1158 1146 547 1693 3218 310 1693 3490 74 Capacity Module: -II II U j Capacity Analysis Module: I) II----- II I Capacity Analysis Ma l Vol/Sat: 0.00 U.37 0.11 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.0-1 0.15 0.15 0.04 Vol/Sat:- _ 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.21 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.51 _.51 0.04 0.55 0.55 ,. - Crit Moves; **** Cri t Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0,.19--0.45 0.45 0..22 0.47 0.4=7 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.14 0.19 0.19 Green/Cycle: 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.03 0.62 0.62 0.05 0.63 0.63 • _ Volume/Cap: 0.01 0_83 0.24 0_83 0.36 0.36 0.07 0.07 0_07 0.78 0.78 0.21 VoluinefCap: 0.82 0.35 0.35 0.88 0.25 0.25. 0.73 0.83 0.83E 0.78 0.88 0.88 ___ I_ --II I I - _- I I ,I Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: - Deiay/Veh: 20.0 20-3 10-5 33_2 10-_3 10.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 31.1 31.1 21.0 Delay/Veh: 44.1 29.3 29.3 51.6 28.5 28.5 67.1 15.7 15.7 66.2 16.9 16.9 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1_00. 1.00 1.00 1_00 1_00 1_00 1.00 1.110 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdj ctr: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 Adjiel/Veh.: 20_0 20.3- 10.5 33.2 10.3 10.3 20.3 20.3 20_3 31.1 31.1 21.0 AdjDel/Veh: 44.1 24.9 24.9 51.6 24.2 24.2 67.1 13.4 13.4 66.2 14.4 14.4 • Queue:_ 0 15 2 8 4 4 0 0 0 6 6 1 Queue: 9 4 4 9 3 3 2 48 48 3 57 57 ***********************************'*qtr********************************'*********** *****************3r************************************************************** Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po '• __ •_ __ _ - -- - ,_____ - _ - ___ .._- _ "--__ _ ._-_-- ___ - _ - ,ti - a_ - - _ - - - - _-__- - -- - 07/07/1993 16:06 Filename: TTEXPM_OUT Page 9 07/07/1993 16:06 Filename; TTEXPM.OUT Page 10 =. TTEXPM`.CMD Wed Jul. 7, 1993 1b:06:52 Page 9-1 TTEXFM-CMD Wed Jul 7r 1993 15:06:52 Page 10-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Existing Vot.umes - PM Peak Hour Existing Volumes - PM Peak Hour . Existing Geometry Existing Geometry Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 4-Way Stop Method 1985 HCM Unsignatized Method Base Volume Alternative Base Volume Alternative - -***************AAA..A.****************:*.******.******.**irk****'***************irk*****irk -*fir*****stele*******tic**********************************************Sir**************** - - Intersection 410 68th Parkway/Haines Street/Atlanta Street intersection #11 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street/I-5 SB ramps } - -- AAAA*********.***************.LA.k*.L;_.:..********** * A AA Ad************************- _ ************************************tic*******tic*****stir**************************** -- J = . Cycle sec): 1 _- Critical Vol_/Cap: (x) 0. 872 Level Of Service: E Loss Time (sec) 0 - Average Delay (sec/veh)• 12_.2 *****;***k****tr******************>****ts:*****,******-t**************************** Optimal Cycle: 0 Lever Of ServiceT C Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound ***********;**.**********.**,tom*******,****************************.**.************** Movement: L T R L T - R L T - R L - T - R Approach; North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound --------I II fI- I1 i . Movement: L _ T - R L - T - R L T - R L T - 1 Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign I 11-- 11 II f , Rights: Include Include Ine_ude Include Control; - Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1I 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Rights: Ignore Include Include Include --I-- II - I -- 11 1_ Lanes: 0_1 0 0 =1 01 0 0...1. 0 1 0 0 1 1" 0 0 1 0 Volume Module: - --'1 11 11 It 1 Base Vat: 0 318 117 158 137 0 0 0 0 142 0 171 Volume Module: i Growth Ad}: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00_ 1.00 1.0G 1.00 1.00 , • Base Vol: 9 119- 351 162 94 15 44 31 18 184 23 202. Initial, Bse: 0 318 117 - 158 137 0 0 0 0 142 0 171=- Growth Adj: LOU 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1-_00 1.k00. 1.00 1.00 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0" 0 C _ 0 0 '_ -._ Initial-Else: -9 119 0 162 94 15 44 31 18 184 23 202 Reduced Vol:- 0 318 117 158. 137 0 0 0 . n 142 0 171 L 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ' Reduct Vol- 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -= 0- 0 - • Reduced Vat: 9 119 0 162 _ 94 15 44 31 18 184 2S 202 PHF Adj-: 1.0.0 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 _ • User Adj": 1.00 1..00 0_00 1_0.1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: - 0 318 117 158 137 0 0 0 0 142 0 171 = _ PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 0_00 1_OQ 1.00 1_00 1.O0 1_O0 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 I--- 11 11 11 1 PRE Volume: 9 119 0 162 94 15 44 31 1 8 184 23 202 Adjusted. Voturne Module: , - PCE Adj: 1..00" 1-0.0 0.00 1=00. LOU 1.00 1-00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% MLF Adjr -1.00. 1_O0 . 0,:00_3_O0 1.00 1.00 1_QO 1_00 1.00 -1.00 1_00 1._90 %"Cycle/Cars: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Final Vat.: 9 119 0 162 _ 94 15 44 31 18 184 23 202 X Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx • - PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1 0 1.10 1.10 1 1 1.10 1.10 1.10 Saturation Flow Module: 11 ii 11 I Cyct/Car PCE: Ixxxx Oxxxx00 .lxxxx00xxxxO lxxxxlGxxxx 0 lxxxxl0xxxxl 1 1 t - Sat/Lane: 281 281 ` 281 410 410 4 1 0 272 - 272 272 27T 277 277 Trek/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Adjustment: 1_00 1..00 1_00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 Adj Vol_: 0 318 117 174 137 0 0 0 0 156 0 188 Lanes:: 0..07 0_93 1..00 0..63 0.,37 LOU_ =0.59 0.41 1.00 1.00 0.10 0.90 - 1 -11 1 1--- 11 -- - ( . . Final Sat.:__ 20- 261 28 1 259 151 410 160 112 272 277 28 24 Critical Gap Module: RT Rad/Ang 20.0 ft/90.0 deg 20.0 ft/90.0 deg 20.0 ft/90.0 deg 50.0 ft/90.0 deg Capacity Ana.1ysis. Modute: -ii-_ -_-_ i1 1i i Critica€. Gp: 5.6 xxxx xxxxx 5.6 xxxx xxxxx 7.3 6.0 5.7 7.3. 6.8 5.7 Vol/Sat:: 0.4& 0.46= 0.0Q 062 8.62 0.04 0.28 0.28 0.07 0.66 0=81- 0.81 ----- ---- 11---- ri t Moves: Capacity Module: _ - I 11_-:___-- 1.1 j1" I Cnflict Vol: 137 xxxx xxxxx 435 xxxx xxxxx 901 730 137 672 672 377 - Levet.Of Service Module:= Potent Cap.:- 956 xxxx xxxxx 676 xxxx xxxxx 200 302 956 291 331 719 Decay/Veh: 5.6 " 5.& 1.0 10..7 10_7 1_1 2.9 2.9 1.3 1 2s5 21.9 21.9 % Used Cap.: 0.0 xxxx xxxxx 25.7 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 0.0 ---0.0 53.6 0.0 26.2 Delay Adj: 1.0G LOU 1.00- LOU 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.OG 1.00 Impedance: 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 0.82 xxxx xxxxx xxxx 1.00 1.00 xxxx 1.00 0.81 AdjDel/Veh:- 5.6 5:.6: 1.0 10.7 10.7 1.1 2.9 2.9 1.3 125 21.9 21.9 Actual Cap.: 956 xxxx xxxxx 676 xxxx xxxxx 133 248 956 239 272 719 Queue: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx"xxxx xxxxx x xx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx ---- I_ 11 Ii --------I1 i - ********* *****************err.***.*****.*ark**.******L*. ************************** Level Of Service Module: Unused Cap.: 956 xxxx xxxxx 502 xxxx xxxxx 133 248 956 83 272 531 LOS by Move: >r * * A * * * * * * * A - Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTK - RT LT - LTR - RI LT - LTR - RT . Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 239 xxxx xxxxx Unused Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 0 xxxxx 83 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: . * * * * * * * * * E * * Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed ti DKS Associates, Po 1 _ _ ' - - - - i - . 07/07/1993 16:06 Filename: TTEXPM_OUT Page 11 07/07/1993 16:06 Filename: TTEXPM_OUT Page 12 TTEXPM_CMD Wed Jul -,. Page 11-1 TTEX. i.CMD Wed Jul 7, 1993 16:06:53 Page 12-1 1993 1v_��s53 Pa , - Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan • Existing Volumes - PM Peak Hour Existing Volumes - PM Peak Hour Existing Geometry Existing Geometry t Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 4-Way Stop Method 1985 HCM Operations Method . ons Metho - Base Volume Alternative Base Volume Alternative -- _*****************k*********kit**************x A0.k*********************************- 4c#•**fir***********tit'.ter-kph***r****************,t*k 7r•!c*ic********y*******4c*****:r****;r** - Intersection#12 at Parkway/Hampton Street Intersection #14 64th Avenue/I-5 SB off-ramp/Pacific Highway _ -- --- ,,...l&k.•k**A.A.4A.=A*********.L.1d,knA::.****ALd*k*-h************A kA************************ - ******************************************************************************* - _ L'cle (sec): 1 Critical-Vol./Cap_ (X): 0,821 Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.832 - Loss Time- (sec): 0 -Average Delay (secfveh): 12..1 . Loss Time (sec): _ 19 Average Delay (sec/veh): 24.2 Optimal C=ycle: 0 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 10099 Level Of Service: C ********t************Akk******LA Ai.A****A.A1k************************************* -***********.******** ********* *********pie*********_k****************************** - - - Approach": Horth Bound. South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: Mo_rth Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound - riovement: L- - T R L T - R L - T R _ - T - R Movement: L T - R_ L - T - ? L = T R _ - - r T R • I Sign Ii- ------II - II _ I - -1- I(- II- II 1 -- f.ontroi Stop-Sign - Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign. Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights; Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include , - Lanes: 0 0 =11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 Q 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Miry. Green: 6 15 15 12 12 12 6 15 15 6 15 15 , -- _ 1 0- 1 =-1 0 I I i( I I -- I Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 Volume Module= I- II II II-_ I Base Vol: 104 90 2 14 15 20 9 192 25 12 2 93 81 Volume Module: Growth Adj-:. 1.00 1-00 1-QO 1.00 1.00 1..00 1_0O 1.00 1.00 1.0G 1_00 LOU Base Vol: 0 1064 0 42 57 57 82 756 0 100. 835 107 Initial use: 104 90 2 14 15 - 209 192 25 12 2 93 81 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 L00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reduct Vol: - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Bse: 0 1064 0 42 57 57 82 756 0 100 83.5 107 ' Reduced Vol: 104 ..--90 = 2 14 15 209 192 25 12 2. 93 81. Reduct Vol: 0 0. 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adi- _.- LOU 1_00 LOO 1_00 LOG 1_C0 1_.00 1_00 LOG 1.00 1_00 1.00 Reduced Vol: 0 1064 0 42 5T 57 . 82 756 _ 0 100 835 107 PRE Adj _` LOG 1.00- 1..00 LOU L00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00--1_00 1_00 1_0Q User Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1_00 L00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 104 90 2 14 15 209 192 25 12 2 93 81 PHF- Adj: 1.00-1.00 L00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 - PCE Adj.: 1_00 1.00 1_00 1..00 LOO 1_00 1_00 1_00 1_00 1_00 1_00 1_00 PHF Volume:. 0 1064 0 42 57 57 82 7 = 0 100 835 107 MLF Adj: T.00 LOU 1,.00 1.00-1,00 1_00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1-_00. 1_00 10.00 PCE. Adj:- LOU 1_.00 =1.00 1.00 1.00 LOU. 1.00 LOU i_ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - : Final Vol..; 104 - 90 2 14 15 20-9- 192 25 12. a 93_ 81 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 LOU 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 - 11---------------Ii' II - I Final Vol.: 42 57 82 794 100 1 F nal V _ 0 1117 0 57 0 0 -877 107 Saturation Flow Module: I _ II-- ' II iI I - . Sat/Lane: 615 615 615 315 315 315 386 386 386 212. 212 212 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1..00-.100 1_00 1_00 1.00 1.00 LOU 1_00 1_00 1.00 1.00--1000 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Lanes: 0.53 0-.46 0.01 0.06 0006 0_88 1_00 0.65 0.32 1.00 0.53 0.47 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.84 0.94 0.99 1.00 0.94 0.97 0.97 Final Sat.: 326 aaa 6 19 20 277 386 _261 125 212 113 99 Lanes: 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.42 0.58 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 1.78 0.22 • . II .-- II II Final Sat.: 35 0 , 741 1005 1515 1693 3564 1693 3113 380 : . 1 n l S t : Q 64 1 5 3 564 0 1 31 Capacity Analysis Module: I I? II'-- II E Vat/Sat: 0.32-. 0.32 0.32 0.76 0.76. 0.76 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.82 0.82 Capacity Analysis Module. Crit Moves:: **** ***x **** z**** Vol Sat: 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.22 0.00 0.06 0.28 0.28 • Crit Moves:. **** ****- **** **** - I-- II II II- 1 I Level Of Service Module: Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.06 0.66 0.00 0.08 0.33 0.33 _ Delay/Veh: 3.4 3.4= 3__4 17.7 17.7 17_7 6.6 1.4 1.4 1.022.6 22.6 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.29 0.81 0.34 0.00 0.74 0.85 0.85 Delay Adj: 1.00 LOG 1.00 _LOG 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 --- = I---------------II ---- II- II-- ---I AdjDel/Veh: 3.4 3.4 3_4 17.7 17.7 17.7 6.6 1.4 1.4 1.0 22.6 22.6= Level Of Service Module: Queue:: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Delay/Veh: 0.0 32.0 0.0 37.5 37.5 36.1 66.3 6.8 0.0 53.6 33.0 33.0 "-k-*-************************ *****.**********eta:*.***fir.* A********************** - Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 _ AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 27.2 0.0 31.8 31.8 30.7 66.3 5.8 0.0 53.6 28.1 28.1 Queue: 0 37 _ 0 3 3 2 4 12 0 4 32 32 ***.********,***************.***********************************************plc******--- -- Traffix System Version.6.5_ (c) 1992 DA Licensed. tc DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po = 1 _ . .. - - - - - e 07f07-/1993 =16:O6 - Filename: TTEXPM_ouT Page 13 07/07/1993 16:06 Fi tename_- TTEXPM_0UT Page 14 TTEXPM_CMD Wed Jul 7, 1993 16:06:54 Page 13-1 • = Tigard. Triangle Specific Area Plan Existing Volumes- - PK Peak Hour Existing_Geometry Level Of Service_Computation Report • 1985 HCM Unsi=gnalized Method Base Volume Alternative • - - �cirl='.c-****•Frick.A,Li�S�r****ir*Yk�ir*.**•k.***-»*kkk***AAAkA*********A-A1 **y****************** - - - - - - ` Intersection #16 1-5 Ne-rampsflai°nes Street ---_**?k***sir******A.A A.A-***** ********************-**A A A A***** ************************* - - - - -Level Of Service: C - - _ - -_ :A..,,,,yci.,,-**---k-***-.J.A-A A******k**•k'a_.A A A.A****�•k****A IAA A A.******Y.-A A.A.- ***********'*-*# - - - - _ - --- - - Approach: North Sound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L -- T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T _ R I . Control: t Stop Sign r1 Stop Sign II Uncontrolled II Uncontrolled _ Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 _-- I_= II II I1 I Volume Module: _ Base Vol: 205 I 145 0 0 0 1 371 220 15 176 0= xx- GreWt Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 _ 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1_00_ 1_00 1.00 1.00_ Initial Bse: 205 1- 145 0 0 0 1 371 220 15 176 0 Reduct Vol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced.Vol _ 205 1 145 0 0 0 1 371 220 15 176 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1..00 1_00 1_00 1.,00 1_00 1..00 1,00 1.00 1..00 1.00 - " PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1,00 1_00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -Final Vol.: 205 1 145 0 0 0 1 371 220 15 176 0 I --_=I I 11 11 - Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: - 0% _ OZ Of Ol - XQ Cycle/Cars-, xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx - xxxx =-xxxx xxxx xxxx X Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1_10 1.10 1_10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1_00 Cycl/Car PCE: -xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb:PCE:_ xxxx xxxx xxxx: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Adj Vol.: 226 1 =160 0 G 0 1 =.371 _ 220 1T 176 0 1_ I(-___ I I I,I___- I Critical Gap-Module: - . RT Rad/Ana: 20..0 ft/90_0 deg 20..0 ft/90.0 deg 20.0 ft/90-0 deg 20.0 ft/90_0 deg Critical Gp: 6-5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxXx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx I- II - - II II L_ Capacity Module: Cnf l i ct Val: 563 563 371 709 783 176 176 xxxx xxxxx. 591 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 447 501 723 355 372 914 990 xxxx xxxxx 636 xxxx xxxxx Used Cap.: 50.4 0.2 22_1 0.0 0.0 0_0 = 0_1 xxxx xxxxx - 2.6 xxxx xxxxx Impedance: xxxx 1.00 0_84: xxxx 1.00 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 0.98 xxxx xxxxx Actual Cap_.. 440 493 723 294. 366 914 990 xxxx xxxxx 636 xxxx xxxxx ;� Level O f Ser v ice Module: I I - H I I I Unused Cap.: 215 492 564 294 366 9-14 989 xxxx xxxxx 620 xxxx xxxxx LDS by Move:. *_ * A * *- * - A 't * - A - * ' _ Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RI = LT - LTR - RI LT - LTR - RT Shared.Cap., 440 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx- xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Unused, Cap.: 214- xxxx xxxxx xxxx 0 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx _XXXX. XXXX xxxxx * - - Shared LDS: C * � * '�' * * * *- * - Traffix System Version 6.5_ Cc) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po _ t • o ✓, ; • ., DKSAthociates___, . , _ ._____...........______...... . , , „ ' „ . • I , [ , • • i. A.ry EN I)IX B ' . ..... , , , . , , , I . . I r.., r . ,Yr: v„, •v: •r•. e:.::.:.,......... t ✓ '1.1 ; •' � p %: � ',.• ✓.•„?••}�:%:ti:•.•✓ ✓:•r;r{..:. ,✓ vSv''� .r. . ., •+✓ ran '•'' ,.,•••,',,,,,,,,,''',•.....,•,..-•'.•• fC' ✓ .r . r.•.•.•Sr:r:• d✓•••kl ,rl.. .. f:• .:.. :r .v rt:••.:�..: r,✓ r✓rb . . :i ..•:-•m a dU • I I ir I . . , r.- C E a f y. r TIGAF-TRIANGLE SPECIFIC PLAN 07-Jul-93 t - _ Residential Retail Gas Station/ Commercial Special Generators ----- ---- J-------^ I Zone SF MF General Restaurant Fast Food Office Service - `(DUss. (P.Us) (SF) (SF), _______(Count)..--- --NSF) (SF) (in Trips) (OutTrips) (Units) Description y Existing 19.93 -, - 19 0 0 2,400 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 2 1 =0 24,400 -- 4,500 3 0 21,400 17 32 14 Bowling Lanes • _° = 3 2 0 12,000 20,200 0 2,400 64,700 0 - 0 - 0 - 4 8 0 - 8,500 °7,200 1 0 0 _ 40 - 30 117 Hotel Rooms 5 0 0 0 0 0 87,000 0 0- 0 0 <: • 6 47 0 1,500 0 0 26,000- = 0 0 0 0 . 7 = 1 - 0 -_ 0° 0 0 0 0 - 216 200 11 Movie Theater Screens 8 38 : 0 - 0 0 - 0 0 0 57 44 = 404 Elementary Students 9 33 0 0- 0 0 15,475 _ 0 -- 0 0 - 0 _ I = • 10 6 2 0 - 0 0 17,200 2,200 2 2 5,700 - SF Church 4 11 6 0 900 0 0 57,800 70,100 9 7 22,280 - SF Seminary 3 12 0 0 0 0 0 i 69,000 0 0 0 0 ? 13 2 0 0 0 0 191,618 0 0 0 0 } - 14 0 0 0 0 0 110,000 0 0 0 _0 TOTAL - 163 2 47,300 34,300 _ 4 577,493 158,400 341 31-6 - - Plot-Peak Hour Trips In: 108 1 155 134 - 223 185 19 - 341 0 - - 1,215 - Gut:: 57 0 155 79 206 953 - 136 0 316 1,903 Total: 165 1 310 263. 429 1,138 155 341 316 3,118 • 4 DKS Associates page 1 Ianduse_wk3 - - _ 07-Jul-93 • TIuARD TRIANGLE SPECIFIC PLAN . Residential - Retail Gas Station} Commercial Special Generators - . Zone _ SF MF General Restaurant. Fast Food Office Service. (Oils) (oils) _(SF) (SF) - _(Count). .____ (FL (SF) (in Trips) (OutTrips) (Units) Description ,Develo=pment Scheme I Original Tigard Triangle Master Plan (Benicender 1 19 0 75,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ - 2 1 0 39,400 9,500 3 0 21,400 17 32 14 Bowling Lanes 58 128 200 Park&Ride Spaces - 3 2 10 12000 - 20,200 0 2,400 64,700. 0 0 0 4- 8 _ - 0 8,500 7,200 1 0 0 40 30 117 Hotel Rooms . 5 0 0 0 0 0 127,000 0 0 0 0 6 0 500 11,500 10,000 0 26,000 10,000 0 0 0 7 0 0 159,674 0 0 0 0 - 216 200 11 Movie Theater Screens 8 38 0 175,000 0 0 0 0 5 7 44 404 Elementary Students 9 0 500 15,000 0 0 15,000 0 0_ 0 - 0 . - 1 J 0 0 0 0 0 72,200 2,200 .=2- 2 _ - 2,� - 5,700 - SF Church # - 11 0 0 900 0 0 157#800 70,100 9 7 22,280 SF Seminary 12_ 0 0 0 0 - 0 1.69,000 0 0 0 0 13 _- 2 0 0 0 0 20-1,61.8 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 110,000 0 0 0 0 _k TOTAL 70 1,010 496,974. 46,900 = 4 771,018 168,400 399 444 PM Peak Hour Trips - - 1,630 251 223 24-7 20 399 0 3,251 -- In: 46 --434 - - ��`Out 25 202 1,630 108 206 1,272 145 0 -444 - 4,1332 Total: 71 636 3,260 359 - 429 1,519 165 399 444 7,283 , DKR_A_gsocfa,UM =.oa.ge 2;�__- _-�,_� .---- _- _ ._.__-_. __. _ ,__ _, landuse.x4k3__ - - _ -- - e * - - - - : - -- Imo- O ff; �d a... �- E 4-- ..-7 !"^". TIGARD TRIANGLE SFECIFIC PLANT 07-Jui-93 -- Residential Retail Gas Station/ Commercial _ __Special Generators Zone SF i1itE G eneral: Restaurant Fa st Food Office Service - , -- (DUs): (DUs) (SFL _(SF) - (Count) (SF) (SF} (In Trips) (OutTrips) (Units) Description it -,Development Scheme II - Recommended Specific Area Plan - 1 0 0 150,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 _- - 2= 1 -- 0' 39;400 9,530 3 0 - 21_,400 17 32. =14 Bowling Lanes - _ - 58 128 200_ Park&Ride Spaces v _' 3 -- _ 2 0 12,000 20,200 0 2,400 79,700 0 0 0 4 8 0 8,500 7;200 1 _ 0 0 40 30 _ 117 Hotel Rooms - 0 0 - - 0 _ 0 0 127,000 0 0 0 0 = 6 0 5. 00 11,500 10,000 0 26,000 10,000 0 0 _ 0 7 0 0 159,614 0-- 0 0 0 216 200 11 Movie Thoatoi Screens &__ 38 0 -175,000 0 0 0 0 57 44 404 Elementary Students - - - 9 0 400 15,000 5,000 - 0 30,000 15,000 0 0 - -_ 0 I . • 10 a_ 0- 0 a - . - 0 72,200 _ 2,200 _ _ 2 2 5,700 SF Church - _11 = _ 0 0 900 0 0 1.57,800 70,1.00 9 7 22,280 SF Seminary t i 12 0 0 0 0 0 169,000 0 0 0 0 13 2 0 -- 0 0 0 201,618,618= 0 0 `0. 0 14 - 0 0 0 0 0 110,000 0 0 0 _ 0_ } TOTAL 51 900 571,974 51,900 4 896,018 198,400 399 444 g 1 PM Peak Hour Trips. #- In: 34 - 387 - 1,876 - 278 223 287 24 - 399 _- 0 3,508 Out - 18, 180 1,876 119- 206 1,478 171 0 444 4,492 Total: 52 567 3,752 398. 429 1,765_ 194 399 444 _ 8,000 1 • } } - TIGARD TRIANGLE SPECIFIC PLAN 07-Jul-93 Residential Retail Gas Station/ Commercial Special Generators -- Zone -SF _ - MF'- General Restaurant Fast Food Office Service -. _ DUs) (DUs) (S SF (Count) - (SF} _(§F) (in Trips)_,(OutTrip) (Units) __-- Cescription= ' _ - - Development Scheme Ill - High-Commercial Plan 1 0 0 150,000 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 _ 39400 9,500 3 0 21,400 17 32 14 Bowline Lanes 58 128 200 Park&Ride Spaces 3 2 0 12.000 20,200 0 2,400 = 7.9,700 -0 0 0 : 4 8 0 8.,50.0 7,200- 1 0 .0 40 30 - 117 Hotel Rooms t = 5- - 0 0 0 0 0 127,000 0 0 0 _- 0 6 0 - 300 11,500 10,000 0 46,000 25,000 0 0 0 _- - 7 0 0 159,674 0 0 0 0 218 200 11 Movie Theater Screens _ . ' 8- -- 38 0 175,000 0 0 0 0 57 44 404 _ Elementary Students 9 0. 400 15,000 5,000 0 30,000 _ 15,000 0 0 0 - 10 0 0 0 0 - 0 72,200 2,200 2 2 5,700 SF Church 11 0 0. 900 0 0 157,800 70,100 9 - 7 22,280 SF Seminary 12 0_ 0 0 0 0 169,000_ 0 = 0 0 0 i 13 - 2 0. 0 -0 0 20.1,618 0 0 0 . 0 14 0 - 0` 0 0 0 110,000 0 0 0 -- 0 - TOTAL 51 700 _ 571,974= 51,900 4 806,018 213,400 399 444 PM Peak Hour Trips - In: 34 = 301 1,876 278 223 258. 26 399 - = 0 3 39 - Out: 18 140 1,876 119 - 206 1,330 184 - - -0 444 - 4,317 - ro} l: 52 441 3,752 - 398 429 - 1,588_ 209 399 444 7,712 6 c n soci2#A-g_., w__ __ _ _ . r_ _ _page 4, - __ sand us . wk3 - - _ TIGARD TRIANGLE SPECIFIC PLAN 07-Jul-93 _ Residential . Retail G as Station/ Commercial Special Generators Zone SF- tvl:F General Restaurant Fast Food _ Office Service. (DJs) (DUs) (SF) (SF) (Count) (SF) (SF) (In Trips) (OutTrips) (Units) Description l Development Scheme IV - Existing Zoning 1 19 0 75,O0Q 0 0 _0 0 0 0 0 - 2 _ 1 0 39,400 9,500. 3 0 21,400 17 32 14 Bowling Lanes - _ s l = 58 28 200 Park F ide Spaces = 3 2 0 12,000 20,200 - 0 2,400 7.9,700 0 0 0__ 4 8 0 8,500 7,200 1 " 0 0 40 30 1.17 Note l Rooms ' 5 0 0 0 0 0 127,000 0 0 0 -_ 0 6 - _ 0 0 175,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 - 0 159,674 0 0 0 0_ 216 200 - - 11 Movie Theater Screens . - 8 = 33 0 175,000 0 0 0 -0 57 44 404 Elementary Students 9 0 0 325,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q -10 0 0 0 0 0 72,200 2,200 2- 2 5,700 SF Church 11 0 0 900_ 0 0 157,800 -- 70,100 - _ 9 7 22,280 SF Seminary 12 0 0 0 0 0 169,000 0 0 0 0 13' 2 0 0 0 0 201,618 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 110,000 0 0 0 ` 0 TOTAL 70 0 970,474 36,900" 4 730,018 173,400 399 444 . r PM Peak Hour Trips . In: 45 0 _ 3,18 _ _ 198 223 234 21 399 0 4,304 Out 25 0 3.1E-3= 85 206- -= 1,205 149 0 444 - _ - _ 5,296 Total: 71 0 6,z:;',--J 283. 429 1,438 170 399 444 9,600 QKS Associates page 5 landuse.wk3 • r r� i t • r f- . • � ► � � „ ■ , • ■ , \ . • ■ o I 1 • \ • , . . . . . . . . , . , . . , , . I , , r pa: : �; •.•1 r:: 'r: 1 i :: Y " :1 ✓� l i r J i` ,{. / :li1 Vi ✓' F i �f.� ✓✓• f,1. !,•,,,✓✓j!.�f'i•f .�i t .. } : :✓ 'Y✓• . 'r.. t .a�•;•;. . C... ►•r • L , ., 1 , 1 1 , . . . A u.. r I / _ 1 I. ' A' _ _ - _ _ . - a °- '"-- - -ate _ -- - - - f - F - - `6 - -- - - - __ __ - _ ' _ - - - - -- - TIGARD TRIANGLE SPECIFIC PLAN 07—JuI-93 Resider.,i� e : Retail Gas Station/ Comm rcial Special! '- Zone Street_ -- Address Name SF - RAF General Restaurant Fast Food Office Service Use= (D Us) (D Us) (SF) (SF) (Count) (SF) (SF) - T 79th Avenue SW 11630—_11965 Single Family Residential 19 - _ I 99=W—Pacific Highway 11744 Veterinary Hospital 1,000 =-99W-Pacific Highway 1177? 16 Acres Vacant Commercial ` 1- 99W-Pacific Highway 11700 Alexanders Restaurant 2,400 Subtotal: 19 0 0 2,400 0 1,000 0 - ; 2 99W-Pacific Highway 11646 Tigard Transmission 3,600 2 =99W—Pacific Highway 11680 Spunkys Hamburgers 1 2 99W—Pacific Highway -116?? _ Vacant.Building - ` 2 ""WW_-Pacific Highway-11674-11678 Doughty Appliances 5,9.00 _ 2 .—JW—Pacific Highway 11:660 -=Tigard Bowling 14 Lanes 2 99W—Pacific Highway 11632 Westside Gymnastic 20,300 it x 2. 99W-Pace is Highway 11606 Appliance Connection 4,100- - 2 99W—Pacific Highway 1163'4 S"ubway&Taco Bell 2 - - _ 2 99W-Pacific Highway 11670 Pizza Caboose 4,5 00 _+ 2 99W—Pacific Highway 11596 Tigard Automotive Detail 4,200 _ 1. { 2 am—Pacific Highway 11590 Single Family Residential 1 x - 2 99W—Pacific Highway. 11640-11642 Cartonics,Ribbons and Trophies 4,100 _ = 2 99W—Pacific Highway 11650-11654 Service—Light Industrial Building 7,200_ -_� Subtotal: 1 0 24,400 4,500 3 0 21,400 _ • 3 68th.Parkway SW _ -° 10935 Seafood Broiler 9,000 - 3 72nd-Avenue-SW 11??? Single Family.Residential- 2 - _ 3 99W—Pacific Highway - 11552 Uhaul plus 4 mini storage units - 12,000 _ _ 36,000 3 99W—Pacific Highway - 1156=4 - = US Vans - - 9,400 3 am—Pacific Highway 1 1530 _ - Hi Hat Restaurant 11,200 ° 3 991? —pacific Highway _ 11540 Tigard.Auto Repair/Service _ - 2,100 i 3 99W-Pacific Highway - 11576 Lawn Care Center - 3,100 F -- i 3 99W—Pacific Highway 11570-11572 Post Cards,J/H Safest Auto Body 4,100 i 3 99W—Pacific Highway_ 11578 American Legion Post 158, _ 2,400 �_____�.__._ �_ s__ r��_. _ _�_�-_- T_Subtotal: 2 0 12,000 20;200 0 2,400 64,700 . i DKS Associates page 1 Ianduse.wk3 - •r .•= -_ - - - - - - a - - - - - - - : TIGARD TRIANGLE SPECIFIC PLAN - 07—Jul-93 Retail Gas Station _Commercial Special: Residential _ m Sg 1 - Zone Street Address Name_ SF MF General Restaurant Fast Food Office Service Use= y (D Us) 1tl�l s) (SF) (SF) (Count) (SF) (SF) 4 64th Avenue SW 11???-11??? Single Family Residential 6 - - 4 68th Parkway SW It??? Single Family Residential 2 , _ 4- 69thi Avenue SW _ 10900 Carrows Restaurant 7,200 _ -- 4 99W—Pacific Highway 11460 Wayside Motor Ina° •117 Rooms` 4 99W—Pacific Highway 11420 Adams Lumber 2,500 4 99W-Pacific Highway 114?' Fantasy adult Video 6,000 4 99W—Pacific Highway= 11.440 BP Gas Station 1 - Subtotal: 8 0 8 500 7,200 1 0 - 0 _ 5 - 68th Parkway SW _ 11308: Key Services Corp 87,000 5 68th.Parkway SW 113?? 2.1.3 Acres Vacant Commercial Subtotal: - 0 0 0 0 0 87,000 0 6 68th Parkway SW 11705 Mtn Pac Mach Inc 1,0.0.0 - - 6" 68th°Parkway SW- - 1157?—11.7?? Single Family Residential 3 6 68th Parkway SW 113?? 4.45 Acres Vacant Commercial 6 68th Parkway SW 11_6?? 12 KSF Vacant Office/Commercial 6 69th Avenue SW= 1.1795-11.905 mingle Family Residential 10- 6 69th Avenue SW 118-7? Commercial For Lease 6 70th Avenue SW 11515—11930= Single Family Residential 5 6 72nd Avenue 11540—11990: Single Family Residential 7 6 72nd.Avenue- 11530 _ Learning Skills Resource Center 1,500 6 Baylor SW = 6340-7175 Single Family Residential 11 . -- = 6 Clinton SW = 6775-7140 Single Family Residential 11 6 Haines Road SW 6900 . OEA Plaza 25,000 - �_ Subtotal: 47 0 1,500 0 0 26,000 _ 0 7 72nd Avenue Future Retail Lot 5 } 7 72ref.Avenue Future Retail Lot 7 72nd Avenue r - 11795. Single Family Residential -t - 7 r 2nd Avenue Movie Theater i 2,700 Seats' 7 72nd Avenue Future Cub Foods 7 72nd.Avenue = Future Retail"G" _ 7 72nd Avenue Future Retail"B" Subtotal: 1' 0 0 = 0 f ,, -- _ -..-_ _ :. r--< case iandu S e,wk3 j#sE S. d I - t _ t T(GARD_TRIANGLE SPECIFIC PLAN- 07-J u1-93 . R n#i Gas l m Residential Retail as Station) Commercial Special i ZoneStre:et Address Name. SF NIF General Restaurant Fast Food Office Service Use-_ ` -_ _ � � (DUs) (DL1s) (SF) (SF) (Count) (SF) (SF) • 8 72nd Avenue 4 4 Stu:-{ent 12615 Phil Lewis Elementary School 0 - a 72nd Avenue = 11985 1 2465 Single Family Residential 5 ` a B:eveland Road SW 722?—7505 Single Family Residential= 14 - 8: Elmhurst SW 7200-7400 Single=Family Residential 4 a` Hermoso.Way SW 7270-7565_ Single Family Residential - 15 • - Subtotal: 38 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 -_ 9 68th Parkway SW 1207?-12700 - Single Family Residential 2 = . 9 68th Parkway SW 12525 _Doctor's Office 2,500 9 69th Avenue SW 121??-126?? Single Family Residential 8 - * i 9 69th Avenue SW _ 12377 45 (NSF Vacant Office/Commercial i. 3 = 9 72nd Avenue 12260-12360 Single Family Residential " 3 it ° • 9 72nd Avenue 125?? 3.1 Acreas Vacant Office/MF 9 72nd.Avenue 25?? 1.97 Vacant Acres tv1F 9 72nd Avenue 12700 _ CPA Offices -- -- -, 1,700 9 72nd Avenue 12600 City Universtiy 11,275 ` 9 B:eveland:Road SW 7060=7175 Single Family Residential 7 _ - t : 9 Elmhurst SW' - 7040-7155 Single Family Residential 7 • _ 9 Gonzaga SW 7020-7120 Single Family Residential - 6 Subtotal: 33 0 0 0 0 15,475 0 10 66th Avunue SW 11625-11685 Cooper Consultants _ -- 13,000 z 10 66th Avenue SW _ 11565 Single Family Residential 1 10 67th Avenue SW 11670 = Cline Commercial Brokerage _ 1,500 10 67th Avenue SW 11535 Health Physics NW 2,700 _ - 10 67th-Avenue SW = 11725 Single Family Residential 1 10 67th Avenue SW 11700 Family = Wolff Systems—Tanning Beds 2,200 • t 10 67th Avenue SW 11565-11585 Church 5,700 SF c 10 67th Avenue-SW 11580 Duplex Apartment 2 10 67th Avenue SW 11-550 days Landscpng(Home Oc c,Use 1 10 68th Parkway SW 11720 Single Family.Residential 1 i 10 Baylor SW 67??" Single Family Residential 1 10 Clinton SW 67?? Single Family Residential 1 l } I Subtotal: , 6 2 0 0 0 17,200 2,200 OKS=Associates page 3 - landuse.wk3 - TIGARD TRIANGLE SPECIFIC PLAN 07-Jul-93 - i Residential Retail Gas Station/ Commercial Special . - ZoneStreet Address Name SF = MF- General Restaurant Fast Food Office Service Use _ DUs DUs `SF SF Count SF SF _ : It 66th Avenue SW 12000 - Ford Landmark 2.0,100 _ 1•1 66th-Avenue SW 12323 Forte America - 17,500 -11 66th Avenue SW 12725 Executive Center 30,500 = 11 67th Avenue SW 12485-12705 Single Family Residential 3 - . 1'1- 67th Avenue SW 127?? Under construction 11 68th Parkway SW 12700 Aikido Training Center 900 _ 11 68th Parkway SW 1257?-1'27?? Single Family Residential 3 11 _68th Parkway SW- 125?? Under construction 11 68th Parkway SW 12540-12670 Landmark Ford Service and Parts 50,000 - 11 Hampton SW - 6655-6665 Hampton Oaks-S eminary 22,280 SF ' - 11 =Hampton SW= - 6745 Pacific:4 Sales 9,800 - _ _._� _._. Subtotal: 6 0 900 0 0 57,800 70,100 F 12 Hampton SW 6600 MedLab 69,000 t =Subtotal: 0 0 0 _ 0 0 X69,000 0 13 68th Parkway SW _ 12770 Hampton Plaza 47,800 -13 69th Avenue SW 1264. 5-12665 Single Family Residential 2 a_ Hampton SW 7035 Hampton Commons 3,000 13 Hampton SW_ 7125 Kingsman Professional Building 10,923 13 Hampton SW 7105 kaiser Dental Office 7,700 13 Hampton SW 7000-7150 Commerce Plaza _- = 77,845 : E. r 13 Hampton SW 6956 Shaffer&Nelson 1,500 13 --Hampton SW 6950 Hampton Square 42,850 Subtotal: 2 0 0 0. -_ 0 191,618 0 14 68th Parkway SW 13333 Farmers Insurance - 110,000 Subtotal: 0 0 0 0 0 110,000 0 • TOTAL FOR STUDY AREA: 163 2 47,300 _ 34,300 4 b77,493 158,400 i\ . - _ D KS.AssociMas- - - - � page 4. -Ianduse.wk3 " _ �- _ - . - - - - , J .. • ■ w _. DKSAssociates. _________,_.........._____................_..__........_ .. . i . • ■ • ' ■ • . .... YJ....r.�. ✓♦ ✓ f J'✓rr. ✓ .J.. ✓M •:,•:�},�'} ..� �: f• I•r l7ls: •r✓✓ l,. % ra•✓�..., ✓.. ... •tiYii i•:ti" • f • a .invr■.}:••1:• • e ''h.r.4: .l... r .r..v4., ..rr.•l •r. •,::F .. ✓.v: : 'rr. .✓ �;�•tip:' ' v.. !n. :4i fir:: ':•r:.::..:..,l.. .... v: ": :v• d 0 Level c f L. . .. �r l l tion IL , , • 1n mss. ■ �' y y 0 j . _ = _ - c- - . -- -` F -- - - - - _ -- - - - ' - _ -- - _`r_---" - --- - - _-1*.•-.ti,� - - ' F . 10/21"1=993 13:41 Filename: TT-FUTMI.OUT Page 1 10/21/1993 13:41 Filename: TTFUTM1.OUT Page 2 TTFUTlf1.CM0 - Mon Oct 4r 1993 16:.57:06 Page 2-1 - TTFUTMI.CMD Mon Oct 4, 1943 16:57:06 Page 3-1 - Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan: Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Future Volumes (Year 2010). - PM Peak Hour_. - Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Base Geometry- (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) Future Base Geometry - (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) = Impact Analysis Report --- f-- Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service 1985 HCM Operations Method -- -_- -- _ ---- - Bas. Future Volume Alternative - Intersection Future Change ttttYktt�****iti t�t t�xy� k****Yrttittr;YiY� ttri* ******t t ttryk trttt, kk*kkk*****tr*tk Del/_ V/ Del/ V/ in Intersection #1 ORE 217 SB ramps/Pacific Highway - LOS Veh C LOS Veh C 7f*****pinta**********i*i****,titiir*k*****,t***st*ic,tir*it****st,t-ltdr*******,t*7Y'ant*******inter.** . # 1 ORE 217 SR' ramps/Pacific Highw F 838 1.192 F 114.1 1.251 +30.:2.46 D/V Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.251 Loss Time (sec): 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): OVERFLOW Y # 2 ORE 21T NB ramps/Pacific Highw D 27_0. 1_035 F 72.2 1.210 +45.:199 D/V Optimal Cycle: 180 Levet Of Service: F '* ******** ************************Sri[*Ott* **************************************,* _ # 3 Dartmouth: Street/Pacific Highw. F OVRFL 1..212 F OVRFL 1.484 +176.940 D/V Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - .T - R L - T -_ R L - T - R L - T R - # 4 72nd Avenue/Pacific Highway- D 27_6 1.010 F 162.7 1.371 +135.066 D/V ---_____-_ __---- ' Control.:. �-� Split Phase )I Split Phase ��_ Protected -�� Protected 5 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street C 17,6 0.904 F OVRFL 2..4:72 + 1.568 V/C Rights: Include Include Include Include - Min.. Green: 0 0 0 15 0 15 0 15 15 6 21 0 # -6 72nd Avenue/Hampton= Street D` 31.0 0_668- D 36.0 0.891 + 4..977 D/V Lanes: ' 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 :, 0 1 f__0 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 # 7 72nd Avenue/ORE21T NB D 25._9 0.764 D 26.1 0.843 + 0.223 D/V Volume Module: _ Base Vol 0 0 0 718 0 585 0 2031 396 86 2330 0 1 - #- 8: 72nd Avenue/ORE 217-S5 C 22.3 0.607 D 2502 0.769 + 2.86& 0/V Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ## 9 68th Parkway/Pacific Highway D 34_8' 1..035 F 99_4.1.194- +64.605 D/V Added Vol.: 0 0 0 330 0 585 2031 396 23 0 0 86 201 6 0 30 811 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 1048 0 585 0 2232 402 86 2511 0 10 68th Parkway-/Hai.nes Street/Ati C 12.9 0_841 F 275.2 1.692 + 0.851 V/C Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:. 0 0 0 1048 0 585 0 2232 402 86 2511 0 - 11 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street; F xxxxx 0.000 F xxxxx 0.000 + 0.000 VIC User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF A d 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 �': 12 68th Parkway/Hampton Street B 8_4 0.803 0 27.9 1.191 + 0.388 V/C PHF Volume: 0 0 0 1048 0 585 0 2232 402 86 2511 0 -, PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 # 13 68th Parkway/ORE elT B_ 7.8 0.554 B 10_2 0.678 + 2.395 D/V MLF Adj: - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 - Final Vol.: 0 0 0 1048 0 585 0 2343 402 86 2637 0 #14 64th Avenue/I-5 SR off-ramp/Pa _F=-66..5 0.934 E 48.4 1.030 -18.047 D/V I - - ----------- -------it 1i 1 Saturation FLow Module: # 16-L-5 NB. ramps/Haines Street C xxxxx 0-000 F xxxxx 0.000 + 0.000 V/C Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 `f Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.99 1.00 _ Lanes: - 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final. Sat.: 0 0 0 3386 0 1515 0 3564 1515 1693 3564 0 . 1-7-- Capacity Ana Module: II._---------- - II-- ______II ( - __ Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.66 0.27 0.05 0.74 0.00 Crit Moves: * ** **** **** **,t* Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0_00 0.31 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.04-0.59 0.00 Volume/Cap: .00-0.00--0.0- -- 0 . 0. 1.20 1.25 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0 00 0 00 0 COE -1.00 0 00 1.25 0 00 1 ZO 48 i 2 25 0 I� - If II i Level Of Service Module: Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.6 Oro 191.7 0.0 131 13.0 230 170 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00- 1.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.6 0.0 163.0 0.0 111 11.0 230 145 0.0 Queue: 0 0 0 43 0 48 0 176 8 8 245 0 *************************************t************************,try**************** Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po - } - - Z' TOf21a 13:41 Fi TF1Mfi_OUT Paat_.3 10 1 1993 13:41 Filename: TTFUTM1.-OUT Page 4 TTFUTMI-CMD - Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:06 -Page=4-1 TTFUTMI.CMD. Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:07 Page 5-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Future Volumes. (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Rase Geometry - CTTFIJTM1/TTPMADJ) Future Base Geometry - (TTFUTMI/TTPMADJ) Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1985 HCM Operations Method 1985 HCM Operations Method • Future Volume A lternative Future Volume Alternative --__******l***,x*****tine.***********k*********,ktiti*t*.irk.*..kiln***pint******l***** ***** *****st. *****t*t***Mrvc,lt*,t,k***'tityr#ic****et±t****tit*****dt*ytYt*i*drtY***rcicieic******#*ic,h*,teitt*ic,Mt** Intersection #2 ORB. 21T NS ramps/Pacific Highway Intersection #3 Dartmouth Street/Pacific Highway --,k�cli***,r:�tzhic�**irylnk.**:0•00�rsir.*0-000Y-it**********-* **************y,r**r******:Yiic�t*****,****** - ******************************************* ***k**i*&*************silk************ _Cycle (sec) 120 Critical Vol_/Cap.- (X): 1.2.10 Cycle (sec):. 120 Critical Vol,/Cap. (X): 1.484 Loss Tame (sec) S Average Delay Csec/veh) OVERFLOW Loss Time (sec): 16 Average Del ay (sec/veh); OVERFLOW Optimal_ Cycler - 180- Level Of Service: = F Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F ***.*-**********tik.*.*****,****.*etc****.***'**.*****iris*.********.**************3i****fir****** - .*********x*****************************************h**************************** Approach: -north Bound South Bound. East Bound West Bound Approach: - Korth Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: LT - R- L - T - R L - T R L - T - R Movement:: L - T - R L - T R L - T - _R L - T - R _ Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:= Include Include include Include Rights: Ovl Include Ovl Include Min.. Green: =-15 0 _ 15 0 0 0 0 15 15 0 15 15 Min.. Green: 6 15 15 6 15 15 - 6 15 15 6 15 15 Lanes: 1 0- 0 O. 1 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0. 2 0 1 Lanes: 1 _0 1 0" 1 1 0 0-- 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 i I I I I ii _._.._I _____ -_ � II I I _ II 1 Volume Module: Volume Module: - Base Val: 545 0 249 0 0 0 0 2186 558 0 1868 738 Base Vol:_ 259 21 3 78 70 252 140 180/ 258 10 2062 6 Growth Adj: 1.00 10.00. 1.00 1.00 1.:00 1..00 1,.00 1.-00" 1.00 1.00 1_0.0 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse 545_ 0 24.9 0 0 =.0: 0 2186: 558 0 1868 738 Initial Bse: 259 21 3 78 70 252-- 140 1807 - 258 10 2062 6 _ Added Vol: 12 0 -65 = 0 0 0 0 531 0 0 157 372. Added Vol: 257 10 213 4 5 - 0 0 231 365 143 272 3 Initial F u t 557 0 314 0 0 0 0 2717 55a - 0 2025 1110 Initial Fut: 516 31 216 82 75 252 140 2038 623 153 2334 9 - aeduct Vol: - 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vot: Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 557 0 314 0 0 0 0 2717 558 0 2025 1110 Reduced Vol: 516 31 216 82 75 252 140 2038 623 153 2334 9 User Adi: 1000 1.00, 1.00 1-00 1.00. 1.00 1.00-1,00 1.OO 1..00 1..00 1.,00 User Adj: 1>O0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1-00 1..00_ 1.00 _ 1-0G 1.00 1_00 =1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 PHF Ad': 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 55T 0 314 0 - 0 0 0 2717 558 0 2025 1110 PHF Volume: 516 31 - 216 82 75 252 140 2038 623 153 2334 9 PCE Adjt 1_.00' 1.-00 1.00 1_00. 1.00 1.00 1.00:'x.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00- 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -- MLF Ad;: 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.0.0 1.00 1.05 1.00 1_00 1.05 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 Final Vol_: 557 0 314 0 0 0 0 2853 55a 0-2126 1110 Final Vol..:. 516 31 216 82 75 252. 140. 2140 623 153 2450 9 =- ( I t II II I I I I I----- II______________[ Saturation Flow Module: Saturation F ow Module: Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800- 1 800 T800 1800 1800 1800. 1800 "1800"1800 1800 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800` 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adiustment: 0.94 1.00 0.84 1.00 1-00 1.00 1..00 0.99 0..84 1.00 0.99 0.84 Adjustment= 0.94 0.99 0_84 0.94 0.87 0.87 0.94 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 1.00. 0.00 1.00. 0..00 0_00 0.00_0.00 2.00 1.00 0.00" 2.00 1.00 Lanes:_ 1.00 1..00 1..00 1.00 0.23 0.77 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.99 0.01 • Final Sat..: 1693 0 1515 0 0 0 0 3564 1515 0 3564 1515 Final Sat. 1693 1782 1515 1693 .360 1208 1693 3564 1515 1693 3551 13 Capacity Aatys s Mod----- -II -1I--_____- �- I[____ __________I -------- I I---- ------( II I iz Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.33 0_00 0.21 0..00 (L00 0..00: 0.00 0.80 0.37 0.00 0.60 0073 Vol/Sat: 0.30 0.02 0.14 0.05 0.21 0,21 0.08 0.60 0.41 0.09 0.69 0.69 Cr-i t Moves=: **** _ ****- **** Crit Moves: *,rho- k*** *,.*�r **ir* Green/Cycle: 0.27 00.00. 0..277 0.00. 0.00- 0..00 0..00 0.66 0..66 0..00 0..66 0.66 1" Green/Cycle: 0.21 0.30 0.36 0.05 0.14 0.14 '1.06 0.45 0.66 0.07 0.46 0.46 1toLesne/Cap:: 1 021 0.,00 0..76 0,.00 0..00 0..00 0.00. 1.21 036- 0..00 0.90 1.=11 Volume/Cap:" 1.48 0.06 0.39 0.97 1.48 1..48 1,48 1.33 0.63 1.33 1.48 _ 1.48 I I I ----11--- " _'"rI I I I_ I I I i I I---- .- - Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Delay/Vets: 164 0..0 36-.1 0..0 0.O 0-0 0_0 137 8.8 0..0 16_& 78.8 Delay/Veh-:= 435 23.0 2.1.8 108 450 449.5 494 239 9.9 307 416 416.2 Delay Ad j:- 1.00 10.00 1..00 1..00. 1,00 1..00 .1.00 1 000 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 Delay Ad-: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1-.00- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0-"85 0..85 1_00" 0.85 0..85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0:.85 ProgAdj Fctr:-1.00' 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 '.00 c1.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 AdjDel/Veh: 164 0.0 30.7 0_0 0.0 0.-0 0_0 1.17 7.5 - 0.0 14_3 67.0 AdjDel;Veh: 435 19.6 18.5 1.08. 3.82 382,1 49/ 203 8.5 307. 354 353.8 Queue: 41 0` 10 0. 0 0 0- 256 10= 0- 63 68 Queue: 69 1 5 5 44 44 20 217 12 16 365 365 *****************.*******.*********qtr************** *************************:t***** **ire****3******i4*************<***************k***.*****ie**************,t******:r**** - .- - Traffi-x System=Version 6-5 Cc) 1992 DA Licensed=to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associatese Po S s11sg ►, ioa .-� a� r"=-_, - prer-vim.--...., )__._...-_-• °""°'° _ - t __. - _ --- - t"°.�" "°"'° - [ 'ar- -rs. . - - --ru.,.++._. - - _ --...•-e..• - -- _ - - - 10/21/1993 13:41 Filename: TTFUTM1_OUT Page 5 10 21 1993 13-41 Filename: TTFUTMI.OUT Pa•e 6 • TTFUTMI_CMD ' Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:07 Page 6-1 TTFUTMI.CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:07 Page 7-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan isuture Volume; (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future-Base Geometry - (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) Future Base Geometry -_ (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) -Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report - 1985 HCM Operations Method 4-Way Stop Method Future Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative *elk** *-***********fr ******tee,:**,Usk**********.**********.** :*r*sue****************Y** ************************************************tY.***************** ***********k* _ Intersection#4--72nd Avenue/Pacific Highway Intersection#5 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street *"K*i!**ant*************=Yee******5****t***ic_ ii:kick***************************.********* -**art**************************************************************************** - - - - Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X):. 1.371 Cycle (sec): 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 2.472 Loss Time (sec): 16 Average Delay (sec/veh -) OVERFLOW Loss Time (sec): 0 Average Delay (sec/veh): OVERFLOW Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service F Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: F *.************.******.***.*.****************.******k******ink************************** *at**,tic*.`&************iris*************************************'ants*tr**�U********k***** Approach: North Bound Sou'th. Bound East Bound West B o u n d Approach: North-Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T R L - T - R L. - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T -- R L - T R L T - R =.Control:. Permitted Permitted Protected. Protected Control;. Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Step Sign Rights: . 0v4 Ovl Ovt Include Rights: Include_ Include Include Include__ M in: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 11 0 - Green: 15 15 15 15 15 15 6 15 15 6 15 15 Lanes: i 0 II 1 0 0 1 0 �} 1 0 0 1 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1' 0 1 _0. 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 ----_--_ Volume Module: • Volume Modul(. !�_ - � II Base Vol: 33 37 86 129 66 16 12 284 28 27 219 43 Base Vol: 24 12 60 222 23 185 150 1789 37 151 2017 113 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. - 9 Growth Adj: 1000 1-00 1--00 1-00 1:.00 1.00 1.00 LOU 1_00 1..00 -1-00 1.00 Initial Bse: 33 37 86 129 66 16 12 284 28 27 219 43 . Initial Bse: 24 12. 60 22.2 23 185 1.50 1789 37 151 2017 113 Added Vol: 103 129 45 93 122 11 23 307 229 73 475 42 Added Volt 233 0 203 0 0 0 0 236 212 89 135 0 Initial Fut.: 136 166 131 222 188 27 35 591 257 100 694 85 Initial Fut: 257 12 263_ 222 23 185 150 20.25 249 240 2202 113 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 Reduct Val: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 136 166 131 222 - 188 27 35 591 257 100 694 85 Reduced Vol: 25T 12 263 222 23 185 150-2025 249 240 2202 113 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1_OC_ 1_00: 1_00. LOG 1..00 1.00 1_00 1..0G 1.00 1.00 Loa PHF Adj: . 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 S PHF Adj:_ 1..00 1.00 1-00 T_00 1.00 1.00 1_00 T.00 1.-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 136 166 131 222 188 27 35 591 257 1.00 694 85 ' PHF Vo1ume: 257 12 263 222 23 185 150 2025 249 240 2202 113 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.0(1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1_.00 1_00.1..00 1.,00 1.00 1.05 100G 1.00 1.05 1.00 Final Vol.:: 136 166 1.31 222 188 27 35 591 257 100 694 85 Final Vole 257_` T2 263 222 23 185 150 2126 249 240 2312 113 f II_____ _----II II___ I t II _ II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation-FLo+:Module: Sat/Lane: 277 277 277 383 383 383 343 343 343 373 373 373 - Sat/Lane:` 12300. 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.35 0.99 0.84 0_62. 0.62 0.84 0_94 0.99 0.84 0_91 0.98 0.98 Lanes: 0.31 0.39 0.30 0.510.43 0.06 1.00 0_70 0.3`0 1.00 0.89 0.11 Lanes: 1.-00 1_00 1_00 0.91 0.09 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.91 0.09 Final Sat.: 87 106 84 195 165 24 343 239 ?`i4 37.3 332 41 Final Sat.: 6. 24 1782 1515 10TT 105 1515 1693 3564 1515 3279 3364 164 _-----._____ j __ - ___II II ------��__ I I1 i1 I I i Capacity Analysis-Module: Capacity Analysis- Module Vol/Sat: 1.56 1.56 1.56 1.14 1.14 1.14 0.10 2.47 2..07 0.27 2.09 2.09 Val/Sat: 0..41 0.01 0.17 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.09 0.60 0.16. 0_07 0.69 0.69 to t Moves: **'�* ****_ ***'} **** Grit Moves: **** ****" **** -_- Green/Cycle: 0.30.0.30 0.36 0.30 0.30 0.37 0.06 0050 0_50 0.06 0.50 0.50 Level Of Service Module: II II II I Volume/Cap: 1.37 0-02 0.48. 0;-73 0.73 033 1..3771.IS 0.33 1.18 1.37- 1.37 Delay/Veh: 380 380380.0 76.4 76.4 76.4 1.5 -;:xc 12025 2.8 2797 2797 I-_-_- _ -_II. II II- I Delay Ad': 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00= Level Of Service Modue: AdjDet/Veh: 380 380 380.0 76.4 76.4 76.4 1.5 xxxx 12025 2.8 2797 2797 - Oelay/Veh: 322.22..5 2.3 00 33.7 33.7 21_1 353 123 13.5 174 283 282.6 Queue: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx :,xxx xxxxx Delay Adj_: 1.00 1.00 -1_001 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ********,r************t************************+****************************,r**** ProgAdjFctr-: 1.00. 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 1..00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 AdjDel/Veh: 322 19.1 19.5 28.7 28.7 17.9 353, 105 11.5 174 240 240.2 Queue; 29 0 7 8 8 4. 17 149 5 18' 286 286 _ k7t7U****************t**********,r.:hFr****.*,Vic* ******** ******yt r******************** -- _ --- - - - - - - Tra:ffix System.Version 6.5 (c) V992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po _ k 10 21 1993 13:41 Filename:. TTFU-TM1:.OUT Pa.e 7 10/21/1993 13:41 Filename: TTFUTMLOUT Page 8 _ TTFUTMI.CMD Mon Oct 4E 1993 16::57:07 Page 8-1 I TTFUTMI.CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:07 Page 9-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Base Geometry - (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) Future Base Geometry - (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1985 HCM Operations Method 1985 HCM Operations Method Future Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative *'****.*****sic.**********..****'Kf*ictklkll f.*****.*.*****************•*******************S.3*1L**' '******************'*******************T:******.************************************Intersection #6 72nd Avenue/Hampton Street Intersection #7 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 NB ***************************.************.**************A.,:.A L.1********.***********.*t** *******+.roc*****fir*********it*********7t*tech'********************.***it****************** Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap.. (X):: 0.891 Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.843 Loss Time (sec): 16 Average Delay (sec/veh): 36.0 Loss Time (sec):. 12 Average Delay (secfveh): 26.1 Optimal Cycle: 125 Level 0f Service: D Optimal Cycle: 94 Level Of Service: 0 - - - - ****-*-**************' -s****:********************************,fir*.******************* - - ******************************************************************************** - - Approach: North Bound South Bound. East Bound Best Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:° L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I_ - T - R Movement: L T R L - T 4t- L - T - R 1 - T - R Control: I- Protected II Protected II Protected II Protected ( Control: i---Protected_--(i Protected II !I Split Phase `Split Phase - Rights.: Include Ovt. Include. Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min_. Green: 6 15 15 6 15 15 15 15 6 15 15 Min. Green:_ 6 21 0 0 15 15 0 0 0 15 0 15 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 t O 1 O 1 0 0_ 1 0 Lanes: f- 0 2 0 0 0 0 2-_ 1 0 0 0- 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 I I I I I II---- I i II-- - I I II----- --- f 1 Vo=lume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 213= 171 224- 12 86 101 47 8 312 328 7 15 Base Vol.:. 390 279 0 0 832 4Z9 0 0 0 386 0 =-103 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.:00 1.00 1..00 1_00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 213 171 -226- 12 86 101 4T 8 312 328 7- 15 Initial Bse: 390 279 0 °" 0 832 429 0 0- 0 386 0 103 Added Vol: 0 314 15 0 344 146 98 IT 0" 45 35 34 Added Vol: 0. 189 0 0 311 82 0 0 0 0 0 141 • Initial Fut: 213 485 239 1Z 430 247 145 25 312 373 42 49 Initial Fut: 390 468 0 0 1143 511 0 0 .0 386 0 2.44 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ Reduced Vol:_213 485 239 12 430 247 145 25 312 373 42 49 Reduced Vol: 390 468 0 0 1143 511 0 0 0 386 0 244 - -_ User Adj:: 1_00' LOU 1_00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.=00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj; _ 1-00' 1.00- LOU 1.00 1.OL 1.00 1_00 1.00. 1..00 1..00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 213 485 239 12 430. 247 145 25 31.2. 373 42 49 PHF Volume: 390 468 0 0 1143 357 0 0 0 386 0 244 PCE Adj: 1.00.1.:00 1,00 1.00 1.,00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1_-00 1_00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -: MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05. 1.00. 1,00' 1_-05 1.00- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 . 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.:_ 213 509= 239 12. 451 247 145 25 312 _. 373 42 4.9 Final Vol-: 390 491 0 0 1200 357 0 0 0 386 _- - 0 244 t - i 1 II i t 1 ----_--__--- --------------I I II 11- I Saturation F ow_Module: Saturation F.ow Module: Sat/Lane- 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800= 1800 _1800 .1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 0.94 0..94=_0.94 0_94: 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.85 0.85 0.94 0,91 0.91 Adjustment: 0.94 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.84 Lanes_: 1.00 1.36 0.64 1..00 1.29 0.71 1_00 0.07 0.93 1.00 0.46 0.54 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.31 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat..: 1.6.93 2304 1.082 1.693. 2188 1198 1693 114 1419 1693 757 883 Final Sat.: 1693 3564 0 0 3997 1189 0 0 _-0 1693 0 1515 Capacity Analysis Module:. Capacity Ana ysis Module: l . Vol Sat: 0.13 0.22 0.22 0-010.21 0.21 0.09 0.22 0..22 0.22=0.06 0.06 Vol/Sat: -�0.23_0.14 -0.00 0.00 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.23 0.00 0.16 Crit Moves: **** **** *** - ****. Grit Moves: ****- **,k* **** **** Green/Cycle: 0_14 0_32 0.32 0.05 0.23 0.60 0.37 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.13=0.13 Green/Cycle: 0_27 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.27 - Volume/Cap: 0.89 0.6a 0.68 0.14 0.89 0.34 0.23 0.89. 0.89 0..89 0..44 0.44 ►loge/Cap: 0.84 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.00 0.60 - 1--- H I I- I I I ----f_ 1 1 i i I I I Level. Of Sertvi°ce Module: = Level Of Service Module: - • Delay/Veh: 60.2 28..1 28.1- 41.5 42..8 9-2 19.9 48.8 48.8 47.6 38.0 38.0 Delay/Veh: - 40.5 7.3 0.0 0.0 29.7 29.7 . 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.7 0.0 30.6 c : Delay Adj: 1.00 1000 1.00 1.00 1000 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1..00. 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr; 10.00 0.85 0.85 1-00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 __ AdljDel/Veh-: 60.2 23.9 23..9 41.5 36.4 7.8 19.9 41.5. 41.5 47.6 32.3 32.3 AdjDet/Veh: 40.5 6.2 0.0 0.0 25.2 25.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.7 0.0 26.0 Queue: 9 22 22 0 25 12 3 13 13 14 3 3 Queue: 14 7 0 0 50 50 0 0 0 14 0 7 ******* *tti**yf*Yf I6�:************.******'*******:***********************.*********]A***** *'k*******It*******2Y***L***************x***********-*******************:k•t.********** _ - - - Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed. to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po 1 a - 10-x'21/1993 13:4.1. Filename: TTFUTML_OUT __ Page 9 10 21 1993 13:41 Filename: TTFUTM1.0&JS Page 10 TTFUTM1.:CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:.57:07 Page 10-1. TTFUTM1.CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:07 Page 11-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Are Plan -- _-+ Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan, Future Votun;es (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour - Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Base Geometry (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) Future Base Geometry - (TTFUTMI/TTPMADJ)_ _ Levee Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report -- 1985 HCM Operations Method: 1985 1JCM Operations Method Future Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative - -- - ******k*******:t*.****,*:s**.*********** ******ale******************.***************,t***** **************************************,t********brit******************************* = - Intersection *8"72nd._Avenue/ORE ZIT SS Intersection - Intersectzon #4 68th Parkway/Pacific Highway *******�t******�****;t**.*****,rr****,k,****.****ie*****-fr-**ink•****c*******.**********,i*****-- - -******************************#************ **************•:�7******************** - - - - Cycle (sec): 120 Crityca;l Vol_/Cap. (X): 0.769 Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. CX): 1.194 Loss Time (sec):: 12 Average Delay (sec/veh):: 25.2 Loss Time (sec):, 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): 99.4 Optimal Cycle: 74 Level Of Service: 0 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F - - -- ****.*X=x#i5r.********.******* **********.**�ti6-A*********************.w*�tr*3.�k***********.* _ =*******fir* **********************************************************c************ Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South _ _ Bound d i t East Bound West Bound L - T - R L T - R L T - R ! L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T = R L - T • R L - T R S t�_ _ It' _ -I Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected • - Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: _ Include Include Include Include Min Green: - 0 15 - 15 "6 21 0 15 0 15 0 0 0 Min. Green: 15-. 15 15 15 15 - 15 6 15 15 6 15 15 _ Laney 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: • 1 0 0 0 0 0 La es• 1 Q O 1 0 1 0 Q 1 0 1 0 t 1 0 0 1 1 0 vatume �odule: 1 1 II I I I 1 II------- ------_IN------ --- I I 1 - I - Volucne Module: _ Base Vol: 0 732 81 533. 290 0 278 0 318 0 0 0 Base Vol: 148 80 41 298 58 31 54 1636 115 69 2144 -78 Growth Adj: 5..00 1.00 1000 1.00 1 00 1..00 1 00°1_OO LOU I000 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 . 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 _ Initial Ilse: 0 -732 81 533 290 0 278 0 318 0 0 0 Initial Sse: 148 80 41. 298 58 31. 54 1636 115 69 2144 78 Added Vol: 0 112 0 233 78 0 77 0 0 2 0 0. Added Vol: 49 3 102 0 -._-3_ 6 7 394 32 53 214 0 Initial Fut: 0 844 81 766 368 0 355 0 318 0 0 0 Initial. Fut: 1.97 83 143 298 61 37 61 2030 147 122 2358 78 Redact Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .° Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 844 81 766 368 0 355 0 318 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 197 83 143 298 61 37 61 2030 147 122 2358 78 User Ad-J- 1_00. 1.00 1_00 1_00.,1_00 1_00 1_00 1..00 0_80 1_00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PH-F AdjT 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-OO 1-00 1..00 1_00 1_00 1..00 1.00. 1=00 PHF Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ==1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Vct er = 0 844 81 766 368 - 0 355 0 254 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 197 83 143 298 61 37 61 2030 _ 147 122 2358 78 PCE Ac!`: 1-00. 000:= :.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00- 1..00 1.00 1.00 1,:00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 MLF Wit 1000 1_05 1.-00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_O0 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1_00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 Final. V-.i_: 0- 886 81 76& 368 0 355 ' 0 254 - 0 0 0 Final Vol_:: 197 83 143 298 61 37 61 2132 147 122 2476 78 If II II - I _ 11---- ------ ---I I- II -- i Saturation Flow Modules Saturation Flow Module- _- Sat/Lane: 1800.1800 -1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800- 1800 1800 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: LOU 0.99 0.84 0.91 0.99 1.00 0.94 1.00 0_84- 1.00 1_00 1.00 Adjustment: 0..72 0.90 0.90 0.51 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.98 0.98 0.94 0.99 0.99 ? Lanes: 0_00 2,.00 1..00 2.00 1.00 0.00 1_00 0.00 1.00 0_000_00 0.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.37 0.63 1.00 0.62 0.38 1.00 1.87 0.13 1.00 1.94 0.06 = - Final Sat_: 0.3564 1515 3279 1782 0 1693 0 1515 0 0 0 Final Sat.: 1301 596 1026 927 1043 632 1693 3301 228 1693 3455 109 C �city � xis. Module: (I° If -1 1 I -------- -_ --- 11--_____-_ I I II Capacity Analysis Module: Vat/Sat:_ 0-00' 0.25 0_05 0.23 0..21 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.17 0.00-0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat:, 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.06 0.06 0,04 0,65 0.65 0.07 0.72 0.72 • Grit Moves: - ***,is= **.*,r *-*** **** Cr it oves- *** *** *,tst* Green/Cycle:- 0.00 0.32 0.32 0_30.0.63_ 0.00 0.27 0.00 0..27' 0.00 0.00 0_00 Green/Cycle: 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.05 0.57 0.57 0.06 0.59 0.59 VotL e!Cap: 0000 0-77 0.1T-0.77 0.33- 0_00 0.77 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00 _0_.00 Volume/Cap 1.22 t 0.56 0.53 0.53 .22 0.22 0.22 0.72 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.22 1.22 t- . Level Of Serf%ce Module: II II -- -If- _. I __--1_ II----- ---- ----II-------------- II 1 Level Of Service Module: Delay/Veh: 0.0`30_0 22-1` 31.4. , 8_1 0_0 3508- 0.0 30.9 0.0 0.0 0_0 Delay/Veh: 30.2 29.8 29.8 186 26.3 26.3 59.2 86,5 86.5 165 147 147.0 Delay Adj:: 1.00 1..00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAd Fctr: 1_00 0.85 0..85 _1_00-0-_85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85. 0.85 ProfdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 AdjOeL/Veh: 0.0 25.5 18,.8 31.4 6_8: 0..0 30.4.-0.0 26.3 0.0 0.0 tt_.0 AdjDel/Veh:= 30.2 25.3 25.3 186 22.4 22.4 59.2 73.5 73.5 165 125 124.9 Queue: 0 28 2 24 6 0 12 0 8 0 0-_ -._0 Queue: 6 7 7 24 3 3 3 138 138 9 214 214 - *****'*.'?*.*ti,'***-******.`************.'***.`�*******,`IL]**`***i*,**********-1Y*******'1.****** * "********'',************************'******************Jf**************fir********* - Traffix System Version 6..5 Cc) 1992. 0A Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po - _- i _ " - - - - i .� , L$I z F 4 - -10/21/1993 -13-41 Filename:: TTFUTMI-OUT Page 11 10/21/1.993 13:41 Filename_ TTFUTM1.0UT _, Page 12 T-TFUTMI_CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:07 Page 12-1' 1 TTFUTMI_CMD Mon Oct-4, 1093 16:57:07 Paoe 13-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specif c Area Plan Future Volumes-(Year 2010) - PH Peak Hour Future Vol es (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour = Future Base Geometry - (TTFUT1�i1/TTPMADJ) Future Base Geometry --(TTFUTMI/TTPMADJ) _ Level Of Service Computation Report --- Level Of Service Computation Report 4-Jay Stop Method 1.985 HCM Unsignatized Method si _ - Future Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative - ---_ - - *****************4 A m.**********ik*slot*intir********?**** ******************i*** *******k********** * ********x**************ink**********************tint********* _ - Intersection-#I0-68th-Parkway/Haines Street/Atlanta. Street Intersection #11 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street/I-5 SB ramps ****.*.***.**********.*******:********.* ****irk.***:***************************:rr***a.**_ **t*******************************i*****it*****sink****************t***,k*******a*** Cycle (sec)`: 1 Cr€ticat Vol./Cap. (X): 1.692 Level. Of Service: _ F Loss Time (sec)` 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): OVERFLOW ****,k*,*****************************************.*******Y**********,s***,k******** Optimal Cycle: 0- Level Of Service: _- F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound ***********************************k A A.*k*********.****,*********:******.*********** Movement _ -_ T - R L - `T - R 1_ - T -_ R_ L - T--- R Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound -------� 11--_--- 11-- 11 1 Movement: L - T -- R L - T - R L - T A_ R L - T - R , Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign - I 11 II 1I I Rights: Ovt Ovi Include Inc:.0 e Control: Stop Sign. ` Stop Sign Stop;Sign Stop Sig, Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 00 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 Rights: Ignore Include Iclude Include __- r- -------------11----------. 11 -- Lanes::- 0- 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Volume Module: I I I--"- 11 1I 1I. - 1 Base Vol: 55 275 127 274 63 177 90 149 30 38 203 135 . - . Volume Modu e: Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Base Vol:: ZI 146 438 61 155 11 26 19 48 291 16 72 Initial Bse: 55 275 127 274 63 177 90 149 30 38 203 135 Grcwth Adj: 1_.00 1.00 0_00 1.00 1.00. 1,00 1_.00 1._00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00- Lidded Vol: 29 190 15 47 93 320 174 202 47 38 284 53 Initial-Sse 21 146 0 61 155 11 26 19 48 291 16 72 Initial Fut: 84 465 142 321 156 497 264 351 77 76 487 188 Added:Vol: 22 172 2258 25 109 5 10. 41 12 303 68 10 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 0= 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 43 318 0 86 264 16 36 60 60 594 84 82 Reduced Vol.: 84 465 142 321 156 497 264 351 77 76 487 188 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . Reduced Val: 43 318 0 86 -264.- 16 36 60 60 594 84. 82 PHF Adj: 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1_00 0_00 LOU 1_00. 1..00 1.00 1.00 1-.00- 1.00 1_00=. 1.00 Final Vol.: 84 465 142 321 156 497 264 351 77 76 487 188 PHF Adj: 1__00 1.00 0..00 1_00 1..00 LOU LOU 1_00 1.00 1_00 1_00 1.00 Adjusted Volume Module: _ 9,4_ 82 Grade: 0% 0% 0% _ 0% - Fhr t'al�me.. 41 _18 0 86 26+ 16 36 60 60 594 i•CE Adj: 1-00 1.00 0_0G 1_00=1.00 1..011 1_00 LOU 1..00 1.00 1.00 LOU % Cycle/Cars: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx -._ xxxx xxxx_ MLF Adj.; 1..00= 1-00. 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 LOU 1_00 1_00 1.,00- i.00 1.00 % Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx - Final Vol.: 43: 318 0.r 86 264 16 36 60 60 5.94 84 82 I PCE Adj: 1.10 1,00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.��J 1.10 1.10 1 1 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Saturation Flow.Module: I-` I I I Trck/Cmb P_CE: xxxx xxxx- xxxx xxxx x xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Sat/Lane: 270 270 270 316 316 316 202 202 202 351 351 351 Adj Vol.: 92 465 142. 353 156 49T 291 386 85 84 535 207 Adjustment: 1F00 1_00 -1.00 1.00 1..00 1.:00 1.00 1.00 -1..00 1.=00 1,00 1.00 Critical Gap Module: 0. Lanes: 0..122 ma 1..00 0..25 .n_75 1_00 0.38 0..62 1_00 1,00 0.51 0_49 RT Rad/Ang: 20.0 ft/90.0 deg 20.0 ft/90.,0 deg 20.0 ft/90.G deg 50.0 ft/90.0 deg Final Sat.::. 32 238 - 270 78 238 316 76 126 202 351 _ 178 173 Critical Op: 5.6 xxxx xxxxx 5.6 xxxx: xxxxx 7.3 6.8 5.7 7.3 - 6.8 5.7 i_ -- -1I II ---1I-- - I - ---I 11 11-- 11 1 A Capacity Anatysis-Module Capacity Module: Vol/Sat: 1.34 1.34 0.00 1,-11 1.11 0.05 0.48 0.48 0.30 1-69 0.47 0..47 Cnflict Vol: 653 xxxx xxxxx 607 xxxx xxxxx 2091 1416 405 2022 1594 536 Crit Moves: **** **** **** *.**I- Potent Cap. 518 xxxx xxxxx 546 xxxx xxxxx 50 =97 697 50 76 598 --- I -- II - II 11---------------1 %Used Cap.: 17.8 xxxx xxxxx 64.7 xxxx xxxxx 582 396 12.2 167 708 34.5 Level Of Service Module: Impedance: 0.88 xxxx xxxxx. 0.43 xxxx xxxxx xxxx 0.00 0.92 xxxx 0.00 0.73 Delay/Veh: 161 161 1..0 67.3 67_3 1..2 - 6.1 6.1 3.1 621 6.0 6.0 Actual Cap.: 518 xxxx xxxxx 546 xxxx xxxxx 0 37 697 0 29 598 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 =1-_C0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_.00 1.00 1.00 -----1 AdjDeL/Veh: 161 1"61 1..0 67.3 67_3. - 1.,2 6.1 6.1 3.1 621 6.0 6.0 Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xx.x xxxxx Unused Cap.: 426-xxxx xxxxx 193 xxxx xxxxx -291 -349 612 _ -84 -507 391 ********************************;i. -R******.**********************************C* LOS by moves A * * D * * F-- * * * * B- Movement: _ LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT -- LTR - RT Cap.: xxxx xxxxx .- hared. xx-xxxx xxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx -45 0 xxxx xxxxx Unused Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx -427 -619 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * F F * * Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed_ to DKS Associates, Po Traffix Systems Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po -- 0 - . .� . - j - -_--- e� mow^ - • 10/21/1993 13:41 Filename: TTFUTMI_OUT Page 13 10/2111993 13:41 Filename:. TTFUTM1.OUT Page 14 TTFUTMl_CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:0T Page 14-1 TTFUTM1.CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:57:07 Page 15-1 _ Tigard.Triangle Specific Area. Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Future Volumes (`fear 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Base geometry - (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) Future Base Geometry (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 4-Way Stop Method 1985 HCM Operations Method Future Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative , _ -- -- _-_* **********learn+***.**************-********her***.**irk*****************#*********.**** j- ****************************************at************************************** Intersection #12 68th Parkway/Hampton Street I Intersection #13 68th Parkway/ORE 217 *.***************.****, *************************.******************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle: (sec): 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (Xl: 1.191 Cycle (sec): 80 - Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.678 Loss Time: (sec):: 8° Average Delay (sec/veh): 27.9 Loss Time (sec); 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): 10.2 . Optimal Cycle:: 0 Level Of Service:= D Optimal Cycle: 54 Levet Of Service: B *****************.*************.,r-*.**.***.********.****************************,ter****.* *******************************************,ter*********************************** • Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R _ --1 11 11--- 11 I I---------------I1 ----11 11 I Control: Stop. Sign Stop. Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected ?� _Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: a l.7. 11 0 C- 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 15 0 15 6 15 0 0 15 15 ( ---------II ---II- 11 I Lanes: ( 0 0 0 0 0 �I 1 0 -0 0 1 �i 1 0 3 0 0 I( I 0 0 3 0 1 " - _ Volume Module: Base Vol- 109= 112 3 8 17 83 175 29 27 5 84 87 Volume Module: Growth Adj:: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1...00 1_00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00. 1.00 Base Vole 0 0 0 23 0 132 47 2026 0 __ 0 1813 71 Initial Else: 109 112 3 8 17 83 175 29 27 5 84 87 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Added yot_ 58 78 0 0 133 35 40 2 10 46 16 31 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 23 0 1.32 47 2026 0 0 1813 71 Initial Fut: 167 190 3 8 150 118 215 31 3T 51 100 118 Added Vol 0 0 0 192 0 89 11 233 0 0 206 127 - • - Reduct Vol:° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 215 0 221 58 2259 0 0-2019 198 - Reduced Vol: 16T 190 3 8 150 118 215 31 37 51 100 118 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adj: 1_00- T.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 LOU 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 2€5 0 221 58 2259 0 0 2019 198 -= PHF Adj: 100: 1.00 1000 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: _ 167 T90 3 8 150: 118' 215 31 31 51 100 1€8 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 LOU €.00 1..00 1.00 1._v00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1-..00 1_00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1..00 T.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1_00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 215 0 221 58 2259 0 0 2019 198 MLF Adj: 1.00' T.00 1000 1.00 1_00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: - 167 190 3 8. 150 118 215 31 37 51 100 118 MLF Adj: t.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1I -.-_I l i 1 I - [ Final Vol_: 0 0 0 215 0 221 58 2372 0 0 2120 198 Saturation Flow.Module: ---- 11 - 11 1II -----I Sat/Lane: _ 582 582 582 346 346 346 302 302 302 183 183 183 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1`.,00 1-00 1.._00: 1.00 LOU 1_00- 1.00 i-00. 1..00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800. 11300 - Lanes: 0_46 0.53 -0.0€ 0.03 0.54 0:.43. 1..00. 0.46 0.54 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.84 0.94 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.84 .46 0.54 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 - - Final. Sat.-: 270. 307 5 10 188 14a 302 138 164- 1.83 84 99 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1_00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 • _ 11 11 II I Final 0 0 _ 5346 Capacity Analysis-Module:_ ---n a Sat.: 0 1693 0 1515 1693 534 0 0 5346. 1515 Vol/Sat: 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.80 0.80 0.80 0_71 0.23 0.23 0.28: 1.19 1.19 Capacity Ana. sis-Module: Grit Moves: *,** ** **** **** Voll//Sat:_ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00. 0.15 0.03-0.44 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.13 - - --1. --II - - 11 - 11 I -Crt t Moves: **** **** .**** ter** Level Of Service Module: Green/Cycle: 0_00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.07 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.57 Delay/Veh: 10..5 10_5. 10.5 20.7 20.7 20.7 15.0 2_4 2_4 2.9 92.5 92.5 Volume/Cara: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.70 0.46 0.69 -0.00 0.00 0.70 0.23 Delay Adj: 1_00.1..00- 1.00 1.00 1_00. LOU 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - __11 AdjDel_/Veh:_ 10.5 10.5 10.5 - 20.7 20.1 20.1 15.0 2.4 2.4 2.9 92.5 92.5 Level of Service Module: 1� 11 I • Queue: xxxx xxx:; xxxxx xx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 0.0 26.9 `28.8. 7.5 0..0 0.0 10.0 6.6 **************************k.*************A*A a***********,ter.************t******* Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00- 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 0.0 26.9 28.8 7.5 0.0 0.0-10.0 6.6 : : Queue: 0 0 0 5 0' 5 1 34 0 0 34 2 - Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po a • - s - - - J _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ - _ _ - - - _ _ -- - - _ _-_ _ - - - 10/21/T993 13:41 Filename:-TTFUTHI.OUT Page 15 10/21/1993 13:41 Filename: TTFUTM1.OUT Page 16 TTFUTM1 0CMD Mon Oct 4-, 1993 16:57:07 Page-16-1 TTFUTM1.CMD Mon Gct 4, 1993 16:57:07 Page 17-1 -- Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle S cific Area Plan Future Volumes (Year 2610) - PM Peak Hour Future Volumes: (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Base Geometry (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) Future Base Geometry - (TTFUTM1/TTPMADJ) - Leval_ Of Service Ccuta?ion Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1985 11CM Operations l ethod 1985 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative -- __****it-A-*Ab.**,**.**********ic*.*.******************************************************' ********************************************************************************intersection #14 64th Avenue/T-5 sa off-ramp/Pacific Highway Intersection #16 I--5 NB ramps/Haines Street - - - - _******iricidric9rirkit*ink**********:****-le******ikir********k-AA,k**.************************ ***A****************#******************************'.-**************************** _Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) - 1.030 Levet Of Service: F Loss Time (sec): 19 Average Delay (sec jveh): 48..4 11 ***,,*ir*************ir*i<*********,**************i<********************************* - Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound :k***** ***:**f**********.*****_**************A*A.A 4******************************** Movement: L - T - R L - T - R t T - R L _- T - R • Approach: North Sound; South: Sound East Bound West Bound 1 H t - Movement: L - T - R L - T R L - T - R L - T - R Controt: Stop Sign �} Stop Sign 11- Uncontrolled `1 Uncontrolled I 1 11 11 11 R ghts Include Include I nc e Include Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Rights_ Include Include Include Include 1 11 11 11---------------( Min. Green: 0 15 0 12 12 12 6 15 15 6 15 15 Volume Module: Lanes: Q 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 10 1 1 0 Base Vot: 37 1 349 0 0 0 1 500 65 67 274 0_ Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Volume Module: 11 'll -`-`--11----"--- 1 Initial Bse: 37 1 349 = 0 0 ° 0 1 500 65 67 274 0 Base Vol: Q 785 0 - 57 68 81 168 843 943 105 1042 233 Added Vot: 272 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 220 0 110 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1_00- 1.00 1.00 1.00 LOU 1_00 1-00 1.00 1_00 1-00 1.00 Initial Fut: 309 1 _ 349 0 0 0 1 604 285 67 384 0 IrTitiat Bse: 0= _785 0 5T 81 168 &43 943 105 1042 233 Reduct Vol:- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vat: 0 191 G 0 0 8 180: 0 1 68 0 Reduced Vol: 309 1 349 . 0 0 0 1 604 285 67 384 0 Tnirial Fut: 0. 976 Q 57 68 90 176 1023 943 106 1110. 233 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 =1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reduct Vol_ 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 p Reduced Vol: G 9776- 0 57 68 90 176 1023 943 106 1110 233 Final Vol.: 309 1 349 0 0 0 1 604 285 67 384 0 User Adj: 1_00. 1,.00 LOG °1-00. 1_00 1_00 LOU LOU 1_00 -1_00 1.00 1.00 Adjusted Volume Module: PHF Adj-: 1_00 1..00 1_._00 1.00- 1.00 10.00 1.00 1,.00 1.00 LOU 1.00 1.00 Grade: 0% 0%- 0% 0% - PHF Volume: 0 976 0 57 68 90 176 1023 943 106 r.TO 233 X-Cycle/Cars:° xxxx xxxx xxxx XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX xxxx. PCE Adj: - 1.00, 1.00 1_04 1.00 1.-00 1_00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00: 1-.00 1_00 - % Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx MLF Adj: 1-00 1.05 1.00 LOU 1_00 1.00 1.00 1_05 1.00 1.,00 1.05 1...00 PCE Adj: 1.10 1_10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 .. FinatVat..:- � 0 1024: 0 5T 68 90 176. 1074 943_ 1.0.6 1165 233 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx - Satura. on Flaw Modute� 11 11 r1_ 1 AdjkVVol.:PCE:339xxx xxxx 384 0xxx 0xxxx 0 1xx604xxx285 74 xxxx 0 Sax/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 18011 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 j Critical Gap Module: Adjustment: _1..00 0.99 1_00 0_97 0.97 0_84 0._94 0.99 0_74 0_94 0.96==0_96 RT Rad/Ang: 20.0=ft/90.0 deg 20.0 ft/90_0 deg 20-0 ft/90.0 deg 20.0 ft/90.0 deg . Lanes: 0_00 2.00 0.00 0_46-0_54 1.00 1..00 2..00 2.00 1.00 1.67 0_33 Critical Gp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 =6-0- 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5,0 xxxx xxxxx ,: Final Sat_: 0 3564 0 796 950 1515 1693 3564 2673 1693 2881 576 11-- _ ----'11- -- 11'--------- ----1 _ _--11 --_. H 11---- --I _ Capacity M G a Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Cnftict Vol: 1056 1056 604 1406 1341 384 384 xxxx xxxxx 889 xxxx xxxxx Vol/Sat: 0:-a0 0.:29 0_00 0_07' 0_07 0.06 0_10 0.30 0.35 _0.06 0_40 0.40 Potent Cap.: 218 253 548 124 168 713 814 xxxx xxxxx 454 xxxx xxxxx _ - Grit Moves:-- ****. **** ****" **** X Used Cap.: 156 0.4 70.1 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 16.2 xxxx xxxxx Green/Cycle: Q00: 0.27 0.00=-0-10 0..10 0_10 0_10 0..40 0.40 0.07 0.38' 038 Impedance: xxxx 1.00 0.38 xxxx 1.00 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 0.89 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap:. 0.,.0Q 1.07 0_00 0..72 0.72 0.59- 1.07 0.75_ 0.88 0-88 1.07 1.07 Actual Cap.: 194 225 548- 42 150 713 814 xxxx xxxxx 454 xxxx xxxxx .- -------1 11 11 11-- 1 I:----- --11- 11--- II 1 Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Oelay/Veh:. 0.0 79.2. 0-0 48.5 48.5 43.6- 122 24,9 31.1 73_T 71..3 71-3 Unused Cap..:- -146 224 164 42 150 713 -. 813 xxxx xxxxx 381 xxxx xxxxx Delay Adj_: 1000. 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1`..00=-= 1.00 1.00 1000 1-00 1..00 -1-00 LOS by Mover * * - - 0 * * * A * * B * * Prc.QAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 0085 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 Movement:, LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RI LT - LTR - RT - LT = LTR - RT AdjUel/Veh: 0.0 67.3 0.0 41_2 41.2 37.1 122 21.1 26.4 73-.7 60.6 60.6 Shared Cap.: 194 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Queue:- - 0 51_ 0 5 5 3 Ti 31 31. 5 68 - 68 Unused Cap.: -147 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx - --- *****k********************:t**'k********irk**********A4 Ak**********************k*** -Shared LOS F - *_ - * - _*-- *- - ,fir - * * * * *- it - - - - - Tra.ffix System Version 6.5 (c)° 1992 DA Licensed.to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po . a tom_ r....'....°s, r.... �. _ - ..�-.--•,* f- - - - '� L - S...... ^" ' _. . _ _ - - — sr _ _0/Z1 i-1°993 13:4.1 Filename TTFUTM1.OUT Page 1T ° r . • ITr ■ - - - _ • 1 . - a , • • r , .iii �' • I G ■ I r r � APPENDIX I I r.y. .y, .•r." J; /� ,'•1}r: .ry;...J,.J r47.: :: .}::%:';,•., :(q.}}•r,• ';L;:q: ,r. +1'i' ::}• ,r,J.,.,7S77r,!r y,:4•.. .J..,??�•::{S•77't73 ,d1''r' ,.J" v. •: J J.'.r' :•Y. %:tier•• .r.• JrJ.rS,rr IT F' r:' N %'is E'r. :;};:,:. ,�.llv:%' •.• r : .J:4 :'J.':r:r:4'.V f7: y f• ,}�??.(.ter.:f::r' ••l'•' !? / .t: ••JJJ P' •.'. :tiF.f. :;r.''r::: 'r':: 1� ?9} r.•. r.•J : ,44......,,,:,.:...:•;.....Jr..•:'!}l7 l:.. r•7:'•:'::J'3':•:r r %'r f •4f ..A JJ :r.r ,•�:%7r "r 47'44• ry4. .r/.r .L. �Ir• }r. Lf r'7 .•f?}r 3 K%�': 3. r•r'':':. .r :v: ?�$Jlr :'rY. •54:5:•• l• .wr44:4:.: •rr• .r: '1rr 1 r I it gated 2010 Legal o [ , vice I ,E , , , [.,, , ■ I • : , [ 1 ' r N I . I , I e \ . v L r ' 1'- _= vamp . - ��-�+---� - _. - _ _. - -- _ pipg F•-------- r �- ---- ''�,- -- F -_ S - 7.--- 10/2T[1993 13=:55 Filename: TTFUTM23_OUT Page 1 10/21[1993 13:55 Filename: TTFUTM23.0UT - --Page 2 TTFUTM2.CMU Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:46:56- Page 2-1 TTFUTM2-CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:46:57 - Page 3-1 - Tigard-Triangle Specific Area. Plan. Tigard Triangle Specific is Area Plan Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) - - Impact`Analysis Report Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service 1985 HCM Operations Method Future Volume Alternative -- Intersection Future ******************************************************************************** Del/ V/ - Intersection #1 ORE 217 SB ramps/Pacific Highway LOS Veh C ******************* ********i************************************************* 1 ODE 217 SS ramps/Pacific HTghw: C 22..0 0.903 Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vot./Cap.=(X): 0.903 Loss Time (sec): 12 - Average Delay (seclveh): 22.0 # 2 ORE 217-NB ramps/Pacific Highw: B 13..9 0.856 Optimal Cycle: 122 Level Of Service: C **.******************:******,*************************************************** # 3 Dartmouth-`Street/Pacific Highw- D 25_4 0.904 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound t - - - Movement: L T R L T - R L T R L T R . _ # 4 72nd Avenue/Pacific Highway D 31.2 0.840 ------- '-__-_-----__-_-II It 11 i = Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected # 5 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street B 13.0 0.767 - Rights: Include Include Include Include r _ ° # 72nd Avenue/Hampton Street 0 26.7 tin. Green: 0 0 0 15 0 15 0 15 15 6 21 0 0.774 Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 0 1 1 0 _3 0 0 . # 772nd Avenue/ORE 217 NB A. xxxxx 0.342 Volume Module:- I . Base Vol.:- 0 0- 0 718 0 585 0 2031 396 86 2330 0 # -8 72nd:Avenue/ORE,217 SB- 0 26.6 0.806 Growth Adj: 1..00.1..00- -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 718 0 585 0 2031 396 86 2330 0 # 9 68th- Parkway/Pacific Highway 0 27_4 0.905 I Added Vol: 0 0 0 330 0 0 0 201 6 0 181 0 _ --- Initial Fut: 0 0 0 1048 0 585 0 2232 402 86 2511 0 _ # 1G 68th Parkway/Kaines Street/All C 19.6 0.804 Reduct Vol: -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 1048 0 585 0 2232 402 86 2511 0 it T1 o8th Parkway/Dartmouth street. D 39.5 0.909 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 PHF Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1..00 1..00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - # 12 68th Parkway/Hampton Street B 13.2 0.658. PHF Volume: 0 0 0 1048 - 0 585 0 2232 402 86 2511 0 - - - PCE Adj: 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 _ = # 14: 64th Avenue/I-5 SB on-ramp/Pac C 16.8 0.743 MLF Adj:_ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 Final Vol.; 0 0 0 1048 0 585 0 234.3 402 86 2637 0 -- #-T6 I-5-Na ramps/Haines Street B 13.7 0.752 --------- -j_r--------- ---- II II 1 s Saturation-Flow Module, �� 38 ORE 2.1 7 NB ramps/Hunziker C 16.6 0.637 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.99 1.00 #92. 1-5 SB' Off-ramp/Rarbur Blvd G 19.7 0.869 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 3279 0 3029 0 5346 1515 1693 5346 0 itAnaL Capacity ysis Module: Vol/Sat; 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.19- 0.00-0.44 0.27. 0.05 0.49 0.00 ' Crit Moves: - **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.00- 0..00 0.35 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.49 0.49 0.06 0.55 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0_90'0_00_-0_55 0.00 0.90 0.54 0.90 0.90 0.00 3 Level Of Service Module: II` _El II Delay/Veh: 0..0 0.0 0.0 32.9 0.0 23.8 0.0 24.4 16.8 83.8 21.8 0.0 Decay Adj:: 1.00 1.00 1.-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . _ ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 0,85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 28..0 0.0 20.2 0.0 20.8 14.3 83.8 18.5 0.0 Queue:. 0 0 0 55 0 44 0 74 9 4 82 Gi Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po 1 - -; - - - e. \ 6: • , t =10/21/1993 -13:55- Filename: TTFUTM23_0UT - Page 3 - 10 21 1993 13:55 Filename: TTFUTM23.0UT- Page= -4 -- _ TTFUTMZ..CMD - Mon Oct 4, 1993. 16:46:57 Page 4-1 TTFUTM2,--CMD -- Mon Oct 4r- 1993 16:46:57 - - Page 5-1 - - _ Tigard-Triangle Specific Area Plan - ------- -M-~--------Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan _ Future Volumes-(Year 2010) - PM Peak-flour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PNl Peak Hour. - - - Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) --Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) _ Level Of Service Computation Report - Level Of-Service Computation Report 1985 HCM Operations-Method • 1985 HCM Operations Method - __ _Future Volume Alternative -- Future Volume Alternative *********tell::***A.A.A*********iNr************ink******ir.'#SY.s***i*****s****xt***ArkiFJriF*k**.l. - ******************.**'**********************************chic**first*****sir*******tit******` Intersection #2.ORE ZIT NB ramps/Pacific Highway Intersection #3 Dartmouth Street/Pacific-Highway - ** ******.*****_*,** ******.********.*.****.***********,rye******************�t*** *****.***r***********************************************************************-- • Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vot.../Cap:.-(X): 0,856 Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap, (X): 0.904 __-0. Loss Time (sec): 8 Average Delay (sec/veh): 13..9 Loss Time (sec): 16 - Average Delay (sec/veh): 25.4 - - Optimal Cycle:- 86 Level-Of Service; ii- Optimal Cycle:. 131- Level Of Service: 0 - - . - * ***************** ****•4***�r�c.****=******.********.**************Yr**************.*** -***a***** ******•tit***�Ir*****************qtr************k**irk*************sir********* -Approach North BQurti South Bound East Bound West Bound. -_Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound - --West Bound .• - - --- - - Movement: L -- T -- R - L - T - R: L - T _ R L - T = R Movement: L - T - R. L - T - R L- -- T - R L - T - - R Control: -Split Phase i) SPermitted d11~_� Permitted 1 Control.: ( Protected ��-_- Protected �1�= Protected Protected - --- Rights: Include- -_ Include Include Include Rights: Ovl. - =Ovl - - Ovt - -- -Include _ - - Min. Green: - 15 0 ;5 - 0 0 0 0 15 15 0 15 15 1i.1-n. Green: 6 _ 15 15 6 - -10 10 6 15 -- 15 6 15 =15 . Lanes:- 1 - 0 _11 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3. 0 1 0 0 2 1 1 Lanes:- 2 0 0 1 0 - 1-,0 1 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 1 0- 2 1 0 Volume Module: V-plume Module: - - .10 2062 6 Base Vol: 54-5 =0 24:9 0 0 0 0 2?:86 .558- 0-1868 738 Base Vol: 254 21 3 78 70- 252 140 1807 258 - _ Growth Adj: 1-00, 1000 1_00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1..00 1000 -1.-0.0 1_00 1.00 Growth Adj: -1.00 LOU 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00: - Initial Bse.: 545 - 249- -10 2062 6 Added Vol: 11. 0 65 0= 0 0 0 531 0 0 157 7z _- Added Vol: 257 10 213 4 5 0 -- 0 231 365 143 272 - 3 - , Iniitial Fut: 557- 0- 314- 0= 0 0 0=2717 558- 0 2025- 1110 - Initial Fut: 516 31 - 216 - 82 - 75= 252 140-2038 623 153 2334 9 Reduct Vo1.rt 0- 0 - 0- 0 - 0 0 0 _O 0 0 0 -- it Reduct Vol: 0 0 0_ 0 0 0 _0 0 0 0 0 0 = Reduced Vol: 557 0 314 0 0. 0 u 2717 558 0 2025- 1110 Reduced Vol: 516 31 216 82 75- 252 140 2038 623 153 2334 9 -User Adj-: 1.Ala 1000 LOG 1':Q0. 1._00 1-00 1_,00= 1..00 1.00 1..00 1:.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00= 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - - - PHF Adj 100 1.00 LOG- L00 1.00 1.:00 1.00. 1..0G 1.00 1.00 'LOG 1000 '- PHF Adj:- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.30 1.00 1.00 1000 1.00 1.00 = PHf Volute: 557 0 -314- 0 0 0 0 Z717 558 0 2025. 1110 PHFVoiume: 516 31 216- 82 75- 252 140 2038- 623 153 2334 - 9 -_ - ° - PCE Adj: - LOG 1_OG 1..00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 LOO 1.00 - 1-00 1.00 1000 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 - 1.00 -1.00 1.00 -1.00 ' MLF Adj; - LOU 1.00 1.00 1:.00 1:..00 1.00.- 1_00 1.05 1.-00 1.00 1.05 -1..00 -MLF Adj:-- - 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1,05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 - - - - _= Final Vol 0:_ 557_ 0 314 0 0 0 0 2853 558 - 0 2126 11t0 Final Vol_: -516 31 216 82 - 75 252 140 2140 623 153 2450 9- _0_0- 1 j --II - • 1 1 ---_---_I 1 1 -- -------11 I I I - - Saturation F':ow•Module: Saturation Flow Modules - Sat/Lane: /800. 1800 -1800 1800. 1800 -1800 1800 180.0- 1800 1800 1800 1800 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 -1800. 1800 1800 -1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 - - - - Adjustment: -0:.91 1-00 0.91 -1-000 1.00 1:00 1-000 0.99 0.84 1.00 0_94: 094 - Adjustment: 0.91 0.86 0.86 0.94 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.99 0.99 - _ I Lanes: 1-28' 0.00- 0..72 0_00 0..00 0.00- 0.00 3000: 1.00 0..00 2.63 1.37 Lanes: 2.00 0.13 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00. 1.00 2,99 0.01 - -°- - Final Sat.: 2100 =0 1184 0 0 0 0 5346 1515 0 4449 2323- Final Sat : 3279 -195 1356 -1693 1782 1515 1693, 5346 1515 1693 5326 20 -- ii________ II_-------- -----I 1 1 l -_-_ (I 11 _-----11 1 C pacity Analysis Module: - - Capacity AnaEysis Module: - - - - 1t41/Sa.t: 027 0-00 0._.27 0_0Q 0.00 MO 0_00. 0.53- -0:.37 0.00 Q.48--0.48 -Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.05 0_04 0,17 0.08 0.40 0.41 0.09 0.46 0.46 Crit Moves - **** **** ****- •Crit Moves: ***z} - - Green/Cycle: a-31. 0.0 0 0.3, 0-00 0_00 0.00 0..00. 0_62 0.62 000O 0.62 0.62 Green/cycle: 0.17 0.22 0.32 0.05 0.09 0.18 0.09 0.49 0.67 0.11 0.51 0.51= - - Votume/Cap: 0_86 0.00 0086. 0.00 0..00 0.00 0._00 0..86 0.59 0.00 G.7T 0_77 Volume/Cap: O.9 0 0.74 0.49 0.9T 0.45 0.90_ ,0,90 0.81- 0.62 0.84 0.90 0.90 - I - - 11 11 If-- .___I - --- ------1 . -- 11-------- i 1 -II I - Level Of Service Module:: Level-GI Service-Module: - D_etay/Veir:_ 34.7 000 340-7 -0.0 0.0 - 0..0 0.0 15.6. 11-0- ___ 0.0 13_0 13.0 Delay/Veh-: 49-,_7 38.9 25.4 108 40.6 57.8 72.8 21.1 9.5 58.3 23.9 23.9 ' Delay-Adj: 1..00 1=.00- 1,00 1..00 1.00 - 1_00 1,.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 -1.00 Delay Adj: 1,00 1.,00 1-..00 1000 1.00 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - ProgAdjFctr-: 0=85 0.85 0-85 1000 0.85 0-85 1.,00 0.85 0-85 -1.00 0..85 _0.85 - - ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00. 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85- 1.00 0.85 0.85 - Adjt)eL/Veh: 29_5 0_0- 29.5 _ 0.0 0.0 0-0 -` 0..0- 13.:2 9.3 000 11..1. 11.1 . AdjDel/Veh: 49.7 33.0 21-.6 108 34.5 4.9.2 72.8 17.9 8.1 58.3 20.3 20.3- . Queue; 29 0 29' 0 0 0 0 79 11 0 - 79 79. - Queue: 19 8 7 5 2 10 6 62 12 6 78 78 - ' { �•***************************:*******,t********************************************fir - **tit*****fie*****************tic*******•*********************************************_ - - - Traffix Sys-tent Version 6,5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to_ DKS Associates,- Po _ Traffix System Version 6_-5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed. to DKS Associates, Po - 1. - --- -= - - - - - _ sr--- -- - - i - �' - - - - .. - - . - _ Cr i . - - - - - r. _ - i-• ? - ,,-.�,e # -- ...._._.+.w f..24 _ ' r..,* - - _ .-....... - - C r - '-.3 _ 1, ,,,4 Fah - .•••+.�.. _ - - - - s -_ 10/21/1993 13:55 Filename: TTFU.TM23.0UT Page 5 10 21.1993 13:55 Filename: TTFUTM23.OUT Pa•e 6 - TTFUTM2.CMD- lion Oct 4,. 1993-16:46":5T Page 6-1 TTFUTMZ.CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:46:57 Page 7-1 Tigard. Tr angle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan . r Future Volumes (Year 2010) -- PM Peak Hour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) - Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1985 HCM Operations Method 1985 HCM Operations Method - Future Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative - _ ********,****:*************************.****************.********-**fir******.********** - *************.******************************************************************* - - _- Intersection#4 72nd Avenue/Pacific Highway Intersection #5 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street -- --=--************_*.**********,-******.*******L.kA i.A**********stile:*********i:**ink*********ink** -- *****************'*******lock***********************************fir***************•*** Critical Vol./Ca (X): 0.767 Cycle (sec): 120. Critical Vol_-/Gap.. CK}:. 0.840 Cycle (sec): 80 p. - _ Loss Time (sec): 16. Average Delay (sec/veh): 31.2 Loss Time (sec):. 8 -__ Average Delay (sec/veh): 13.0 _ Optimal Cycle: 105 Le°YA Of Service: 0 Optimal Cycle:. 68 - Levet Of Service: 0 1rir*r.*********It loin******/4**************..**;i*********qtr.*i*A A L****************,******** at****** ****************************!r***************°***************************--- - Approach: North: Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R. L T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: I L - T - R L - T - R S L - T - R f°` L=- -- T - R Control.: Protected Protected: Protected Protected Control: Permitted 1� Permitted Permitted Permitted 1 , Rights: 0v4. Ovl Include Ovt Rights: Include I nclude Include Include ttin0 Green: 6 15 15 . 6 15 15 6 15 15 6 15 15- Min. Green: 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 Lanes: - 2 0- 1 0= T 1° 0 0. 0 1 0- 2 1 0 i 0_ 2 1 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 - 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0_ 0" 1 0 Vo1un e Module- Volume Module: Base Vo.l:. 24 12 60 222 23 155 150 1789 37 151 2017 113 Base Vol: 33 = 37 86 129 66 16 - 12 284 28 27 219 43 . - ' Growth Adis;= 1000 1..00 T..00 i.OG 1.00" 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial ase: 24- 1.2 60 222 23 185 150 1789 37 _ 151 2017 113 Initial=Bse: 33 37 86 129 66 16 12 284 28 27 219 43 Added Vol.: 233 0 203 0 0 _ 0 0 236 212 89 185 0 Added Vol; 103 129 45 93 122 ii 23 307 229 73 475 42 Initial Fut:_ 257 12 263 222 23 185 -150 2025 249 240 2202 113. Initial Fut: 1.36 166 131 222 188 27 35. 591 257 100 694 85 - Keduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 Reduced:Vol: 25T 12. 263 222 23 185 150.-2025 249 240 2202 113 Reduced Vol 136 166 131 222 188 27 35 591 257 , 100 694 85 User Adj: 1.00 1,00 1,.00 1:QO 1..00 1_00 1."00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj:= 1-..00' 1.00 LOU 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1..00 1-0,0 1..00 1.00 1-00 LOU 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 _ PHF Volume: 257= 12 263 222 Z3 1 85. 150 2025 249 240 2202 113 PHF Volume: 136 166 131 222 188 27 35 591 257 100 694 85 PCE Ad:-: 1 0 1.00 1 00 1.:00 1.00 1.00 1.00-1.00 1-00 1..00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj:= 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 11, MLF Adj:" 1.00_1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00" 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1..05 1..00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vot.: 257 12 263 . 222 : 23 185 150 2126 249 240 2312 113 Final Vol.: 136 166 - 131" 222 188 27 35 591 257 100 694 85 11 11-=- II 1 _ I I I1 I Saturation FLoW.Module: SaturationrF ow Module: ----11.------ Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 _1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800. 1800 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1600 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 0.91 0.•99 0.84 Q_94 0..86_ Q.86. 3.94- Q,98" 0.98 0.94 0.98 0.98 Adjustment: 0.61 0.92 0.92 0.50 0.97 0.97 0.24 0.99 0.84 0.32 0.97 0.97 Lanes: 2.00_1..00 1.00' 1..0U=0.11 0.89- 1.00 2069 0.31 1.00 2.86 0_14 Lanes: 1.00 0.56- 0.44 _1.00 0.87 0.13 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.11 : Final Sat0: 3279 1782 1515 -1693 171 - 1379 1 693 4738. 555 1693 5046 247 Final Sat.: 1105 926 731 909 1527 219 428 1782 1515 570 1556 191 _11- -1 1_ 11 it 11 1 it Capacity-Ana�_ysis: Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Von/Sat: 0.08 0.01 MT 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.45 0.45 0.14°0.46 0.46.- - Vc l/Sat 0.1 Z 0.18 0.18 0.24 0.12 0.12` 0.08 0.33" 0.17 0.18 0.45 0.45 Crit Moves:: **** **** ****- **** Crit Moves: **** **** - Green/Cycle: 0.-10 0.13= 0..21 0=13 0.16 0.26 -0..10 0.46 0.46 0-.15 0.51 0.64 Green/Cycle: 0_32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.58 0.58 -0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 Volume/Cep: 0_82 0..05 _0-64 0..9 7 0.82 0..51 0.90 0.-97 0..9 7 0.97 0.90 0.71 - Volume/Cap: 0.39 0.56 0.56 0.77.0.39 0.39 0.14 0.57 0.29 0.30 0.77 0.77 Level Of Service Module:: 11°--- Levet Of Service Module: Delay/Vets: 51.1 35.2 31.7 77.9 4 9.,4 29.6 70_4 33.433.4 75.7 23.7 11.2 Delay/Veh_ 16.5 18.2 18.2 26.6 16.3 16.3 5.8 8.5 6.5 6.6 12.1 12.1 Delay Adj: 1.00 1000 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 "=1.0U 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 "0-85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0_85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 51.1. 29.9 7.0 77..9 42.0 25.1 70.4 28.4 28--4 75.7 202 9.5 AdjDel/Veh: 16..5 18.2 18.2 26.6 16.3 16.3 5.8 8.5 6.5 6.6 12.1 12.1 •- Queue: 10 0 8 11 8 6 7 86 86 T1 77- 54- - Queue: 2 6 6 5 4 4 0 8 3 - 1 14 14 s' - ****s*********,ret********fir***** ***********.******,******** ********.**********.****-_ **'************************X*****************************************************- - _ '4 Traffix System Version 6.5 _ (c) T992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po i \� _- _ - - • TO/21/1993 13_55 Filename: TTFUTM23 00UT Page T 10721/1993 13_55 Filename: TTFUTM23.0UT Page 8 TTFUTM3.CMD Tue Oct 5, 1993 08:35:18 Page 2-1 _ - TTFUTM3,0141) Tue Oct 5, 1993 08:35:18 Page 3-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan - Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM3i Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM3) Level Of Service Computation Report ----- _ 1985 HCM!Operations Method Level Of Service Computation t _ o h - /_ _ - - _ - - ' r i a • T0/21t1993 13.55 Filename: TTFUTM23.OUT Page 9 10/21/1993 13:55 Filename: TTFUTM23.OUT Page 10 TTFUTM3-CMD Tue-Oct 5, 1993 08:35:T8 Page 4-1 I TTFUTM2.CMD. Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:46:57 - Page 11-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Future Volumes (Year 2010)_ - PM Peak Hour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Mitigated.Future Geometry - (TTFFU:T?i3) Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) Level Of Service Conutati ors Report Level Of Service Computation Report -'. 1985 HCM Operations Method 1985 HCt4 Operations Method Base Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative - - - *"icie******.******++.r**-** 1*********ieAe****it********.ie{***-k.***sfrk'k***Y******A.*.*icYe***** - ***'******************************************sir********************************** - - Intersection #8 72nd.Avenue/ORE 217 SB Intersection #9 68th Parkway/Pacific Highway *************.**,t is**yt******* k**************:tit*************************#-x*,t*,r,*:r - --**************************h******fit*********sir******************fir**iii************** - Cycle (sec): 120 _ Critical Vol./Cap.. (X):: 0.806 Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.905 • - = Loss Time (sec).: 12 Average Delay(sec/veh : 26.6 Loss Time (sec): 16 Average Delay (sec/veh): 27.4 optimal Cycle:: 83 Level Of Service: D Optimal Cycle: 132 Level Of Service: D -- - - **sk*.********************si.,Est********************************************.********* ****ink****************ski******* **********************************fir************* - -Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound. South Round East Bound West Bound £ Movement:: L T R: L_ r_ R: L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T R L T - R L - T - R L- - T - _R it I Control:: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected r Rights:_ Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include` Include Min. Green: 0- 15 15 6 21 0 15 0 15 0 0 0 -Min. Green: 6 15 15 6 15 15 6 15 15 6" 15 15 • Lanes: O 0 2 T 0- 2 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0- 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 i 0_ 1 0. 2_ 1 0 1 0 - 2 1 0 II II 1 Volume Module: Volume:Module: Base Vol: 0. 844 81 976 368 0 415 0 254 0 0 0 Base Vol,: 148 80 41 298 58 31 54 1636 115 69 2144 78 Growth Adj 1.00- 1.-00 1_00 1,:00 1_00 1.00- 1.00 1-00 1.00' 1=_00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . =, __ Initial Bse: -` 0 844- 81 - 975. 368. 0 415 0 254 0 0 0 Initial Bse: 148 80 41 298 58 31 54 1636 115 69 2144 78 Reduct Vol Q 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 Added Vol: 49 3 102 0 3 6 7 394 32 53 214 0 Reduced Vol: 0=--844 81 976 368 0 415 0 254 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 197 83 143 298 61 37 61 2030 147 . 122 2:58 78 User Adj,: 1.00 1-00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.,00= 1.00 1.00. 0.80 1.00 1..00 1.00 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0" 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Adj: 1-00 1.:Q0 1.00 _1.00 LOU 1__00 1-00 1.00 T.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 Reduced Vol: 197 83 143 298 61 37 61 2030 147 122 2358 78 PHF Volume: 0: 844 81 976. 36a 0 415 0 203 0. _ 0 0 _ User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1_00 LOG 1,:00. 1.00 1.00 1_00- 1.00 1.00 1_00 _1. 0: 1.00 1.00 PHFAdj: 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 --- MLF Adj: 1.00 1..05 1.U0: 1.00=1..00 1.00- 1__00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 HP Volume:_ 197 83 143 298 61 37 61 2030= 147 122 2358 78 Final Vol.: 0 886 81 976_ 368 0 415 0 203 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - MLF Adj: _ 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 I -Saturation F ow Module: !I 1 11 1 Final Vol.: 197 83 143 298 61 37 61 2132 147 122 2476 78 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800' 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 -- -___t -I Saturation F ow Module: �I -(I I Adjustment 1.00-0._98 0.98 0 R91 0.49- 't.00 0,94 1.00 0_84 1,00 1.00 1.0 �------ - Lanes: 0.00 2..75 0.25 2.00 1_00° 0.00 1:.00 0..00` :1.00 0.00 0..00 0.00 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 18001800 1800 1800 Final Sa,t,.:: - 0. 4849 443. 3279 1782 0 1693 0 1515 Q, 0 0 -Adjustment:_ 0.94 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.98 0.98 0.94 0.99 0.99 _____ -_-___. _.___-_ Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.62 3 r 1� 11____.___- �1_ 1 L 5� 1.oa 1.0 1.00 1 00 0.6 c. s 1.00 2.81- 0.19 1.00 2.91 0.09 Capacity Analysis Module: Final Sat.: 1693 1782 1515 1693 1043 632 1693 4951 341 1693 5183 1.63 Vow/Sat: 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.30 0_21 0..00 0.25 0.00 0.13 0000 0_00 0.00. It 11-_ II I Crit Moves: ***, **** **** Capacity Analysis Module: . Green/Cycle:. 0.00 0.23 0,23: 0_37 0..60 0.00 0_30: 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0_12 0.05 0.09--0.18 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.43 0.43 0.07 0.48 0.48 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0_81 0_S1. 0_81. 0.35 0.00 0-81 0.00 0.44 0-00 0.00 G.00 Crit Moves: **** -**** **** **** I. - `-----Ii 11 I1"" --------- 1 Green/Cycle: 0.19 0.13 0.13 0.19 0.13 0.13 0.05 0.48 0.48 0.08 0.51 0.51 . Level Of Service Module: Volume/Cap: 0.62 0.37 0.76 0.95 0.47 0.47 0..72 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.95 Geiay/Yeti- G.0 36.3 36.:3 28..7 9,5 0.0 35.6 0.0 26_0. 0-0 0.0 0.0 1_ 11--- II--- II- I _ Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level Of Service Module: ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0Q-85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.35 0.85 Delay/Veh: 36.9 37.1 49.1 63.1 38.3 38.3 59.2 25.8 25.8 76.5 27.2 27.2 . AdjOel/Veh: 0-0 30.8 30`..8 28.7 8.0 0.0 30.3 0..0 22.1 -0_0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1..00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Queue: 0 32 32 30 6 0 14 0 6 - 0 0 0 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 x*******:r>3****,:********•****a.A.A-k**********,+_********.***************************x AdjOel/Veh: 36.9 31..6 41.7 63.1 32.6 32.6 59.2 21.9 21.9 76.5 23.1 23.1 Queue: 6 3 5 13 3 3 3 73 73 6 86 86 Trafffx System Ver-si°rn 6.5 (c). 1992 DA Licensee--to DKS Associates, Po Traffic System Version 6.5 (c) 1992. DA Licensed t_' DKS Associates, Po s • 10/21/1993 13-:55_ Filename: TTFUTM23_OUT Page 11 10/21/1993 =13:.55 Filename: TTFUTM23.OUT Pa.e 12 TTFUTMZ_CMD Mott Oct 4, 1993 16:46:57 Page 12-1 I TTFUTKZ.CMD Mon Oct 4, 1993 16:46:57 Page 13-1 Tigard. Triangle Specific Area Plan Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan - - -" Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak flour Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM2) Level Of Service Computation Report ~--- l Level Of Service Computation Report 1985"MCM_Operations Method 1985 HCM Operations Method _ Future Volume Alternative Future Volume Alternative - - - 1ntYrieyl:lc*k*****b****,**********r.********kit*Y«rsfat*****3r*rc****ir.**t******k&deir.*Yr*,r*r,.** ***************t********************st**ir+Y****.**************************,(****** Intersection #10-68th Parkway/Haines: Street/Atlanta Street Intersection #11 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street/I-5 SB ramps - _-__ -- ***************************A-d,cr-a.*****.*************************.*****,*********.**** *** *********ter*.*********************sir**********************************_******* _ Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap... (X.): 0.804 Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.909 Loss Time (sec): 12 Average Delay (sec/veh) 19.6 Loss Time (Sec): 16 Average Delay (sec/veh): 39.5 ; Optimal Cycle: 78 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 134 Level Of Service: D *A.A:,t.**.**iA.*.k***********a*tic****fir.******Ptak*******.*******t********************%qtr.**** **i* *********.********ale******************************X******irk******************- -- . Approach:. North Bound South Bound. East Bound. West Bound Approach: Uorth bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement::. L" - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R= L - 'T - R _ - -1 I I I{ I1 I 1------- -------11-- - 1{-- II--- { Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:- Ovl IncOlde Include Include Rights: Ovt Ovl Include Include -• _ ` Min_ Green: 15 15 15 15 13 15 6 15 15 6 15 15 - I Min. Green: 6 15 15 6 15 15 6 15 15 6 _ 15 15 - Lanes: 10101 1 ( 0 1. 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0: 0 1 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1- 0 1 0 1 0 1 _, . Volume Module.. {I=_- ({-_ 1 1 1 Volute Module: I( II II---- Base Volt __ 21 146. 43S 61 155 11 26 19 48; 291 16 7Z Base Vol: 55 275 127 274 63 177 90 149 30 38 203 135 Growth Adj: 1.00:1.00 T..00 1_00 1--00 1_QO LOU 1_00 - 1..00 1.00 1000 1..00 Growth Add 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial ffse: 21 146- 438 61 155 11 26 19 48: 291 16 72 Ini tial Bse: 55 275 127 274 63 177 = 90 149 30 38 203 - 135 Added Vol:= 22 172 2.5& 25 109 5 10 41 12 303 68 10 Aged Vol: 29 190 15 47 93 320 174 202 47 38 284 53 Initial Fut: 43 315 696- 86 264 16 36 60 60 594 84 82 Initial Fut: 84-.465 1.42 321 156 497 264 351 77 76 487 188 Reduct VoL: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Reduced Vot: 43' 3.18 696 86 264 16 36 60 60 594 84 82 Reduced Vol: 84 465 142 321 156 497 - 264 351 77 76 487 188 : User-Ad,: 1-00 1..00 1_00 1.00 1_00 1_00. 1000 1_00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1000 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 f - -- PHF Adj 1__00 1-00. 1.00 1_00 Loa 1_00 1.00 1_00 1_00, 1.00 1:.00 1.00 PHF Adj-:- 1_00-1_00 1_00 1.00 I.QO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 �'_ -` PHF Volume: 43 318 696 86 264 16 36 60 60 594 84 82 PHF Volume: 84 465 142 321 "156. 697 264 351 77 76 487 188 - PCE Adj: 1..0u_ 1..=00 1..00 1.00. LOU 1.00 1_00 1_00 1..00 =-1..00 1_00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ' _ - MLF Adf: 1;.00 1.QG 1_00 1_00 1_00 1_00 i_00 1_00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ( MLF Adj: 1.00 1000 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .• Final Vol..: 43 318 696 86 264 16 36 60 60 594 84 82 ( Final Vol.: 84 465 142 321 156- 497 264 351 77 76 487 188 ( 1I_ Ii 1I [ ( --_sji_------ - 11 II 11----------- - ' - = Saturation Flow.Module: Saturation Ftow Module: Sat/Lane: -- 1800 1 800 1800. 1800 180G 18C0- 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Sae/Lace:. 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 0.50=0-99 0_.84 0.17 0.98 0.98 0.94-0.9Z 0.92 0.94 0.92 0..92 Adjustment: 0.94 0.99 0.84 0.91 0.99 0.84 0.94 0.96 0.96 0_94 0.99 0.84 ' Lanes: 1.00 1.00. 1000 1.00 0..94 0.06 1.00. 0,50 0.50 1.00 0.51 0.49 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.82 0018 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.t 909= 1782 151-c 303 1663 101 1693 829 829 1693 839 819 Final Sat.: 1693 1782 1515 327.9 1782 1515 1693 1418 311 1693 1782 1515 Capacity Anal s- Module II II 11 I ------ II-- II----- -II I = - y Capacity Analysis Module: ':o1/Sat: 0 005= 0_18: 0.46 0..25.0..16 0_16 0_02 0007 0_.07 0.35 0.10- 0.10: y - Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.26 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.33 0.16 0.25 0.25 0.04 0.27 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** ;t*;-- _ Crit Modes.:. **** **** ****_ **** Green/Cycle: 0_33 0.35 "0_76- 033 0_33- 0..33 0_16 0._15 0.15 0.40 0_4D 0.40 Green/Cycle: 0.05 0.29 0.34 0.11 0.34 0.52 0.17 0.42 0.42 0.05 0.30 0.30 Volume/Cap: 0.14. 05 1 0_61 0_87 0_49 0049 0_13 0__48 0.48. 0.87 025 0.25 Volume/Can: U.99 0.91 0.28 0.91 0.25 0.64 0.91 0.59 _-0.59 0.90 0.91 9.41 L =--- ;---------------11-'- I I I I I II li 11 1 - Level 0=- Service Module: Level Of Service Module: . - DeLay/Veht 18..1 19.9 4.8 58=-9 2T.0 _21.0 27.5 30.8 30.8 29.1 15.5 15.5 Delay/Veh: 116 45.8 22.2 59.1 21.5 17.1 58.7 21.2 21.2, 88.0 44.6. 25.8 - j Delay Ad : 1.00 1.00` 1.:00 1_00' 1.00 LOU 1..00 LOU 1.00 1.00" 1_00 1.00 Delay Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - FrogAd. Fctr: 1.00 1-00 1..00 1.00= 1.00 1_00 1.00 T.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 ProoAdjFctr: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDdliVeh:. 1801` 19--,9 t,.It 58.9 21..0 21.0 27_5.30.8' 30_8 __2901 15.5 15.5 AdjDel/Veh: 116 45.8 22.2 59.1 21.5 17.1 58.7 21.2 _ 21.2 88.0 44.6 25.8 Queue:- 1 7 9 1 6 6 1 3 3 17 3 3 Queue:. 5 18 3 13 4 12. 11 11 11 4 18 5 - - - - *************..*******i►:********************************************************ant *******.*****************************************,t*********air*1******************* -- - - - Traffix-System Version 6.5 Cc) 1992 DA Licensed to OKS Associates, Po Traffiix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po sr - F _ • - i - . - f- _ A. k , , r___, F______ _.r.,_..7_,-.4. fi,.....=...... ,..........-..... ..------- ,,,,_-..........„ _ ,,,,.,,,,,,z„.,,, 10;21f1993 13:55 Filename: TTFUTM23_OUT Page 13 10/21/1993 13_55 Filename: TTFUTM23_OUT Page- 14 T T FUTM3_CMD Tue Oct 5 1993 08.:35:15 Page 5-1 ---------------- - - TTFUTM3.CMD Tue Oct 5, 1993 08:35:18 Page 6-1 Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan =- . Future Volumes. (Year 2010) - Ptk Peak Hour Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM3). Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour -- - - Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM3) Level Of Service Computation Report , 1985 HCK Operations Method Level Of Service Computation Report Rase Volume Alternative 1985 HCM Operations Method , *******-*.***.************art**,****************.**.*t***********************:**.****** Base Volume Alternative Intersection #12 68th Parkway/Hampton.Street ******************************************************************************** ***_***-*******k*********************,************************************ *** Intersection #14 64th Avenue/I-5 SB on-rP_mp/Pe^ific Highway - Cycle: (sec): 80 Critical VoL..JCap. (X):_ 0.658 ******************************************************************************** Loss Time (urea): B, Average fielay_(sec/veh): 13.2 Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.743 Optimal Cye'e: 68 Levet Of Service: 8 Loss Time (sec): 12 Average Delay (sec/veh):_ 16.8. ********.*ir, * .**************t******** "****** *****c* c#sY****.*********se****,t#*t* * Optimaal -Cycle: 69 _ - - Level Of Service: - - C Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound ***.***************************************************************************** Movement: L - T -. R L- T - R L v T -- R L T - R Approach: Nort h B ou nd South Bound East Bound West Bound 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Movement: L - T - R L T - R L T R L T R Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - __1 Permitted 11-----_---------11-'--------- _HI 1 Rights: Include Include Include Include Control: Permitted Protected Protected Min. Green: 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanese 00 11 0 a o o 14 0 0 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 27 27 27 6 15 15 6 15 15 1 1 --11 - _ it 1 Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 --2 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 Volume Module:- 1-=-------------1! 1[ 11-- 1 Rase Vol: 257 120 3 8' 20 248 285 31 197 10 140 118 Volume Module: Growth Adj- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00: 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Vol.: 0 0 0 57 68 90 176 1023 943 106 2136 283 Initial_ Bse: 257 120 3 8 20 248 285 31 197 10 140 113 I Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0_ 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 57 68 90 176 1023 943 106 2136 283 3 Reduced Val: 25T 120 3 8 20 248 285 31 19T 10 1=:0 118 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User no`s.: 1.00 1.00: 1..00 1.00 1.00 1,000 1.00 1..00 1-00 1000 1.00 1..00 Reduced Vol: 0 0_ 0 57 68. 90 176 1023 943 106 2136 283 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 T.00 1-00 1.00 1_00- 1..00 1..00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1_00 User Adj: 1,.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 257 120 3 8 20 248 285 31 197 10 140 118 PHF Adj.: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 - PCE Adj: 1_00` 1.00 1..00: -1.00 1000 1000 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 57 68 90 176-1023 943 106 2136 283 - MLF Adj: 1000=1..00 1_00. 1.00 1.00 1..00 LOU 1..00 1.00 1.00 1,0 1.00 PCE Adj: 1..00-1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 257 12.0 3 8 20 243 285 - 31 197 10 140 ire) MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 _ 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 + - 11 IF-- i1- - 1 _.__a ______ ___011 68 90 176 1074 943 106 2243 283 _ Final Vol 0 0 57 ' Saturation Flow Module: { 11 _ - II 1_ Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800- 1800 180.0 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: =0.62 0.62 0..62 0077 0_77 0_77 0.62 0.86 0.86 0.99 0..99 0.84 1= Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 .=1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Lanes: 0-68 0_31 0.01 0.03= 0.07 0.90 1.00 0.14 0086 0.07 0.93 1.00 j Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.94 0.99 0.74 0.94 0.97 0.97 Final Sat : 75.9. 355 9 ._ 40 101 1249 1123 211 1340 119 1663 1515 Lanes.. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.54 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.66 0.34 -_-- ---_ _11 1i_ II 1 Final. Sat 0 0 0 691 824 1515 1693 3564 2673 1693 4652 58T _ii y - --_ _----- ------ - ---- Capacity Anaaysts Module: - 11 II___. 11 1 Val/Sat: 0.34 0.34 0..34 0.20' 0,20: 0.20 0.25 0_15 0.1.5 a.oa 0.08--.0.08., Capacity Ana ysis Module: Orin Moves:- ` *.*** **** Vol/Sat: 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.10 0.30 0.35 0.06 0.48 0.48 Green/Cycle: 0._51 0.51 0.51 051 0_51 )..51 0.39 0_39. 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 Grit Moves: **** _ **** **** Volume/Cap: 0.6& 0_-66 0_66. 0.39 0_.�9 0.39 =0.66--0.38 -0.38 110.22 0.22 0.201 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.12 0.57--0.57 0.10 0.56 0.56 r"` 1 11` I{- Volume/Cap` 0.00_0_00-+0_00 0`37-0_37- 0_26 0.87-0.53 0.62 0.62 0.87 0.87 Level Of Service Module:: -- _1__ ` - - i1- -11"'--_-_ '11 1 Delay/Vent 12..8- 12,8 12.8 9.1 9=01 9.1 17.9 13.7 13.7 12.6 12.6 12.5 Level Of Service Module: Delay Ad j. 1.00 IJN1 LOU' 1.00 LOU- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1000 1.00 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0..0 30.2 30.2 29.2 60.5 12.1 13.4 43.7 19.6 19.6 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00' 1_00 1.00 LOG 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 LOU AdjDel/Veh: 12_8 12.8 12_8 : 9-1 9.1 9_1 17.9` 15.7' 13.,7 12.6 12.6 12.5 ProgAdjFctr: 1.00 0.85 0.85 0,85 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.85 0..85 Queue _ 7 7 7 4 4- 4-- 6 4 4 2 2 2 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.6 25.6 24.8 60.5 10.3 11.4 43.7 16.7 16.7 �_**_** ***************rx*.**. *.***�***** * ***********.******************** Queue- 0 0 - 0 4 4- 2 7 22 21 4 75 75 Traffix_ System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Pa raffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to (WS Associates, Po I • - - - f . - f 10/21/1993 13:55 Filename: TTFUTM23_0UT Page 15 10/21,/1993 13:55 Filename: TTFUTM23.0UT Page 16 TTFUTM3,_CMD Tue Oct t 5, 1993 08. 5:18 Page 7-1° . TTFU TIIZ.CMD Mon Oct 40 1.993 16:46:57 Page 1T-1 g _-- , Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan Future - Hour - Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan tr Volumes (Year 2010)uture_Yol s (Y ar 2010, PM Peak •• Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM3) - Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTMZ) Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report _ 1485 HCM Operations Method 1985 HCM Operations Method Base Volume Alternative - Future Volume Alternative ************,**,******,****,r****,x**k**,rt,Y*,,r**,** ******************************* ****** ****.*."**.****************************,A.sA.*, ,*************************** • =Intersection#38 ORE 217 NB rams/0unziker ,.' Intersection 416 1--5 NB ramps/Hafnes=Street - *****************************.r***;c******************•**************************** .FX ---**'t**'s-ityc********•h******.*.********14r****�**sic***.**********:iF*A&AAk******�4`.************* Cycle (sec): - _ - - --100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): - - - -- 0.637 - - Cycle (sec): 80 Critical Vol../Cap. (X) 0.752 Loss Time (sec): 0 Average Detay (sec/veh): 16.6 '°A -- Loss- Time (sec): 8 Average Delay (sec/veh.): 13.7 Optimat Cycte: 63 Level Of Service: C - Op.timat_ Cycle: 53 Level Of Service: B ********************************************************-g.********************** \ , ************************************************.*****,�*****.**********;tee***:k***** Approach: North Bound -- South Bound East Bound nd_ West Bound • Approach:_ North Bound_ South- Bound East-Bound West B ound Movement: L - T R _ L T - R L T R L - - T - R Movement:' L T - R- L T - R L - T R L - T - R - "" ____11_= 1 1 i- I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Contrct: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Inctuct-- Include Include i Rights.:" Include- Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 - .tin. Green:= 15 - 15 15 0 0 0 0 15 15 15 15 0 - Lanes: 0 0 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 " 1 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1I 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11. 0 0 --- --1--------- 11- 11- - 11 1_ -1 11 I_I 11- ( Volume Mod ute- Volume Module: B ase Vol.: 55 0 771 0 0 0 120 412 0 0 447 450 Base Vol: 37 1 349 0 - 0 0 1 500 65 67 274_ 0 Growth Adjr 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Growth Adj:_ 1..00 T.AO T.:00 T.00" LOU 1.00 1_00 1_00 1.00 1.00" 1.00 1-.00 Initial. Bse: 55 0 -771 0 0 0 120 4.12- 0 0 447 450 -- Initial Bse: IT 1 349 0 0" 0 - 1 500 ' 65" 67 274 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 Added Vol: 272 0 0 0 0- 0 0 104 220" 0 110 . 0 Reduced Vol: 55 0 771 0 0 0 120 412 0 0 447 450 Initial Fut:: 309 1 349 0 0 0 1 604 285 67 384 0 User Adj: 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reduct Vat: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reduced Voir 309 1 349 0 0 0 1 604 285 67 384 0 PHF Volume: 55 0 771 0 0 0 _ 120 412 0 0 447 450 User Adj: 1_30 1.00 1.00. 1.00:"'[.:00 1000 1_00 1.00 1_00 T.00 1.00 1..00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 LOU. 1.00- 1.__00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1..00 = T000 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 309 T 34-9 0 0 0 I 604 285 67 384 0 Final Vol.: 55 0 771 0 0 . 0 120 412 0 0 447 450 PCE Adj; - 1_00 1000 1_00- 1_00 1.00 11..00 1_00 1_00 T_vc1_-1.00 1_00 1.00 ------- ) _ MLF Adj: 'l_OG 1_00 1_00 1_00 1.00. 1..00 1.:00 1..00 1000 1.00 1_00 1..00 Saturation Flow Module:° II----- `-Ii---'"--"--_-`--11` 1 Final Vot_a 309= 1 349 0 0 0 1 604 285 67 384 0 Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 r 11 11- II -- I Adjustment: 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.84 Row ow,Module: - Lanes: 0.13 0.00 1.87 0..00 0.00. 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00° 0.00=1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane T800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Final Sat.: 204 0 2861 0 0 0 1693 1782 0 0 1782 1515 - Adjustment _ G084 0_84 -0.84 ° 1.00 1_00 1.00 0.75 0.75 0.84 0.74 0074 1.00 11-- I I-"" 11- _ Lanes: 0.99 0.01 -.LOU 0.00 1_00 0..00 0.01 0.99 1.00 0.15 0.85 _0..00 - Capacity Analysis Module: _ - Final Sat.: 1510" 5 1515= 0 1800 0 2 1352 1515 199 1138 , 0 - Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.30 -° --- � ---- 1( ---11 _11 "[ Crit Moves: **,�* * ,� **�* ***�** - s Capacity Ana ysis Module: Green/Cycle: 0.42 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.47 VoL/Sat: 0.20 0..20 0_23 0.00 0.00 0000 0.45 0.45 0.19 0.34 0.34 0.00 = Volume/Cap: 0.64 0.00 0.64 0.00"0.00 0..00 0.64 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.64 II_Grit: Moves: **** **** **** ____________17_______ Green/Cycle:: 0_31 0.31 0..31- 0000 0000 _0.00 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.00 Level Of Service Module: Volume/Can: 0.'.57-0.67 0..75 0-00 0000 0.00 0_75 0.75 0.32 0.57-0.57 0.00 " Delay/Veh": 18.1 0.0 1.8.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.1 9.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 16.8 1 ---11 I1-_-_---_ II ---I Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Levee Of Service Module: ProgAdjFctr:_ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veht 21.0 21..0. 2307 0.0 0.00 0.0 11.9 11.9 6.3 8.3 8.3 0.0 AdjDet/Veh: 18.1 0,0 180.1 0.0 o.a 0.0 37.1 9.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 16.8 _. Detay Adj:. 1:_00 1.00 1.00 1..00. 1000" 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1000 -1.00 Queue: - 18 0 18_ 0 0 0 4 6 0 0 _ 9 10 ProgAdiFctr: 1_00 1.00 'LOG 1.00 1..00' -1..00 1.00 1-00. 1 000 1.00 1.00 1.00 ******.**•***********;t*********:*************,***,************x-******************* A-dj el/Veh: 211.0 21.0 23-7 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.9 11.9 6.3 8.3" 8.3- 0.0._ Queue: 6 6 8 0 0 0 11 11 3. 6 6 0 ****************************t.A.A*********-,**********************************.****- _ - - - _- - -- - - - - -- - - •. ' _ Traffix System Version 6.5 (c 1992_DA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po Traf 'x-Sys rslon 5 c) 1 2 D Traffix System Version 6.5 (c) 1992 DA Licensed to DKS Associates-,. Po • t • c4„,i `J- - -- .--t'^�.-.�- - .......^.-""�. � �...►'--" "� � • - --- - - - - t 10/Z1/1993 13:55 Filename: TTFUTM23.0UT Page 17" 10/21/1993 13:55 Filename: ITFUTM23.OUT Page i8 - - T T FUTM3.CMD rue Oct 5, 1993 08:35:18 Page 8-1 . Tigard Triangle Specific Area Plan . Future Volumes (Year 2010) - PM Peak Hour Mitigated Future Geometry - (TTFUTM3) - . Level Of Service Computation Report 1985 HCM Operations Method. - Base Volume Alternative *********************** ****k***r-4.kk.l irk***** **A-pl****:k****k***ir sic**tY*:YsY**hlr****fir Interssi_tion.#92 L-5 SR Off-rampfBarcur Blvd - * **2****'3************k**,first.************.*******,****..********** ************s***** Cycle-ksec): 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.869 Loss i-iir (sec): 8 Average Delay (seciveh): 12.7 Optimal 'Cycle: 91 Level Of Service: C _ - _**^kfir*****:t.**********stkir*************,[riff**************w*********,kilt******i"1c:ir******* - - - Approach; IIorth Bound. South Bound. East Bound West Bound , Movement: i L - T - R_ ' - T - R L - T - H L - T - R i Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted _ - Rights: include. Include Include Include Min, Green: 0° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 • ---_I . ; I I- Ii------ -i -------- 1 Volume Module: Base. Vol- :0. 0 a 150 0 1026 0 1080 0 0 1449 0 Growth-Adj t 1..00 1.00 1..00 1_00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.:00 LOU 1..00 1.00 1.00 _ Initia:l Bse: 0 G 0 15.0 0 1026 0 1080 0 0 1449 0 Reduct Vtit`-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Reduced Vo`0: 0 0 0 150 t 1026 0 1080 0 0 144.9 0 User-Adi 1.A0 1,:00. 1.00. 1.00 1.0G 1.00 1_00 1..0O 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 - Phi: Adj: 1.00 1_OO 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1..00 LOO 1.00 LOG 1_00 1_00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 150 0_ 1.026 0 1080 0 0 144-9 0 - PCE Adj: 1.;00 1.:00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.€0 MLF Adj: 1.0.0-1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..05 1.00 LOG. 1.05 '1.00 Final Vol..: ( 0 0 0= 150 0 1026 0 1134- 0 0 1521 0 Saturation_Fto --Module:. - -� Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 1.00 1,00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.74 1_00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 00010 1_00 0-00' 2.00 0..00 2_00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0__00 _Final Sat.: 0 0 0 16.93 0 2673 0 3564 0 0 3564 0 Capacity Ana:lys--- Module: Vol/Sat: 0_00 0.00_ 0.00 0_09 0.00 0.38 0.00 0_32' 0.00 0..00 0.43 0.00 - Crit Moves: ,ksk**, **-k-k �*** Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.00 0.00, 0.44 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0_00 0..00110.20 0.00 0..8710.00 0.6-5 0.001#0.00 0.87 0.001 Level Of Service Module= Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0..0= 15.6 0..0 28..1 0.0 17.9 0.0 0.0 24.1 0.0 Relay Adj: 1:-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.200 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 =ProgAdjFctr 1.00 0.85 0.85 1_00 0_85 0.85 1_00-0_85 0.85 1.A0 0.85 0.85 AdjDel/Vent. 0.0 0.0. - 0.0- 15.6 - 0.0 23_9 0_0 15.2 0.0 _ 0_.0 20.5 0.0 -- Queue: 0 0 0 3 0 33 0 29 0 0 47 __ 0 -4. _ ************************,Ir********stir******ic*s*****.*************.******k********** - - - - - - - - - Traffix System Version 6.5 (c)= 1992 OA Licensed to DKS Associates, Po a 'd , , I .4 , . „ P D ..S Assoaates . ,. i, , I ,6' Acknowledgements ,,, The following people participated in the production of this study: CITY OF TIGARD ., John Acker, Associate Planner, Community Development Department , ".-Carol Landsman, Senior Planner, Community Development Department Randy Wooley, City Engineer TECIINICAL ADVISORY CO.MMUT IEE , Dale Jordan, ,Department of Land Conservation and Development u Kim Knox, Tri-Met .�,` ` . Lidwien Rahinan, Oregon Department of Transportation ; METRO • . "---5---_, i Dick Walker, Transportation Planning Supervisor - K un Hwa Kim, Senior Transportation Planner y � r l� OTAK, Inc. Ralph Taiwan, Principal ' Dave Couch, Planner ..4s, N DICS ASSOCIATES a Project Manager Ransford .S, McCourt P,E, Project Engineers Brian K. Copeland Kym S. Di1orio, P.E. • Graphkcs Inger Knox C ,7. Production Deborah Millicaii J ' r :t, r • • e;r P Y Transportation - ,, H.' ,, ., 3; ^ , , .. , . . Impact S , , ,. . 1 , • ... , , ,,,;,:-„- ,.„. „ , ::,-, ,,,-..,. 9.,,-,,. .,,,,,, , .-,,,, ,,, ,,,,,,,:,,,.,, c , . , ,,,,, ,, 1,,,„ ,, ,, ,,, ,,, , , „ , , , . , , , ' I I , . .. t A ' rcia t,,, ,, ,,:,,,,,,,,,,,„ ,„ , , ,,,''' '11 ''' I• '''1''''''' V I'' ''' '1•'' l' 1 F I q k ,w I ` rk tit,, .,,,.. w s It i+P I,"''',',, 1 t,1 +' 1 1 1 ITC' ,1! • ' yY �+,".tl,,.,,..J,,.,,,,.,` 1..,,;.lµ.,,..1 a,,,.. I I,.,...,'.,...,,1..6 J'(;,,„,„...,',.;:„...,„,„„.1, ' - ^ '� tl' ",w'I«wy,y«.,,., ,I! tll.n�i 'f•w, '".r r.w;ry,`a d 1�4 1!¢y rIF, til,ltl ',1 Ft?1i ,+ll y'Ya-' n l. I t I r1 I.,f ( Iii' I ! 4 4 t lal l.,„,,,".,..,...l_ ,.4k' -,' ',.a a. :,.� .;.i k fir,.w.a,4 4, }} J HiW 17:7'i:17;',.;','",";7'..''' Yly 4 1 Y, Y I yy{,, I I �!xf (I�} x ��'4 R� 4 1 mri O" ( �Fil ' u'C"Y�; ��`� ry, �,. I,y}1 ,�,�.I I J S�- I " ..1}• Oregon , �1r�x v,u'^ 1, ti 4;�rN,h="M, 't,l it' '7;a; .rJ ' a>,a,•„..i,r..,,lb'.G 141:,,i.wl.,.ua.,-,:.d ....',.,..,A.v-..,a>a.i .,,.,,r,,,,,, ,'''''''01'7'''''''''''l 7:77,747';41"0 '7,7,7;-7,v7+ rw t r >,,tt y- -I 1' : ':.':' L y P y t 1'ytC t °4« 4tn I :I2 M B ,y 1„ i_1,")4 I ,.,,, ";r r I�r.,'.. h3.: • , P f. i '1,1' r''aY , 1 i ' ! • : r41jJ 3 f Y N „,,,,. • + ,, w • E rr,,, r 1 . -""nt, f.•Jr /� n . -'1 � i1 � :�. °tJ 4r r ri '1. J 1. J � '! Ir Cs q1 ,0 h° a .f �'K 'r I I "� _.IL �j It P,'''! kti Y �y;rx r Y� 1 �i di; 1 J . " "� �' �J,:�' I y IBC',I tx 1 of f ? .7 �Y t,� �� �'�',,,���,rr"pt 1r I•�«� r Y �. `,tv rl a «; J, ' .. ......_ ..,' _ ` :'''''';''c';.',:, ' 1 �trr )� f�, I :..: 'I IAI A `f. i - t,- •:. r b '; 4 h f t f : , c. .1•' y/ I • ,1 Nq,s. �.t ,,',:, 1��,+ ;Ja,t.�- 'f• ; 4 ...ol 1 !y {' 1 .I•,,I ,I,r1 1 (..- kl”: ,' 1 k, II E Transportation tannin /Taff Engineering x n: rI -1+ + 4 `. 1• r ' AN (dl 14 MMMIII���... r r t l t � J 1 • 11 t ai 1 J4,"I_v a f,■■ t ky r li rli.f f "� { '! } I�J) qit , r .I , '`7f „1 t, YID 7 , 4 , YI d,, �f i■•I 1 I I .. 4 �,f r ' :;N 1Y 1 ' I Y'1 +t r-,ri t I;� c y,.F wr +f v;t,' I I a �u 4, t f 3 11J "f, '., ��+'�'"�I ppr�..,Ww.aa,�,. �r' yAyA , 1 1`I 9 ebrLiar i I'94V M„✓ '�I},41! I�.y t it F�} ,, t,t.� t rw,.+ i,- ,z;''{'I''1 Iq ,' iiii777 d 1 1 air y r J, °itr r t I tv ' t '-f, i I I ! ,l,l.n+ C .. t. R I n ,n• � j• + I t ... a .. 1 • I Transportation Impact Study .. • , w Foods . , 1 i, a 1 r .. , . „" .. . . L. , . ,.. Tigard Oregon Ptrepared for: SUl f VAALU inc. , •• FIrepared'by: w r�I � l. w 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205 , (503) 228-5230 ■ • I 1 • Project 881.00 • F-ebt'ua 1993 . ^ Yn • • • , 'kiy,'' i I, I i February 1993 Tigard Center Cub Foods Table of Contents Table of Contents , I •w. SeC�Section 1 I' i , Executive Summary . . . . . , ; •' Y� 1 1 . Section 2 • 1 i. Introduction 1 1 Y 1 , Section Existing Conditions 1 7 Section 1 • 1994 Traffic Imact'Analysis 1.4 1 • 1 Sect,.® 1 2015 Traffic Conditions i , . 1 , 1 28 Section Tigard Triangle Build-Out Traffic Conditions . . Y 1 33 Section 7 Conclusions I , . And Recommendations 36 • • - Appendix A 6 . . , , . , . . 3 9 , I i • 1 w I : j . 1 k ,, i 1 I. I. 1 I I 1 • 1 1 1 I , ti , 1 ....w,i•w.l.�or.•n�:ri....�+r•.a.r+Iw 1 (,.., I •o/u y{�As /cia)es, l l4Y 0i . ' February 199 .. Tigard Center Cub Foods List Of Figures , k • f List Of Figures 1 i i Figure � , Site Vicinity . , . , 6 Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes , , . . • 11 , . Funded Improvements and Assumhd Lane Configuration . 13 ' Figure Site Plan Figure 5 , Trip Distribution , . , . . . . , . . , . . 20 Figure 6 ; . ,. •, Traffic 21 }, ' . . �:t.d 1 raffic PM Peak. Flour . . . . . . . Back ro n Figure 7 • • Site Generated Traffic PM Peak Hour . 23 E: Figure 8 1994 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour . . . . . . 24! Figure 9 i �o • Za 1'5 Link Volumes PM Peak Hour r , i Figure 10 l'Bard Triangle Build-out Link Volumes PM Peak Hour . r 35 • List of TableS ' TTabMe Existing P.M. Peak Hour'Level of Service . �r 1(I .. I. .` .• Table t•�, _, Trip Generation. Y / 1 , , , , , . , . , ,. 19 m Table 3 ;; l i 25 rt.iture P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service . , 6 r � 2 , Table 4 , • . ,,,,;!,v,� � � � Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis . , . /r � � �� j, Kittelson &Associates, Plc, it 1 • ,h _ .+,.,,,......,.... .,...-,,...>,..+.r+--......,r....._,-.r..-.,,.,,,.....�.,... .,«.......,.,....r.__.a....... ,.,,..+,u..,slu,r.,,..,.....w�.:�-.w_,.«_.M.,�.aa.;;.a:.-.a,.r,+�,r,•-n ru..... .o.r...l-.,u..,,+.., ,...._ ' .;.,i44., "'„`JL•.•'`•c,—� Ns-t.•I. ..LL...a•.M.m...+NaA.:uW4wa.4.w.t:4.[L:..A.a.,-"+n:1.4CW.ldt-.,+0.�...1'..i.w,r.r 1Wv=.J4nL..l.,.kA:.:.,:.a1nr.Mtiw',:vtrt4.w�...-+.rla.:a.ls.iut, • • r � •\r • • I I 9r • 1 1, „ • I • �T• a ,I ,•y II(( 4. I 4 • i I •fir ■ ■ ■ ■ I I ■ o ■ 7 I { 1 E , 1 r,''tt) 1 f i u`' t F � I' l rl,1 if' it .t r C4 tl t (\ 4 1 r f t � ,'•,"''''',' I 1 r ' 1 * 41 1..k L ,«� ..�1 a* • ,.!� , u' '—'7'"--,,•71 to 1 t'1' '� (1 4A_ r . f ► F...,..tr..I:,,S44 ,. ..,,,.,...rw.,...aww.."a, «w«._..„„ ,,..,...w. ,.,,,�L..''.,,x4„�,,, , f• F • 1'' a 6' , i Y,... Y., d a,.wY.'r L- ,t1„:'.Y.»,.. I,,,+F* Y f Y, ,w y . A'«b^,h £IPi21 b N 1 1:;'''lhl!! h y �v I rI I�I�'F ;wi va 1 lrJ,-. -.tF k'�tll, w Y t f Y y r. -. I vvl,s� O t t,Y,C i � a1 t `1 ' • .l / � 4 , t 4 , I lw 1 1 44. 1` ,,,,, ` f t4r 1 + ,,„ Yl •'44 r .• •LI M•« 1k •>'Y I, r,S.y t "Yi "1,. •2 ■I11• 7! f r i 1 r �1• 4, W 1 , a I , 11 4' 1, �, 1 ',I 1� ` ti '� ; 1 wJ ,+���1C,t ��r ,y t•, 7 Y Y F NJe t rr f JI aY w aYr V1 k r!i • • r - •lI.1O110tmfl yy)[ ( l ,ift+if. , I ,� J 4 yr 4 • , , :il ' ' 1. . . , ' EectJt \/e Siii t b t,, . . , , . , ...,...-...., , , , �Y ” y ,. rIF'� { 1` 4 a 14! 41i. 1,, I,' 4 ', i d f i }4p,,, M a, � It`w�,t+( ' � yYVr ly jr' ''r F ' rf' Jh y !rlaY Ik.FF 4'.u Y�t•r,�r H '1} r r+,, ' • rq a 1 t 'n a •� r . py , z ',ti.',' ' ' ' , ,•,,,t .1 tt,.I 11 6•., j I, y,r;.,lf 'I;a,..�`.,,./' • y J 1 r February uar,V 1� 3 • Tigard Center Cub roads Executive Summary Executive I , . SuperValu, Inc. is proposing to construct a community commercial center containing approxi-- rnately 156,250 gross square feet of leasable floor area. The anchor tenant will be a Cub'Foods . grocery store. This study,evaluated the traffic impacts from this proposed development and found the following: I • All of the study area intersections currently operate at acceptable levels o f service e . during the critical weekday,p.m. peak hour time period. ,, i ,/7, • With th e addition osite-generated traffic from the proposed development, all stud y area intersections 'will continue to operate within acceptable level of service limits 4' under projected 1994 conditions. Further, no offsite improvements are required to maintain acceptable levels of service beyond those assumed to be in place with the •' ' already funded transportation improvements within the study area. • ' • Based on a review of the current site plan, it is concluded that the proposed develop menu ad e q uatel y addre ss es the following iss ues: (a) Provision of sufficient major access driveway throat depth. • • (b) Minimization, of interaction between customers and delivery or service ; ( : vehicles (c) Provision of sufficient number of site driveways to disperse the site-gen- erated traffic such that substantial congestion is not likely to occur at any , '• one driveway. ;. • Signal nation of the SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection will not be warranted under projected. 1994 conditions. However, it is estimated that this inter . section will likely require signalization within the next five to 10 years. At such a tune ' . , when a detailed warrant analysis indicates a need for a signal,the resulting southbound ' y SW'72nd Avenue left-turn storage requirement is likely to increase, and may begin to interfere � opt ration of the left-turn�movement SW 72nd � � �; • with the � northbound leftw ent�at the S • specific t e attnent for this condition should be determined in . . Avenue site access. 'The�pecifi r a the future when detailed field observations and operational analyses can be conducted with real-world data, Possible treatments for this condition may include • is (a) Expanding the ' 72nd Avenue between � .e can ��� � the site access • and Dartmouth Street by 12 feet to provide side-by-,side left turn lanes - (b) Restriction of access at this location to right-in/right-out only. This . alternative is less desirable with respect to the accessibility of the center . but does not require further widening of SW 72nd Avenue (c) Relocating the SW 72nd access drive further to the north A.planning level analysis of projected year 2015 traffic volumes indicates a need for s oss-sec on both SW 72� .� � � � a�three-lane� x� t�oz1 a '�1` nd Avenue (north of SW Dartmouth) and S Dartmouth Street. With the signali2 ation of certain intersections within the study area, some additional widening may be required to accommodate turning rr oVet Tents. • Kitten t n,&Associate,, Inc. February 1993 Tigard Center Cub Foods Executive Summary M It is estimated that within 15-20 years, some form of access control will be required at the SW 72nd Avenue access to address a projected capacity deficiency for the exiting .. left-turn movement. Since, multiple alternative ingress/egress routes are available to J the site, access control could be imposed without substantially affecting the accessi- • ' bility of the site. .. G It is estimated that within 10-15 years, some treatment will be required at the SW • • Dartmouth access to alleviate a projected capacity.deficiency for the exiting left-turn : movement. Again,the specific treatment for this condition should be determined in the ', ' future when detailed •field observations and operational analyses can be conducted with • • real-world data. Possible treatments for this condition may include signalizalon or , µ access control for the exiting left-turn movement, Since an alternative egress route . • with virtually no out-of-direction travel is available, access control could be imposed . . ' without substantially affecting the accessibility of the site. d A planning level analysis of projected Tigard Triangle build-out volumes indicates a need for a five-lane cross-section on both SW 72nd Avenue (north of SW Dartmouth) and SW Dartmouth Street. With the signalization of certain intersections within the ,study area, some 'additional widening may be required to accommodate turning , • movements. . iii [ ' ; A . I n / . • , r J I I I • i ' O. • a.,.»w...Wa• ....wrGw......,...wr.....�..+h�.-_.mu_c+.m_... ..k.+w.•.,«.n r . v.a ,_K.+...•.,..al r.._,.w,10W,..Jk+ww+....1-,..,_ \/w,} .,-.,,. ..•..+ti,_,,..,.t�.0..,.. �--.-. .. - r- ...,,_...s..,.....»xwu«n..,...,nww. ....r+r,..r.,,W M.IVMWW'j.iL(...�AAY• 1 ' 1 , , Q 1 1 , , .. I • I I 1 i w• I , I I 1 I i ...7.4 ( q' . L ' , , 1, , , I • l , , I' 1 I , I .:.,..,....,..,.. , , , , ,. . , ,... : , , , , 1 ;t 1:, U )1' , I {L 11 ( » a I I f, ` r° , i I I r.,'''''''';',,-,..'''''''''.7.* f;'""",'"'..17'''77', r —'''''q �a'M r t..—,, P • ' t o u. .r f ,''• • • • .o.-• b rI'. ' .,, M.v. i.+...,,n.x r.« •ke 1 ,„,..,:.,,..„..,:..•,!, . 1. ..... , il,K w n i wy�r h � apy ,I k . na +qlr »x ny l ii� w• tj4 I1,J1,�»i`r."b>}", Y%�11Ni'et'l 1 I Fflr+, bl �Mw ; 'RAA� q $ t I I ,i t d y, ily,;fNo °K; "t'py. $i WY rU'r la ., ^ ii'a '' '0}, ' y" 1,' 1 i ,,1 p .04P . r 4 .1 "k I I -..:.:;'..41.�,, ' 4, ,. . w",.„� riaA4 114r„ n ',',$,yi• I 1 _ Mr p � r"f ,,4 y o- ?'E d i ; fit t � L �c1' ti w' 1 I � . 1 t� ' ti, 1 $ l U), 01°' 1 e I 1 H9F.��t ,ii y, .at t U r t C ...:•,1';','',",;,:•.'',"'•'' hrl l,. tr a , y ' 1. 1 ..,.!' , ,, ,.: '„ .. •♦� %t'•y f,"r IA , t f.i) i r•t.r.. ■ I � r ..r l I 1�Ir t ,.;,.4.,..'Y l !, r t Ir .� y. ' f t lt ,I t I t I I l ■! F ""` ' ` ' 1 r Y 1, ' yr kI l, 1,, ri'' a 1 , Iritroductiori r 4„ 4 0 4 4,,,, I. i AI f l y U %I y , w r �'I p i rt e Ihd d r ,ft 1 I ,,Ftl 1; r i I ■ x, 4 , If ,: 7 41 ' p ,, .1 1 1ry tt '.r r ,rr It r ` iy�. tr� t I � .1 1 t ,1,,,,■ •1. I y �+ 9 I X 1 a{, t 4- . ' { ' ,14 tYaY3*'r1 �f, rya t 11 i t, � l 4 , 11 1 :I 1 c t- { y Wld r',rd 1I Iii 4 ty a I,�1•' � t tia �Rs r Yl. , , I I 1 r," i' '� r t1•,� 1 iii C>r i(* 1 • { ,• I I I , its 4a r; I February 1993 • Tigard Center Cub Foods introduction . i Introdluc do 1 SCOPE OF THE REPOFI`a' .,.. P on-site - The purpose of this report is to provide an assessment of the expected on site and off site N. transportation impacts associated with the construction of a commercial center in Tigard, Oregon. The site is located on a vacant parcel that is generally bounded by SW 72nd Avenue on the east, the proposed SW Dartmouth Street on the south, Red Rock Creek on the west and the existing Tigard Cinemas on the north. Figure 1 identifies the existing road system within the area surrounding the proposed site. I discussed in this report include:Specific traffic related issues d pl Existing land use and traffic conditions in the project study area Trip characteristic estimates for full development of the site in accordance with the • ' proposed site plan. i • Access design and location analysis for the proposed development. d.: . The c ► sed development on 1994 p.m. peak hour operations at , , �, . 1'he traffic impact of the prof,a� op p p p 0. the key'intersections within the site vicinity and site driveways. The projection lof traffic volumes for roadways adjacent to the site for both 2015 traffic ..,,' conditions and those that can be expected with full buildout of the Tigard Triangle ' {"', area. � access provisions for the Cub ' . t ut tra.traffic volumes on the s v • ▪ 'The iixi act o�201.S �'nd`b�it do f p p Tigard Center. . . . { , } I • ,II PROJECT DESCRIPTION t } . rL{ 3 1 1 1 ai 1n a rox�imalltel I F. � t",.urrent site plans call for the construction construction of a cotrinmercial center coat n containing approximately y PII 156,250 gross square feet of leasable floor area. The anchor tenant will be a 79,455 square foot • Cub Foods grocery store.'A.,perimeter parcel immediately northwest of the proposed SW l2nd , Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection could potentially accommodate any niuwnber of retail use For purposes of this study, it has been assumed that this parcel would be developed with a . • •". 3, 00 square-foot fast-fo od restaurant and a13,40 0 s q tie-foot banp k wit l a dri ve-through, Initial c onstruction activitie s are expected to begin in 1993 with occu p anc y in 19 941 The proposed ' development site is currently vacant, 1 . } I I I r • I I s', I I KitteCsori tl Associu� tes, ift?r'1 I .....,.. ..._.._._ ....,.' � .� I , - Ise ♦, ` ' . ,;1 1 0'. .I f 1 • • • t' i .> ,...4 m ,I . i .. • (.il. SW HAINES RD. :�a • i 7,224% S1TF ,y„.Sre_ .;, t. ,. • I To S 4',I) W RAMP N Sl"; • • • • • , 1 SITE ICINITY . SURE'ALU INC, I"I f`i:� V w • } JANUARY S,. ,,.,� fi ,, 1 1 e61F041f i • ' ' s 'II It), r Pi , 1.✓.+ ,111 ._.....d.,�r..•u,..>...,.,..n• ,..w.,.......,.v.Jr F.,m..._.nt..� «..,..A....a«.r.. .0 i......V ..«.. u,,......w. J....,.w.,.•...r.w.....-,✓.W..w.•....,.0 �. .. ...k ..•_, e..,... ..1..._.1, n«_...a... ..a.v,.,., "..rt.�...a...r..w-•w,4 wa,w�ww4F ...,- .N.-V... ....u_..a. I, , • i i I I iil I I 1 �) i P, 1 If ,, ; f . L , • ,: : , , : li i f i I : . ..• , , : ::...:,.......,„,,..„:„.,,,,,,,,,,....,„....„.....,.....:.....,,,,,,,,,,. ,. :, i I, • ., , : . .. ,r 1 f .4 4,� .. . P yt(f .»,r 7 (w r ww.- ..7 r..w, f, .r. t GG 4 q iL ' L.+...,.,,n: ,:4 .....,...-n...m.. 1>.i...Clr..... 1 LIIBL , r f7 r ce ii Ewe..Mix ., f 1.,,L ( .. 1 ' • y-'*r "tt n 'Pt`-r wr I; . dJ l r Q1!(i; iIC4� t} M,g1,4� r-;y1•^p , r ta M'4r , 4, {I 1 . 4 r� '1.}+.11wtir! I ,.r ..,w' *r IK 3^itlil-rrar• rl i 'I>!r 11 i!t{1 LE :i I',,._, . u,.,..:mY l,,r N..,:a }' N`„`".w'.:.7' t*-1,,, 'p ' hq a 1,Y 1 gar)„r 7 .r,'i,.*. 4.4 ■p y}∎ 1Ni k r p• ' f la' i'Y, t �,, .Y, t 1. y`i t� x�"F;,,,,I,Y 1 s/, iy uAA } .fi b f r:r," ,,ir,i,,rf 't�,;,, '11\ d M ' '1Yi 1 tM f5� r' ° �` ��' rr 1' r s ,'JA7 1, ,JI ,p ° �'H .4, -It ''��t��'' 3 `'tr p . Nl: ^ ' .w. I .I„m,,,,,R i dyA,..''! 1., .. u"F'wKr ''.. ,, 4, . GGPP IIK a M et ' 1 R,1 tY? A" ' tii n r y ' i p r 11$ - , - 1 ■ * t r /f.i Y1 4' 7 tyy.V..p ,1 �?.a { 1 rcr G *•!'f.'4'. , I r y r t . Section 3 '' y ' r • y k• - r r ii p zl rI . 1y # lit I' s' � Corditions � ` ,•. . , Y 'I l r7 �' 5 1 w F , r , !k 11 • I fi;,. , t I t t ;1 ° , rN I I t r)» 1 t a�'�1 ri 1 -:I ri a 1 I ( t A w 1 G. rr r ,s,r,� y., o 1 9 I" v act 1 fr A 3 1{ r ,1 J `Ah j< .4. 1M1 ><,5r. .,{k..i';'Y,'�I�t 4ry;J .➢,r r/..A 1,.. �, , 1 1 'y. r n '", ,f.. •'i. .e •. t.141. . . • February 1993 • Tigard Center Crib Foods . Existing Conditions ? ' Existing Conditions SITE CONDITIONS AND ADJACENT LAND USES • The project site is vacant. Therefore, it does not generate significant volumes of traffic. The land area to the west of the site between SW 72nd Avenue and Highway 217 is vacant. The • Tigard Cinemas is located immediately to the north of the site. Further to the north, land along j . Highway 99W, where direct access to 99W exists, development consists primarily of retail •. I ,,. commercial land uses. Where no direct access is available, such as in the vicinity of SW 72nd Avenue, the commercial uses are less intense (e.g., rental agencies, mini-warehousing). l:m- ', mediately east of the site,between SW 72nd Avenue and Interstate 5 (1-5),land uses are primarily low density residential, In the vicinity of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Hampton Street there is a • . concentration of office buildings and institutional uses. •, g • f STUDY AREA • The study area was defined as the site access drives, SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Avenue '` I • and the nearest existing or planned signalized intersections in each of the cardinal directions: • (a) SW Dartmouth Street - SW 78th Avenue/Highway 99W F (b) SW 72nd Avenue/SW Hampton Street � • (c) SW 72nd Avenue/Highway 99W TRANSPORTATION AOLI.1 ES ; The primary roadways providing access to the general area of the site include.Highway 99W, 1 Highway 217 and Interstate 5 (I-5) which form.the three sides of the "Tigard Triangle" (hereafter , referred to as the "Triangle"). This development will draw its primary access from then stem of g P P y y , secondary roadways connected to these regional facilities--SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street (See Figure l), SW 72nd Avenue is classified as a major collector and currently consists of a two-lane cross-see- • , ' tiorn with one travel lane in each direction, SW 72nd Avenue provides direct access to Highway ; 217 via a partial cloverleaf interchange at the southern edge of the Triangle,,At the northern edge of the Triangle, access from SW 72nd Avenue to Highway 99W is indirect, via Villa Ridge, frontage road on the south side of Highway 99W. No on-street parking can be accommodated or Is allowed on SW 72nd Avenue, and the posted speed is 30 mph,' • SW Dartmouth Street is a proposed,minor collector which will eventually connect the ramps,to and from southbound 1.5 to Highway 99W directly at the existing SW 78th Avenue/Highway 99W intersection. KtttPCsoh.&Associates',j , .,, • • ,. • d• • ., . , •' • 1, ,,•.•• r . • r W r•' W- ■ 1. February 1993 i. 1,, Tigard Center Cub Foods Fxcstin ; PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACTIVITY " . Field observations at the proposed site vicinity during the p.m peak hour showed very'little . pedestrian or bicycle activity at the study area. It is expected that this development will have a , minimal impact on these travel modes. TRANSIT FACILITIES •4 Tri-Met provides fixed route transit service on two routes at the periphery of the study area. Route .' • , 12, "Barbur Boulevard" operates on Highway 99W at the northern edge of the Triangle. Route w 78, "Beaverton-Lake Oswego" operates within the Triangle on SW 72nd Avenue between �� Highway 217 and SW Hampton. Street, on SW Hampton Street between SW 72nd Avenue and �• .r! ')< SW 68th Parkway, and on SW 68th Parkway between SW Hampton Street and SW Atlanta. , _w Route #12, "Burbur Blvd." operates regularly scheduled, all-day service between King City and :. • Downtown Portland via Tigard Transit Center,Barbur Transit r. ;nter, and the Burlingame Transit ' ` Center. Peak-hour extensions of this service serve the City therwood on the south-west end of the route. During the a.m.peak period(7:00-9:00), service w0 provided from the Tigard Transit Center at headways which vary from 4 to 15 minutes. During the p.m. peak period.(4:00 6:00), 1,_1 service is provided both on a local basis and an express basis between Downtown Portland and the Burbur Transit Center, which results in a combined headway which varies between 3 minutes , and 15i minutes. Transit service at this level is consider to be some of the best capable of being b provided with fixed route bus service in a mixed traffic right-of-way. . Route #78, "Beaverton-Lake Oswego" operates regularly scheduled, all-day service between the ' Beaverton Transit Center and the Lake Oswego Transit Center via Tigard Transit`Center. This . , route travels through the existing concentration of office employment within the southern portion r't of the Triangle. During the a.m. peak period (7:00 - 9:00), service is provided from the Tigard 1 ITransit Center at headways which vary from. 19 to 33 minutes. During the p.m. peak period(4:00 • . f 6:00), service is provided with a headway which varies between 20.minutes and 34 minutes, These headways are typical of suburban feeder transit routes. Depending on the trade-offs between additional route distance and potential for additional ridership, this route could poten- tially be diverted further north on SW 72nd to the proposed Dartmouth Street to serve this and ,r,. other proposed developments in the ''heart" of the Triangle. , 'Tf'1 AF FNC VOLUMES AND PEAK HOUR OPERATIONS ° Since the weekday p,m, peak hour is the time period when the greatest total traffic demands are • placed r,N the surrounding street system, this was the time period that was used in all subsequent . analyse;). Experience has shown that while retail cent:r traffic by itself may be as mach as 50 percent heavier later in the evening or on weekends, the combination of normal and retail center ,,., , generated traffic is typically at its m.axirnurn during the weekday evening peak hoar period, Existing weekday p.m. pe ak ho ur traffic volumes were counted at the following locations: , , 4, 1 1+ SW 78th Avenue (Future Dartmouth St,)/Highwiity 99W . 2, SW`72nd Avenue/SW Hampton Street 1 ' _., •• , I Irr.4niw•�wuirar�+•o+1nI:M � I ' Kjtte1son &Associates', t►ic{ • 1 r cF� -• ..,. ,wr...,,„.,... .. .. -. .., ......... ........•r .... ,.r.. .•-....,.. .,..,.. .,..,... ... .......•....,,>m...,...._.,,.+mx.w i i....u..x4 a,.,,,.•.M.« .., ,..n -.,... ........-.... .. .. ,........,..a...a..+..,.,• _r. ..u-....ynrswana,,,;' N February 199,E - : T1gard Center Cub Foods Existing Conditions 3. SW 72nd Avenue north of the propoSed SW Dartmouth Street alignment These manual traffic counts were conducted between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. during Enid=weekdays in January 1993 These two-hour observations revealed that the weekd peak hour occurs from.4:30-5:30 p.m, The existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure 2. Current Levels of Service All Level of Service (LOS) analyses described in this report were performed in accordance with . the procedures described in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual A description of the LOS Concept and the criteria which determine LOS is provided in Appendix A. Copies of the analysis forms are available on request. In order to assure that this analysis is based upon worst-case conditions, the peak 15 minute period flow rate during the evening P eak hour was used in the evaluation of all intersection levels of service. Thus,the a,tialysis reflects conditions that are only likely to occur for 15 minutes out of each average weekday. For the remainder of each weekday and throughout the weekends, traffic conditions within the study impact area are likely to be better than that described in this report. Table 1 identifies the results of the LOS calculations for 1 lations for exlsttng conditions at the study area. intersections. As shown in the table, all signalized study area intersections are operating at an acceptable level of service (LOS "B"). f Table 1 Existing P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Signalized_... .:. ignalized • Intersection ( • tuna • Delay V/C LOS Reserve LOS Capacity n4.4 „ 1,"78th Avenue/Highway 99W 0,81 B �,' r `� 2,72hd Avenue/Hampton Street 8.59 G i* ts'ittelsori d4 Ass ociates' hie, 10, I. L5%0 '.y. tin 4s r ;' • 110/ ti ' SW HAINES RD. a 6\ SITE ti , . ! ��� • �,..w SW 1-IAMPTON ST a .w, rN .2tl ff.) . 4 t le //// 1 , , N tl TRAFFIC VOLUMES LIMES , 1 I I SUPEF-RV ►EIER . ; . K 2 ., .., 1 JANUARY ig93 If w � C i February 1993 l Tigard Center Cub Foods Existing Conditions FUNDED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS The following are the known.,funded transportation improvements within the Triangle which are .. expected to influence future traffic patterns, namely: 1. Dartmouth Street • 4 ;a As discussed previously, Dartmouth.Street will connect the 1-5 southbound on-off , ramps to Highway 99W. Initially, Dartmouth Street will be constructed with a three-lane cross-section consisting of one travel lane in each direction and a center • - left-turn lane. The ultimate cross-section of this facility adjacent to the site will be reviewed later in this report based on the predicted 2015 and Triangle Build- , w, Out traffic volumes. u 1. SW 72nd Avenue/Highway 99W Intersection The existing indirect connection between SW 72nd Avenue and Highway 99W is programmed to be replaced with an at-grade si nalized intersection. The northern. . , leg of this intersection will replace the existing signalized access for Fred Meyer to Highway 99W. ,. These improvements and the assumed intersection lane configurations and controls are illustrated Ej • in Figure 3, a : I [ . w 3 i Kittelson&A'sociates, Inc. , r:; I f . . I J �.� _. � .,.� ....,.. _...�N.._�err+...,.r..._......n.w.w.._.�._..«. _......sr.-..�..in...,..=.n�rr..u..r.y.v......_.L. .r...F.4:.� Jn.��41A.._.s..r.....LJ.L«_...-......+....u........1.........w....u..+_.�r.-... v.r A..._. _,.. �. .� I= .u_..__ �v.N.1s..- ✓n NU.rxLU�.J.a.l� n..«Y...-«A..t+ 1 , fi 1 'i ),\''';•.'. , 0 i. °I\it if-a- 7/4 t plk 1%"14 k •, /1 If, \t 1 I 0 . r (INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT) _ , • SW HAINES R D. 99 0r ,SITE J vTy !� STREET) ST, I, e Lii 1 V I l'i 1.. !� r, , i e'� i, A MPT©N ST. � , . 1 1 S '`..- 1 I LEGEN1 T RAFFIC SIGNAL !; 6 tir °` '` TCp SIGN I i` (FUNDED IMPROVEMENT) 1 , IUNIE IMPROVEMENTS ANC , l ' I ASSUMED LANE CONFIGURATION -,r,� I 1 • � SUPERVALU INC. . ..�FIGUaE�I� IIIWA ,s' 1 CUB JGAF . CENTER I% l' • JANUARY . 88'1 F006+. iferm; , , m_ .. ,, ,. .._«. �:•., « �� •:_a..,,<� w,. .yam' . 7 i , , if • , , i r I 1 , , ' i I I , ` t' r' n' 1 "9 t ! I f 75 1 r l,' I .t± 1 t 7 p 1' , 't' '4 M •I I j f P t ` i , I I U' - r ''',"':,1 rr,,.. I j,..n I1 Ill" r � f , , . r.N • ' 5 +{ �' !r r rr r+r,t " ,.,-w.0 .»;,"-`,"'{r'""'":',,"":','":„"'','",,',iL+ i ,1 ' i °',t A J,«—r,'„«y�+r r:'.+aw. ',-1 f,.L.w... ...0 + k` y-, , ,, w of l p,] J4 7 M h hS\\\\ tS CrW f't h� r 11 + i MJk Y+Rw .e.! ,+Ify4,�s,+7',1 m4't r�a��Fyn' �P' cv i' • � � �c+�' A+I�iµXr;" � k.' :.iY:srr `w.a+'r..,4.,...nA 4::,,f k �d' 4t• ' 't t 4r .''''' h ir4 ')t ,, I I „ ✓i r°4i1,f i A«tir• 4� t ,A Y "i A 1 1 r c 73. .. q _,+)7. rJ rlt n'A�tTA ,4, .F 6 4 s Y''��'5a f I ti + :f r 7 A+, }(a1 t '' , ikr t'r, t "j 1 rfv'I i%n `r is L� lc St.• 1 .I '� A, ,y I rV! '.g7,*fri�4!-d �` �L.�'+V, ttt i rrtr , Af ,.+w � � .,Yf .j„•4„ f +o�.f'•^litl�,r. .� � :Y• j pp Vi ,p 1 I f+ J 1 _ Y I Y,++ tt .I 1 i'1E s, t k y ti t, t {.V.:,''., A ', air h + .ri" ,,} , 11rl I•r�xi + A,•, _ �. .._;- .,. I",y,:f{l+rl :7,,rfr fN 9 , +,I�r, -•, ;, fa°'r ♦ ', refnY�rrwte k 4 I 1994 Trathc � � � �YrC t l• I + r. I +j , ' y Jiy' 7i+{I,V r r r„j„S'�r.? ihl}1 I,a 1 •{y+,hn r . �r+ k y" i 7A� F�A ls Aip Ar S.•{° . ••. fl ,fb{N i ( '4.`I.t, ' , , I J _, ° T i i+ 1 fit,�, rri i r 1'+ ' „ ` r i � 1 dI fir YI N �1� . '' �tll y ,� .t .l 1 I 1 (I 1 , t, 1 r ti, + ff" „ i ■ i , A n • T February 1993 , ...: Tigard Center C ub Foods Traffic Impact Analysis . `Traffi M1 . c Impact Analysis 1 The evening wekda y peak hour impact of traffic generated by the e ro p bsed development was analyzed as follows: • The placement and size of the';proposed retail center were confirmed. • The total number of future evening peak hour trips, both in and out of the proposed • development were estimated for the current development plans for the site. 'l • Background traffic volumes on each key road Isegment within the study area were a, • estimated based on observed 1993 weekday evening peak hour conditions, traffic diversions based on the planned transportation improvements previously cited and the • pattern of traffic volumes developed from the July 1988 "Triangle Area Traffic Circulation Study prepar ed by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). , ' • The regional market area relative to major feeder highways was'exami,ned to obtain an estimate of trip distribution patterns within the study area. . . .. Site-generated traffic predicted for the weekday penn. peak hour was assigned to the p '. , roadway network and added to background traffic volumes, developed for 1994 conditions Traffic demands on each roadway facility were analyzed to identify any capacity or level of service deficiencies under projected 1994 conditions. A detailed discussion of this methodology and the analysis results is contained in the remainder ' of this report ' i i I Y ' , DEVELOPMENT PLANS 1 site plans call for commercial center containing approximately Current site plan r the construction of a cornme� " g app ely , 156,250 gross square feet of leasable floor area. The anchor tenant will be a 79,455 square foot Cub grocery .' , Foods rocery store" A perimeter parcel immediately northwest of the proposed SW '72nd � ; • • Avenue/SW Dartmouth S treet intersection could potentially accommodate any number of retail uses. For pus . -� purposes of this study, it has been assumed that this parcel would be developed with a . square-foot fast-food restaurant and g . ,6� � � square-foot h Initial e; 3 0 s� d a 3,400 square foot 1�ank with a drive-throw , construction activities are expected to begin in 1993 1993 with occupancy in 1994. The proposed development site is currently vacant public access drives and one service drive are proposed for the p � ed merit. The' . . Two p connect t development. �. Tw p o5 e devel� access drive locations are shown in Figure 4. The access drives o o SW 72nd Avenue on . , the east side of the site and to SW Dartmouth Street on the south side of the site, The driveways ' h .lane cross-section with two lanes in outbound direction single i. . Will consist of a tlYrce' action and a sin inbound lane. A one way inbound servic e drib eway fom SW 72nd Av enue is proposed at the northern - perimeter of the situ , . ktt elsar Associates;, Inc, 15 , • 11114414 p.1.4 ,14ur1.I w+Kr Vy1,�21�I•;;iMm Part' 11+CMb,)11� p_ Y A F P r *Town• .h . _ llr.wW MKI a Wow.. heinegi.e n11MaaY.'+rrr ll1lilfi,� k' ;111:1:,'' I Ilfd) ' • ril)I1! ,v .I l li::::u ri l.1;j' l l% !,1 h u�aa..' 1,1-• I) " �.1; :NU I,I 1f► 11 Itjfl(111,'1 ag li)rll} s:v�.—a L-AYEeME- WAREMART POOPS 1 w.aeS nm w...a.11 t rl �I:4 4 CJB FOODS—SITE PLAN tf CITY OF T OARD..OREGON It as a i February 1993 . , Tigard Center Cab Fo ods , Traffic Impact Analysis d---, of rE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ",:. 'Current site plans call for the'construction,of a commercial center containing approximately pproximately , � 156,250 gross square feet of leasable floor, area with a fast-food restaurant, assumed to be 3,600 • -• square feet in size, and a drive-in bank, assumed to be 3,400 square feet in size (the average size , for these uses in Trip Generation) The major tenants will include a Cub Foods grocery store and two other complimentary retail 1 ' . I uses. The other retail space will house supporting retail activities (e.g,., dry cleaners,'card/statio- nery store, video,rental outlet, etc.). These uses are typical of those found in a community commercial center. ]Estimates'of total daily and p.m. peak hour driveway volumes for the proposed retail center and ,�' associated uses were''developed from empirical observations at many similar-sized commercial centers located throughout the United States. These empirical observations are summarized in a standard reference manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, i Analysis of Shopping Trip Types Ins evaluating the traffic impacts of the proposed,development on the surrounding street system, _, it is important to realize that for commercial developments, there are different types of vehicle trips, and that each type has a different effect on the street system. ( enerally, there are four basic; types of trips associated with any retail/commercial development: 1. Drop-in Trips — These retail trips already exist on the roadways that provide • •9 primary access to the new retail center and are being made for some purpose other ' ' than shopping at the proposed commercial center (for example, home-to-work). Drop-in trips do not result in any increase in background traffic volumes within: • . �.,. r . y the study area In fact, the only impact of these drop-irk trips occurs at the site driveway(s), where they become turning movements into and out of the proposed retail center instead of through movements, There,fore, drop-in trips have no additional effect on the road system beyond the development's driveways, , ; 2. Diverted Trips'--These shopping trips are currently being drawn to other cornmer ° lcial activities that compete with the proposed retail center, 'lout are redirected to the new store when it opens. This redirection usually occurs because of an � �npio ve ment in shopping corveiiierce rand proximity for the affe ct ed drivers, � Diverted trips will result in an increase in traffic volumes within the immediate the ,Site` but result in in traffic volumes at other " vicinity of th wilt, also resin adecrease i locations area e the used • within the are (i ei r. to shop).in,areas.where . . y op). Therei'ore, this hcomponent of the total generated demand eau ses no change i n the total number � ..w. of vehicle trips within the area, even though it may add to the number of trips within the , of the e,' Ch' �ediate vicinity e sit �Another side benefit is that by diverting, �� � � �� ��� � �� these trips often cause a net reduction in total vehicle miles traveled on the area-wide transportation System, This is a'common sense observation, since it is 1 difficult to i �.agine that iaany'drivers would divert to a new retail center in order 1 1 . to travel a greater distance than they did previously. 3, Captured Tripe- In the absence of the prolpose&retail center, these vehicle trips • would be made by the adjoining residences„ neighborhoods; and businesses to • more distant centers requiring 1 it Ce�., t, , arterials � ��, �mr t ,eta' r on major a and'highwnysuch � , Kitteison &Associates Inc, ��, � 17 ,,, • r , , . A, i.,: .° iI February 1993 Tigard Center Cub Foods Traffic Impact Analysis • , as Highway 99W, 1-5 and Highway 217. But because of the presence of the proposed retail center,these vehicle trips are captured and thereby prevented from traveling ion the nearby arterial system. As an example, persons living in any ' residential,uses proposed within the Triangle will be able to make at least some , of their shopping, trips by.walking mode rather than by vehicle. Similarly, „._ residents of residential units developed farther away from the proposed site but still within the Triangle will be able to ,satisfy their needs for retail goods by • '''. L' ' ' shopping.at the proposed Cub Tigard Center'and thereby not travelling on . ' e' a reduction in the. � ��'� Highway 99W to reach other shopping areas. The net effect is r t i n it h " , • • amount of traffic on the immediately adjoining arterial street system that offsets, some additional traffic brought into the immediate area ' to so degree,,the the addition traffic t through the ' diverted trips described above, r • r ` � 4.,NewTrips-These retail trips would not have'been made without the existence of the proposed retail center. Therefore, this is the only trip type that results in an ' increase zn the total numb er of vehicle trips made within in the area. These are als o r . � � the only vehicle� trips that represent, additional vehicle miles of travel on the area-wide trans portation stem. . �°� •, • • Although traffic engineers have long recognized the existence of these four different types of • ' ' retail trips, until recently very little research.has been conducted to determine what proportion of a the total retail center-generated traffic demand can be attributed to each of these trip types, The Institute of Transportation Engineers has published��a summary of trip type investigations con- ducted across the United States that is useful to this analysis. ' According to ITE Trip Generation, the proportion of p.m, peak hour trips generated by a retail ,: center that are pass-by o r dro -za can b e related. to either the center's size or the average dail Y . : i ,traffic volume on the roadways adjacent to the centers in the case of the Cub Tigard Center,,it has been assumed that pass-by y tri s will be�.drawn to the center from Highway 99W. Based on ' P y P i the average daily volume of traffic on Highway 99W, the Cub Tigard Center can be expected to exhibit a'pass-by or drop-in trip percentage of approximately 40% during the p.m. speak hour, However; according to the trip distribution assumptions made for this study, approximately 50% of the Cub Tigard Center traffic will be utilizing Highway 99W to approach the study area, ]Hence,; only 50% of the projected 40% pass-by trips will actually be "available" to the site resulting in an overall pass-by trip percentage of 20%. •Tpby�trzps w uld dep rt fro n their exsst r r oute on 1 g hway 99W nd use 72nd Avenue or Dartmouth Street to reach the site. From the p er s p ective of the traffic volumes Predicted for the streets adjacent to the sites these trips wou also be in addition to expected �g nd traffics "�.certt t � trips ld �� - � �ioti background • volumes.The remaining 80 percent are ass unted to be representative of new trips and trips diverted from other areas to the study area r ' 1 These assumptions are considered conservative, and it is likely the actual traffic'impacts of the , , proposed retail center will be p trip 1 even less than indicated within the remainder of this report. ' , ' 1 Based on the information described above, the trip generation characteristics shown in Table 2 . were estimated f "id, with for• 'we' estimated �btiz out of the site a.n,a.ccord�.tace the proposed site plan an.�part, peak hour basis, kitteiscon&Associates, The, ; ' 18 . l • • r Februaty 199 Tigard rd Center Cu Foods b ads Traffic Impact Analysis , Table 2 Trip Generation • , Peak Hour Trips ...; Size ITS: Lard Use (S•F.GLA) Code Daily Total Inbound Outbound Gross Trips Shopping Center 156,250 820 9,295 870 435 435 . Fast food Restaurant 3,600 834 2,275 130 70 60 Drive-in Bank 3,400 912 960 150 70 80 TOTAL 163,250 12,530 1,150 575 575 • " Pass-By Trips (20%) -,220 -110 W w n. r .. .», • Net Trips TRIP DISTRIBUTION/ASSIGNMENT The distribution of site-generated g eieratec rri s onto t he roadway system within the study impact area was . estimated through examination of the anticipated market area relative to the existing street circulation system, a review of trip distribution estimates prepared for other nearby development , proposals, and a review of the existing traffic volumes and circulation patterns, As a result of these analyses, the estimated trip distribution pattern shown in Figure 5 was prepared. ° All pass-by or drop-in trips were assumed to come from Highway 99W. The distribution of these ' , � Y trips was taken directly from the existing east-west split of.traffic on Highway 99W. BAcKGRoUND vacuum DEVELOPMENT The proposed development is the first major retail commercial development within the interior of the Triangle: Simultaneously with development of this site, the funded transportation im- proveme cur.,These new facilities will promote a shift in existing travel,patterns within nts will oc y ' s tale Triangle. There is expected to be.no significant benefit to travellers with origin and • destinations outside of the Triangle and as such, these new facilities are not expected to attract „ significant�amounts of external trips through the Triangle,angle, The primary shifts of travel patterns n. included in the development ment of the 1994 background volumes are: Traffic Attracted to Dartmouth • portion the which' � � � � � � � � �'hraffie generated in the southern ortrr�n'oftih Triangle w currently uses 72nd Avenue'and Hunziker to reach ch destinations southeast of the Triangle is expected to be attracted to Dartmouth, This traffic would use Highway 99W;in combination with Dartmouth to reach the desired destination, Similarly, some traffic entering Xrttels clrt &'Associates, trtc, I as , • n' , J ,, 70...00.000.000....................00.0.0.° n 4,0,401(72 0,44000°A; k . . • 9 1 ,, . , u5d O 307 SW HalN s RD. r � u 0i illr 0_,\ SIT E 1 'i:),`04'''' ■ c Q'r"' 4, al xy ,,. —1 - • n' N. • y /1/,c> Z 3 0% 7.-) 5W`M,4MPT"ON ST. • i • 1 • r TRIP DISTRIBUTIO U� v�� IN riGUr E• ;��. CUB TIGAR cENI JANUARY",_15193 h I 8 1F 05 a +' • 0 rr� N O 15'---► '35 / 3) 40 or 15 • 16". 'N1?),..1' tr) 1\ t P .. (00N ,w., C , c , \ bP 1 .........., , .... • u U Ao 41g, . t'�$()p4► .� r� b,,°' \, � 'b. • • SW�. S HAINES RD. 7 1 ' . , • , ,••• , ' 1 , * . . . , 1 . ,p� 0 .R �. -.0.-- .0 .4%,,,,,,,..j.... . J 21 1.,,,i t19 i SW HAMPTON ST. 70+--h 44....110 N c,1 zd , t iv, i 1 . 1. H- 1 , 1 1 9 9"'Y" P.A 4 JI P it A K iltOUR . i FIGURE <,...- SUPEI VALU, INC, CUtE3 TIGARD CENT , 1 • . 88 1 F006 �, •h Februa 1993 ' . .� Trgard Center Cub Foods Traffic Impact Analysis I the Triangle from southbound 1-5 which has destinations with primary access to .I W . 1 72nd Avenue will use Dartmouth to reach that street, As well, some of the traffic 1 . • generated north of the proposed Dartmouth alignment will divert from Highway 99W to Dartmouth between the'origin and the 78th-Dartmouth/Highway 99W t intersection. 1 Traffic Attracted to Improved 72nd Avenue . . i , A portion of the traffic currently using the,68th Avenue corridor to travel between . the northern portion. of the Triangle and south of Highway 2 17 can be expected p ected to divert with the improved connection between,72nd Avenue and Highway 99W. ' . reflect these traffic diversions. These diversions were estimated The volumes shown in Figure 6 r e fl C• • „w. , . by preparing a traffic assignment model of the Triangle based on the land use'descriptions I provided the 1988 study and tri p generation characteristics from 1TE Tri p Generation. , This model calibrated to existing m. peak hour ground counts. . lWasc• I ' . L. INTF.FISECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE „, I Using the estimated trip distribution pattern shown in Figure 5 and the existing pattern of travel on Highway 99W (for the pass-by trips), the traffic anticipated to be generated by the proposed development during weekday evening peak hours (both new and pass-by trips) was assigned to ' the street system within the study area. The assignment of this site-generated traffic to specific road segments and intersections within the study area is shown in Figure 7. Figure 8 illustrates projected total traffic volumes at all key intersections within the study area, • ' 1 under 1994 weekday evening peak hour conditions, with full development of the site. For purposes of the level of service analysis, it has been assumed that newly-formed intersection I of SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street will be controlled initially utilizing four-way stop , ' control, It has also been assumed that, as part of the d.evelop;:ant, a separate left-turn lane would be constructed on SW 72nd Avenue to serve the primary site access driveway. i • Table 3 summarizes the results of the intersection LOS analyses under 1994 background and 1994 ' with project conditions. With the assumed control measures at SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street, all of the study intersections are expected to exhibit acceptable LOS during the'p.m. peak hour with development of the project. . TRAFFIC SIO NAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 1 . As a art of this analysis, a special investigation was conducted to evaluate the need for installing ' � ... p � Y p g Avenue/SW . assumed w b ' traffic signals at the SW 72nd .Aven>rte �artii�outh Street intersection instead of the assn four- stop control. The Minimum Vehicular Volume Warrant (Warrant, 1 as described in �!ay pI it IReference 5)'and the Interruption of Continuous Flow Warrant(Warrant 2) are both based on the eighth.- highest hour conditions, The Peak 13our Volume Warrant(Warrant 11) was also examined, ,, • alent to ui For the purposes'of this )analysis, it is assumed that the eighth highest hour is e q v' a` ' approximately 70 percent of the peak hour. Additionally,only half of the minor street's projected I I Iittelsch &Associates, Mc.l 1 • i • /7/.----- n 1 130 • 130.-14 75 ► 60 , a 7S l' A,6 Kt I, - 1 �5 I • ♦C) LtP y s 1. Sal HAINES RD6 G, j I ,0 SITE% �. ST, '' —. '1 -.7). 4 1 l,. a fl 0 ft IREPP . I SW d ,...,.., .,, --,,,, . • n 195.1 k. i ds fi' r. 1 ci ., i SITE GENERATED ' i I 1 SUPERVAL.U, INC. FIGURE �/ ), , I I CUB / I CE I\11. 13 JA+ UAR' .199 : I I,' • rn I • • . 0--;::7"-'''''.\\ (...--- • • u,. .'.J._..1.,......a...................,.,a..,.....««,a�aas�..l n».=A..d_.........r...._.-._...�.-......tY....aJi.. ..WG.....i..,...r.....91w.....«__..-r...-.+......:.w!{u...N.e..t..lY.:.n..uu...L......u..l._,r.�.i�... .u. a. .W.>p. .ta.1Y wue w d j 130' [ 1 p. 130 15.0011 /"L-80 .1, 9 0.- I�110 !� � oi 110- c1$ , \ . °‘ lk,:4).4° It...b\C116,0 o tr) .°i f ifi , " .A� to)1.iy0 ry «r c5 hOr.N . .....� 95 .. . it i . • .h• 14 .x► � a a „L r SW HA,1NES RD. I, a. .- o SITE .4444 • 1 7 Lk I /� 'i 4 '/I( SIT , , rk" '16* 1 '4 I ' . . M C I ' V 1 10-.•w110 zo 1 rr I • • 7 •. � 1 ' TRAFFIC , • A\SUPERVALU INC„ U� � D N'TEi I �k�NUA .,, 1: 9.3. 1 r00 b 881 Fl , ' • , N h L 4.] y' February 1993 ' Tigard Center Cub Foods Traffic Impact Analysis i Table 3 . Future Peak Hour Level of Service 1994 Without Project 1994 With Project '8 I Signalized - Intersection Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS ' .• [, 1. 78th-Dartmouth/Hwy 99W 16.6 0.84 C 25.7 0.94 D 2, 72nd/Hampton St. 15.0 0,51 C 15.0 0.60 C • 3. 72nd/Hwy 99W 20.8 0.82 C 24.5 0.84 C 1994 Without Project 1994 With Project Four-Way Stop , Controlled Intersections Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS ,? 4. 72nd/Dartmouth 3 0.31 A 8 0.54 B ,__ .. _:_.___ - 1994 Without Project 94 With . Two-Way Stop ., Controlled intersections Reserve LOS Reserve LOS �.._.__.. Capacity apacity 5. Cub Tigard Center Access to 72nd !� 269 C 6, Cub Tigard Center Access to Dartmouth ,\ 354 8 • right-turn volume is included for warrant evaluation purposes, because right turning vehicles would likely benefit very little from a traffic signal,likely y g It is important to recognize that these Warrants are necessary, but not by themselves sufficient ' ( I justification for the installation of a signal,, For example, the warrants evaluated above take into . account traffic volumes on all major and minor street approaches, but do not explicitly account for driver delay, directional distribution of the main street traffic, or the proportion of side street vehicles making right turns instead of left turns, Other system,wide considerations, such as the effect on capacity and levels of service, should also be taken into account, In many instances, unsignalized intersections meeting one or more of these warrants continue to operate very 1 l �y' traffic satisfactorily and. W1 era than would occur if ff1�, . . . y n , with even less total d uld a signal were installed, o , Thus, professional judgement should be used in assessing the need for a traffic signal even after 11 one or more of the above-identified warrants are satisfied. P n The results of the traffic signal warrant analysis are shown in Table 4, Under 1994 projected conditions with the project,the SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection does nee the not meet zatior , However, based on a straightline any of the warrants tested for signali - � projection of background traffic growth a t this intersection, Warrant #11 is, estimated to met in 1995. , Continuing'the same growth trend, Warrants#1 &#11 would be met in 2000, Warrants 1, 2,,and , �, 1l are pr`oj�:cted to be met in 2003r I 1�'cttelsr�rt&a�.ssaecct,tes 1`rtc, ° • February 1993 r I I . Tigard Center Cube Foods Traffic Impact� � t Anal3 scs • Table 4 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Intersection: SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street :,. Warrant Met? I r ar Condition Warrant Warrant Warrant Over r , #t — #2 #11 An(a) f I r 1994 With Cub Tigard Center NO NO NO NO (: 1 995 With Cub Ti and Center NO NO YES NO k. g • 2000 With Cub Tigard Center YES NO YES YES 2003 With Cub Tigard Center YES YES YES YES (a)A"YES"in this column suggests that if projected volumes occur,signal installation should be strongly considered n r , These estimates only provide and indication of when operational problems at the intersection may begin to appear, and should not be used to determine when a signal will be required: Field observations of the intersection's operational characteristics and actual volume rneasurements should.be conducted at this location before any decision to install a signal is made. r • I ' INTERNAL CIRCULATION The key issues addressed in this report with respect to internal circulation for the proposed ° development include the following: I , • The major access driveways should provide clear and unobstructed access throats with ,.I sufficient depth to ensure that parking/exiting maneuvers Will not create significant conflicts with drivers entering or exiting the site • The interaction between customers of the commercial center and delivery or service vehicles should be reduced as much as posible, The number of driveways provided to the si,e are adequate uate to disperse the site ener d ' y l' � p � ated traffic such that substantial congestion is not likely to occur at any one driveway, el t Iccn Based on a review of the current site plan, it is concludf.id that the proposed development adequately addresses each of the issues 1 " The two primary nary access drives have m o re than sufficient throat depth to accommodate predicted l traffic volumes, The internal roadway system of the development, with a one-v.'ay.. inbound service drivewa y at the northern boundary of the site has been designed such that, with the exception of the perimeter retail parcels, all service/delivery vehicles will use the service driveway on SW 72nd Avenue, Itte1so/i& K AISOCiateS, • • • 1 February 1 99.3 w ) y Tigard Center Cub Foods Traffic Impact Analysis a' It. Therefore, the interaction between customers of the I commercial center and service/delivery . vehicles will be minimal.' The o erational analysis indicates t ha t a n adequate level o f service ce will' be provided at all of the . :. proposed site driveways'. Further, several alternate ingress and egress routes are available, which r will minimise the potential for congestion to develop at any single driveway. Considering these .. • . factors it is concluded that the number of driveways provided to the site will be adequate to ensure that substantial congestion will not occur at any single driveway location, • +fi ACCESS CONSIDERATIONS k,• i Sight Distance Existing sight distance at the proposed access locations on SW 72nd Avenue is in excess of the ' y required 350 feet in each direction. A review of the planned horizontal and vertical alignment of , . SW Dartmouth Street indicates that the required ' sight distance of 350 feet'inboth directions will � g, - ," ." i be provided at the proposed. SW Dartmouth access location. • P Left-Turn Storage 1 'There are two ,locations where available left-turn storage is somewhat limited: the inbound ' . left-turn movement into the site access drive on SW 72nd Avenue, and the southbound left-turn r movement at the SW 72nd'Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street'intersection, Therefore, the left-turn ' .., storage analysis has focused on these locations ' Given the predicted total 1994 p,m, peak hour traffic volumes, a PP roximatelY y 50 feet of stora g e 9 distance is required for both the'northbound,. left-turn movement into the site driveway and the southbound left turn movement at the SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection. A , . . review of the proposed site plan indicates that these intersections will be separated by approxi- ' ; . mutely 250 feet. "Therefore, it is concluded that adequate left-turn storage distance will be available under predicted 1994 , peak hour conditions: , , ' '• • P,m .• ••• I In a previous discussion it was shown that a traffic signal will lik'ciy be required at the SW 72nd I. Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection at some time lri the -future, At such a time when a , ' detailed warrant analysis indicates a need for a signal, the resulting southbound SW 72nd Avenue , . [._, • is likely to increase, begin to interfere'with the left turn storage requirement ' y , and may g nt4 rfere' ,operation of the northbound left turn movement at the SW 72nd Avenue site access. The specific treatment for this condition should be determined in the future when detailed field observations and I • . operational analyses can be conducte d w i th real-world data, Possible treatments for thi s condition ition may include, , , 1 , ,, / (a) Expanding the right-of-wa.� on SW 72nd Avenue'between the site i ccess and I, Dartmouth Street by 12 feet to provide side-by-side left turn lanes i, Y' (b) Restriction of access at this location to right-in/right-out only. This alternative is p accessibility of th ' less desirable with respect to the accessibility e center but,does not require further widening of SW 72nd Avenue (c)rRelocating the SW 72nd access drive further'to the north . r , Kitte1son C Associates, Inca 7 , • r , I' • • .4..., ,x-r,+*++'va..�.+;i.,. ,.. v..{\..rA.�«,��. �„„s ... .._.„.,sx„.,. .,,..w.r.w ,.�.x,w.,u.u..w„,xaau-+ruwa..L+u'4.WwYprr.,u.F,,'✓.wi'J.I.uIA«,u,�'u7:'n..Ww,+„H+„>.u..Mw::{WlUttafr:'.., III 1 I. r I ,I 1 M. I 4 ! S . y t � Y l ; 1 { I I '1 , ' ' 11,, I „ . Le QQ 1 r i'•-.'t I . 1 f`^ t IL1.t I • ��y 7T ' ts'^ 4 Iry na .F it t t l'i s x 4 , , w • 1 u,; ' r, 41 y I' . ,l r a' ,. r � ,I 1 . . t �h ni ” .i 1 ,,I�pt y ,,.w4M a,„.r..I M»' «..l�L,.,i.,x ,1.,. '«�� 1,.....r,1, L„4.,:..74+,,,d..55LS' 1 SnwY r""'E2+ ,----.:,,,t1,•--•, „ s y t��„I '",i Ia,,: r1 ,,,',,,,,;4':,,,,,I • ,a �q�r �t l,. ! + ? J aI •iM �r�.:>, �,r �'1 M'i{I lX 7Jy4r l4, `l 4, 4 1el 4, a'• 1 • { ■ r,k, •{Y • t 1,,LL: 1,1r1 Ye t4I 7I! r 15•. , 1 NI �5�1 N�,„ '' i+r 514{ 1..-rYy1 �Gi 3.1 � t� t 44, 7. d r x 11 1 r 4�,„1:'',,•,;,, ^R 1! i j4 , C ri r 1 J , r4r , , 7 4 { 4 ± r^ F{ 41,1 9,41i_ lry�r 5j14 .4„ ' P 4,Y rl� , ....., ,/,,.� ,41 1 1 I, I j,. 1°I 10 AhY 14 1 Fr l''. x 0'r 51 1 r' t r„{ 4 ru{nti ""7 t 1 1. ” ?9rj 1111.. htld N'1 ,r ”, 1 ' I. 1 ylr}Irr ,■11 r; r �rti+1!'',` r ,' ..v Mt, j�` rI Io' ,t « r Ira, / ,,(7 1 h d _4 t 1 I 1 114}.1(�4 F;t 7,:,. '1�1 7� i f a+ a Ik I 1 I I ra.” I, ' 11 ti t: .. �fw1 ''..1'./1,1, I 1 �1` �N/ 'dli'�t dl � 4 r G r j ... .. 1. -..,. • Y�1'{wl 1ktiN f^� IH + �y. 1 ,Y \,.' ;I ,4r r r Kt' C d 1 '1 rN A� 1 1 1r a1 ori�dtic ii c r } 1 4t! 1 t 1 r �i J ' 1 ! t a 1� lxr�' + ,t �i, I r 4 1 �4; ,, r4 1 �, It a i� r,� 7'. d 9141 &!.e 1 'r�v ,1 I� t !� l ,1,,' A a 14: e 4f, I M 11 UI ! 1 1 r 6 4 �w tz rr a z 4 r f.', p �+ I '�!4 r 7. t,r 'a i y , S. < 4 a-n •S4 •K, F, vt`` 4 + i!{Y' rli k�'r d 4 , e�• k41F74i1j, f�41r t,.I 11 4 r ' A ''a5 1 TI�4f 1 1 III- 1°i4 it Ir a*711".,!alt��n, ' t ;,��`�':41 1`o4 tlii..,',.' lJt' . . . • • ' 1 February 1993 Tigard Center Cub Foods 2015 Traffic Conditions ' • 2015 Traffic Conditions . An analysis of 2015 conditions was conducted to answer the following questions: . I (a)Within the 20-year plann:t:ng horizon,what roadway cross-section will be required ' ' on the major roadways fronting,the site(SW 72nd Avenue, SW'Dartmouth Street) ' 1 to accommodate future traffic volumes. This information will help the City in , determining right-of4ay requirements along the site's frontage. . .•, (b) Will the access drives continue to provide sufficient site access with growth in background traffic volumes. L: To determine 2015 traffic conditions, link traffic volumes were developed using the land use information from the June 1989 ODOT study and the calibrated traffic assignment model utilized for the preparation of 1994 background traffic volumes,These issues are discussed in detail within • , — the balance of this section, 2015 TRAFFIC VOLUME DEVELOPMENT , . The traffic assignment model utilized to developed the 1994 back round'traffic volumes was ' p g r employed to develop the 2015 link volumes adjacent to the site The 2015 traffic assignment model uses the land use projections from the June 1989 ODOT study with one exception;ODOT's • Zone 9 xs identical to this specific development proposal, The volumes generated by that zone were replaced by the specific site traffic,assignments for this development, This,model utilizes trip generation rates from ITE's Trip Generati0n, This results in a higher level of trips on the ,, roadway system than was predicted in the July 1988 ODOT study, Figure 9 presents the link volumes for roadway links within the study area. ROADWAY CROSS-SECTION REQUIRE MENTS . . , Based on the link volumes shown in Figure 9 and a link capacity for planning purposes of 1,000 vehicles per hour (vph), SW 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site requires a general three-lane cross-section. This cross-section would consist of one travel lane in each direction and a center (' left-turn lane, Similarly, SW Da rtmouth Street adjacent to the si te requires a general three-1 ane° cross-section, Depending on the signalization of certain intersections within. the study area, ,, additional lanes may be required to accommodate turning movements. ACCESS• With respect to access for the proposed development, of primary concern is whether or,riot the site access driveways will continue to function at acceptable service levels on a long term basis. It has been shown that for projected 1994 conditions, the site access drives on both SW 72nd , -, e and mouth operate a ver. good of service as rri men Avenue nd �S W Dartmouth Will o ca•ate a very g od level o full ode unsignalized intersections, . r.....,...I.....:. ........r,.e._,...-.,�..._,..�. r.,,.�,.... x....:.»,4,.1 ..c...,...c,_.. ... I.,»w... ,., h,.. .... .r r ,..r....«.... ..,.«.�...:.,.,.�.,w'..�..a ».._.. _.. ,.. ._.,._......_.,...-.....,. �..,,.r..._.a....�.__..,..�,r...l....,...._,.,.�....-_.a.. �.:� c.u.'� .gym. ...:.. � ., ...._ ._.». _ _ . • . l'''," , y 1 Iir J , [,, r . r r 1' '',,,../271.,,f) 1.,..il. . , ' ' ' '. . . L .. , 1.. . . 1 , , . , , . .' , .! .' ' '.'„ . . . ,. .!. ,, . . , . , ,..„..) (.0 1 , ., . .. . , . . . . ! ! ! ! . . !r.----. , - . . . . . ., , . . : . ' .'. ;.. . M , , , . . , , . . . . a...... s , .. .-. , • • .4 . , . . . ... . . . ; . . . . , , . , . , . , 1 ,, . . . , , , ..Js .._:. , . . , . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . , , . , , , . .. , , .. . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . .„ .. , ... .. . , . ,. ,,, . . , . ,, . , , , . . .... .., .. ,. ; ..., . ._.; ,, ..,.... . ... .. , . . . . . . . , . ,, . , , .. . . „ . . .,. , , . . . , r Ir • •• , 4' a'' f. 015 P M PEAK HOUR l; i '. :,., :,.,.. I .. 1 . , . .. . , 1 . . . .„ , , . . . , . .. „ LINK. . rr ' SLPRVALLI, • . . ., . . , , INC, ! G�F r a IJAF�'t" . . . , ,. , , . „ JAN -881f009 �ry .,,..:..._. ,'..r ..,.a„,,.r.� r....:..,..,:. '....,' ...�...,. ...'/..,. ,,,.._.....,.,•1 r. .... .. .......... .... .................. ... ..,. .. , ... .,.. r,,.e. ,...x. ...,.. w: Y x..,.,,r rV.., ....r rr. �r.,,. .. .,, .r .I. 1 r r n / r r R ti • • February 1993 Tigard Center Cub Foods1 2015 Traffic Conditions r As development activity intensifies within the Triangle, and traffic volumes on SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street increase, the level of service at these unsignalized intersections will ' ! decline. Using the projected 2015 link volumes shown in Figure 9, an analysis was conducted to g I evaluate Level of Service at the unsignalized cd site ac cess drives'o n SW Avenue and SW • Dartmouth Street..I The results of these analyses indicate that both access drives will degrade to an unacceptable "F" level of service for the minor street outbound left-turn movements under • projected 2015 conditions. All other movements will continue to experience acceptable service w,. levels. Given that both driveways are projected to experience capacity deficiencies for the minor street , left-turn :movements by y ear 2015, it i s im p ortant to estimate whether these capacity acit y deficiencies are likely to be a near term (one to three years) or a long term problem: To answer • • that question, a,straight-line growth projection was prepared for traffic volumes on SW 72nd • Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street for each year between 1994 and 2015. Based on. the straight- • I, on SW 72nd Avenue will continue to line growth estimates, it was determined the access drive o have adequate capacity for minor street left-turn,movements through the year 2014. The SW • projected�ected to have adequate capacity left-turn move- Dartmouth Street access is ro' p 'ty for minor street left-tzar , ,me is through the year 2009, if the intersection continues to function as a three-legged T-inter- n g y ? . section. • . ,There is the potential that a fourth leg to the SW Dartmouth,Access will be constructed in the future to serve a similar-sized retail development on the south side of SW Dartmouth Street. If • this were to occur, the additional left turn demands at.the intersection would accelerate the projected capacity deficiency from the year 2009 to the year 2003, At either location,the projected capacity deficiencies are a longer term problem that do not require () treatment at this time, Even so, it is important to consider the range of remedial measures that are available when the problems begins to appear{ For unsignalized intersections, potential treatments are limited primarily to signalization and access control (prohibiting certain move- ,A ments at the intersection.). The range of remedial measures that are considered appropriate at each location, and the implications thereof are described within the following paragraphs, I I , SW 7' 'nd Avenue Access a a... With respect to the SW 72nd Avenue access,signalization is not a feasible option given this access drives close proximity to the SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street;intersection(approximately feet from line for the southbound SW 72 n Avenue the ) 2 stop � Y . enue � iSC'Y�tion ; 250 f m the sto f 72nd A approach to the rote pp ` her only feasible option available is to prohibit mats c lef movements efore, p � � would be the vailable ' oli�b the problematic t-turn Sri out of the site, The most effective enforcement of the left-turn movement prohibition re s construct a raised median on S W to cons 721ici Avenue, If outbound left-turn movements are prohibited at this location, drivers desiring to depart the site via northbound SW 72nd have at leost three alternative ativ e �u utes wi th limited out-of-dii ec- ton travel' n the SW(a) Turn right onl SW 72nd Avenue, and make a U Tur>_ maneuver at th. W 72nd 'Dartmouth Street intersection, Y Avenue/SW D�. � ou �nt�,rs " To make a U-Turn at this location; I ;, some 7 d Avenue would be require accommodate the wider widening on SW 72n ��d to arc Y er turning radii of U-turn maneuvers;' I I � I II I I lC'tttel, .u scut A,ssoccdtes; a „ ,, , ,. February 199 3 ., M Tigard Center Cub Foods 2015 Traffic Conditions :. . ' (b)Turn right on SW 72nd Avenue, and make a left turn at the SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection. These vehicles could then proceed to alternative northbound routes such as SW 68th Avenue. (c)Turn right onto SW Dartmouth Street from the SW Dartmouth Access and proceed northbound on SW Dartmouth Street to Highway 99W, Of the three alternatives, this movement results in the greatest out-of-direction travel., (d) If the Dartmouth Access drive was signalized, an additional alternative route . r would be to turn left out of the Dartmouth Access, turn left again at the SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection and proceed northbound on SW 72nd Avenue. , Y If inbound left-turn movements are prohibited at this location, drivers desiring to enter the site f� via northbound SW 72nd Avenue have a clear alternative route with limited out-of-direction '' travel. Approaching from the south on SW 72nd, drivers can turn left onto SW Dartmouth Street '•1,a and proceed to turn right into the site at the Dartmouth Street access. Approaching from the east . on SW Dartmouth Street, drivers can travel straight through on SW Dartmouth (as opposed to turning g rig ht on SW 72nd) and proceed to turn right into the site at the Dartmouth Street access. g g Given these multiple alternative ingress/egress routes,it is concluded that the access control could be be imposed without substantially affecting the accessibility of the site, tk SW Dartmouth Street IWith respect to the SW Dartmouth Street outbound left-turn movement, which is projected to , • experience a capacity deficiency within the next 10 to 15 years,signalization(with the appropriate j signal coordination)is a feasible option, Another potential treatment would be to prohibit exiting left-turn movements. With raised channelization, entering left-turn movements could still be . • allowed. If outbound left-turn movements are prohibited at this location, drivers desiring to exit the site via eastbound SW Dartmouth Street have a clear alternative route with virtually no out-of-direc- tion travel, The alternative would be to turn right out of the SW 72nd access arid proceed southbound on.SW 72nd Avenue. Depending on their destination, drivers could either turn.left , or travel through the SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection. Given this alternative egress route with virtually no outwof-direction travel, it is concluded that even the most restrictive access treatment could be imposed without substantially affecting the accessibility of the site • • • w . . t _,, Kittelso •&Associates, Inca s d y ,n ' .,'. ,. . „ • • • ,t,,..,.we...--I,.m.........�r.,,un..arzF.-...-...a G.,..wuu.w..x..ww,u...._..+N.F«.+.L41.t«..L.aLL..1rJ...h+r.ll.r...uLL•.i.•_...4Tfi..,.,+<u•....w+..y+4:4%-*++..I wr +t.ls.::l�..n Un4anl.,r+4rY m<_Y...U..v.ki,....-..w. v......,......u.vl._.,..............w...e.w.w..��.,.Ww...wrr.eurar.•r..Y.+.+Ir y ,i �. „ - .w+r.uW141mY..siW"••'-•��.Il:rtL'aaJ�=:3t":'+',w,.:L%:16(r:.NMU.r1A:..1LtC«ru:n�:%cvn..G6:.i(A{:: ' 1 • • r I �.,. • ., it 1 1 I. •.. • • I ., • • • • • Lw r {i Y' • r i j•I f' t • • • {r9Fpy r...l.......'..,'_;,'.:,.,_r,,,....._..r..•,,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'I Ire..�... "�• . • E t ~ Ye" ^ w.n. T Y •«Y f i f'.� 77 AI. •1 "u..tt rw. .,'."^"L, J,•„ I Y.Y'-r.w •• • • 4: ".{ ..r�...n ..F.tI.a nrl u.n,r,r..:...•.i..o,Mr ',L1',,:..,,L'4,...'.1.,,,,„— o , ••' ' °• • • • • • • • r✓ � -Ii� {L;gt �,1ia e 4 1 ','1 .• �t: E ,s..• fit. . 4.�.d 1 J h• b tt t ", • t l•• a : ka r ''J ;n ir l t r 7 � 1 + ■ }� ' w ''4•''r w •3tM,!': , y I Mhtr. i etla lo_ • I.. . 4 l t P" , t r ,• ni Y rI t 4 Y _ —,,,,,./ , r v )`t Y 1 . , -".,e r Y 1 I C a r Me... t A ire hpF l' liçard triangle 1 Build Out Tra . l {t lrL lAt•,t1 { rl})fly 't tJ RrF� "I Lt!,P V r IYtk,t�.IC Mi I� �l'"tom "':■f1�- r ;�,tr N "i rt {e iI 7 9�,�.7't I •11 d 6 •r r 1 ! P" b i ' : . : on ,, 1 5�'� r�r.i.,M.W i�ptyt �} h I F le �t�{,,,, i •`c r�' o �,,`{•.k: aIrt I 1 t e 1l'{ r J t t �.: • jt rl . a „at: •-` Y t , w e a4a 4r r +, " r y n,! l l e'l { r li .1I. 1 t, 45 l b .,r ey•�' t r( .... 1 1 e ■ t 9;I t ✓11 N i N li.!S 9l ." `4 I•- 3Afd , . r. I • 1 w v r I r ,; : .. I I Feb Fehr�uary 1993 Tigard Center Cub Foods Tigard Triangle,Build Out Traffic Conditions ■ Tigard Triangle Huila-Out Traffic Conditions In this section of the report, build-out traffic conditions are examined, as they pertain to facility sizing at locations next to the site. To determine Build-Out traffic conditions,link traffic volumes , were developed in the same fashion as was done for 2015. conditions. In light of those link �' volumes (Figure 10), the number of lanes on. both SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street .. adjacent to the site required for 2015 were reviewed considering,general transportation planning capacities for roadway links. These issues are discussed within the balance of this section. L . Roadway Cross-Section Requirements . ' Based on link volumes shown in Figure 10 and a link capacity for planning purposes of 1,000 „ r vehicles per hour (vph), SW 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site requires a general five-lane .. cross-section. This cross-section will consist of two through lanes in each direction and a center left-turn lane. Similarly, SW Dartmouth Street adjacent to the site requires a general five-lane ,,/, . cross-section. Depending on signaliz,ation of certain intersections within the study area, addi- " , tional lanes may be required to accommodate turning movements. E, There is obviously a high degree of uncertainty with respect to how many years it will take to reach build-out conditions within the Triangle. Therefore,results of the build-out analysis should ' ,., only be used to estimate ultimate right-of-way requirements on the major roadways fronting the , w site (SW 72nd Avenue, SW Dartmouth Street), ,". [ ' ,, I • [.. f Kittelson&Au"`cwiates, Ina 34 ' ' 1 • r I , 1 .II l Y , ' • , L .. z • • �, k 1 1 1 (5),>10, 0 , ' 9 ., , • • Lf'l • r, • I I I I I I 1,. I I I I 1 1 I I 1 t I I I I ...o- I BUILD-OUT tI . PEAK 140LIR LINK VOLUME SUPER ALU, INC;. FIOUI�E 7 •• • CUB ,TICa C ,C NTER JANUArY i 993 si 0 i . . p 85ff010 r F • • . m • ■ , —..+o>..r+r...w.,.,�,,.... ...,..cM.+,+...n,,1,1•�,�.a1.:..l..1.m.�wuw.t1.,+w�l,ua.te;1.i;.,.F44,K.:+�.`Yr+wrwe:.,,:Wa'u+:tl.11>NY:wu+x[.I.e1tw:,al'14�,•. i • • ■ } , • . 1 i , , r . Ir A I ` lil I t7 L . • ' I i� ., L., I 1 11 1 , I �I 1 f . � {'� , a I�. 1 f I I r { �1 It jf I I �'0,• II a,,1J[`..i ; ' ,y. 'wrz i, I" k t 7 i'11 ! - ' b 7 7 I, ...;,.J.a.�,4.«+„L.., 1-,4..,rx',.....d..u...,Y r, ,.1...,x.:. ....�w.„�;�.«.x»x'f N I 1 PI ..dN.:..,,,,,...ru„ �<.,«;•,«1..r,:,1..,„„S ..1.,11.«..,5 ,1...0 �o;,,,,w.wy„7,.,«.,,,.«) p t's "'r” wrr'7+., .r ,I,,,,yyxry» +'r.».•9 f ti ' � r 'r'ig, I. I,, 41 Yyy'r+y' �-y9jJ 7iM� ,IE'�fl'7;• �t1 d 1'�'1''',''! K {h1fl,- �', ! rw'xA M '<Y,.,.'6'1''{i}tFJ r' 1 ry,4'J117 ��? tr•II yl e 1 a',r,ert;,.1•')/1".:;111',1 x 1 L''„ 7 l I! r., A .� r ti_.R:.»,a,..�„ae.,.w.. ...,wd; � .a,,,7m'µ.i.y:.ii� rx ,,.r.1f.,.::a 1.r d�}}�,1�y000C Fti,� * t jji ;yY�, F fiyi �r}�t ! !r 5 1� ' ,w ,ty r ' Y off 4' p”,4. ,Il'i� k � s fir,. k:r�` { R ■ 1.0 lf: I,.1 r'J 1' Fir rr r ,. t ., 'i I r� , � r � r � .I° r r�t 1 • e t 1'' { ;t 1 T . I • I }} P c..x 1.. _!r. � 4 n 4 ,F'�R„ .. ■ , lq'4'.A'..;!''7. • 1 I, ''' , :,.4.'. 7.I i 1 �:• a r.,,a I 7 . 4' .. Ri ,. ,. ,1,1,1,1 �_. „I I ;I J,�;. Section ' , t t t ��J t .l 1 7'4 zq. ' , t�Rd{ y C I L xl w M y. s `iF'`'`+ t 1 " 1 t , Ir i' 1. (/.�J -(�q,, rJ , it °+,14 r,"' •^1,,.. ' .. .v� R,.,,„ . app II 'I one union r fyW - 1 far+ Lftyr r yzyb F !Y7 x , ,. FC r Y wil, I I 'p, Recommendations.. .. ,x An M! ,S yAfl 1r y�1�R j� F°I 4r ''tr- RF RZ r1,�eq+ fYpF 1.l lr i 75 C:�1 Ii. Ik f ) ■1 .y R 9 1 a Cti xl 1 .?' µ.I i+ I Y',l•x '�t� 1 , l� r IMx rr. ■ r t-!'P, ,, 'I It'. 1 y i. i t• 1•I R x aY+ i •I xy3� r 't ly-�ir f x1"1�fr,y '�If7 tl( wt d Yri " yll y l }Cx,x '�w o f , r°tir w��.4�1ax' 1 r x+ k ,y, .,I,H, A" a aY µ t r y r , .i:,1. K .1'. a i 1 1.:a L I. �i C .r 144 �' r ■ r r. , I A}}y�Jj • February 1993 {' .. , . 'y � , Tigard Center CtcG Foods Conclusions And Recommendations , p� - -- i � Conclusions And Recommendation !, .,o' Based on the results of the traffic analysis described in this report it is concluded that the proposed . 1 Cub Tigard Center can be developed while still maintaining acceptable levels of traffic service , , and safety within the surrounding transportation system.' No off-site improvements are reco,m- f' - accommodate this development.mended in the near-term to a rnzxi � p Based on a review of the current site "plan, it is concluded that the proposed development . adequately addresses the following issues: ' (a) Provision of sufficient major access driveway throat depth, (b) Minimization of interaction between customers and delivery or service vehicles. • (c) Provision of sufficient number of site driveways to disperse the site-generated '{ ' — traffic such that substantial congestion is not likely to.occur at any one driveway. Signaiization of SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street intersection will not be warranted under ' projected 1994 conditions. However, it is estimated that this intersection wil;;, likely require signalization within the next five to 1,0 years: At such 'a time when a detailed, warrant analysis ' . . indicates a need for a signal, the resulting Isouthbound SW 72nd Avenue; left-turn storage L requirement is likely to increase, and may begin to interfere with the operation of the northbound f. left turn movement at the SW 72nd Avenue site access. The specific treatment for this condition should be determined in the'future when detailed field observations and operational analyses can 1 ' . be conducted with real-world data. Possible treatments for this condition may include: (a) Expanding the right-of-way on SW 72nd Avenue between the site access and Dartmouth street by 12 feet to provide side,-by-side left turn lanes (b) restriction of access at this location to right-in/right-out only. This alternative is j, . less desirable with respect to the accessibility of the center but does not require ,.. further widening of SW 72nd Avenue -j, , (c) relocating the SW 72nd access drive further to the north .: analysis traffic volumes indicates a need for a three-lane i A planning level,ana�ysrs of prv�ected.year 201.� tr � v cross-section,on both SW 72nd Avenue(north of SW Dartmouth)and SW Dartrriouth Street: With ,-.h: the signalization of certain intersections within the study area, some additional widening may be i » required to accommodate turning movements: It is estimated that within 15-20 years, some form of access control q" ' within y access will be required at. the SW Avenue access for the movement. • 72nd p ectedca capacity deficiency eexitingleft�ttirii inoveme . cess to address a roj P crty� eficienc' • ingress/egress rF,s Since, multiple alternative in g .s routes are available to the site access control could be - /., imposed without substantially affecting the.accessibility of the site, ii SW Dartmouth. i at the SW required red r some,treatment will be u ; that within 10 15 years, s 'fit is estimated th wi 4 � y access to alleviate a projected capacity deficiency for the exiting left-turn movement, Again, the n should detailed field determined in thy, •. � ne j - i future .when . {1�, specific treatment for this conditio s ldl be deternu re w ` • observations and operational analyses can be conducted with real world data,, Possible treatments 1 1 may inch' Yi access control for the .. n left-turn for this condition m include either .�ignalization or c s conic i the exiting eft-tit '. . 1 movement: Since an alterrnative egress route with virtually no out-of-direction travel is available, access c ontr of could be imposed without substantially affecting the accessibility of the site, ' ' , ' � 37 Kt�tel,��ji �Associates, inc.Ittc t . 'A . • 0.^, .�...,�,....i...,...o>. ..r...............�»._._ .,.. .'w ,,..�.., ,�„u,.,_w.4 .,...... ...,-.4.sl N,...,.,...a..,e',.•. kw...�..,.e.... ....,,,.. �.w,._.,u. - ..-.-.+._..,., ...,.�N ..,.�.... ,.. .........,u...., .,..-�.> ...•xv..,..-r.,,........ , ....u... •.. . February 1993 Tigard Center Cub Foods Conclusions And Recommendations i A planning lk.1';lel analysis of projected Tigard Triangle build-out volumes indicates a need for a ; • five-lane cross-section on both SW 72nd Avenue (north of SW Dartmouth) and SW Dartmouth Street. With the si g nalization of certain intersections within the study ar,ta, some additional ! . widening may be required to accommodate turning movements. r • P li t I ' s ' 1, I • -,.. ., .. Kitte� s�o, A, scci Inc, 38 ;: i • • a . • ' it rr.1 i, r 1 .Y. y I ' • • wei 1 ir} • �Y I i .^1 l' . 1. F 1 . ' i . . . . , , FF ,:','FF ' ''',F-f 'FF'....,'. ,FF'.', L:-",' . . . , .1 , ... „ . ., , . .:.. . , . . .. .. . ., .„' :. ,. . . , . 1:" ,',''H r..',,'1'.1■,'',,.',,.Y..,,, ,'"1; ,„:',,,,,.,• '.,,„, I,.,,,',1,,.'.,','.j .'. ‘' ,.. , . .' . ... . . , .. .„. . „ .. .. . . , .: . , „ . , . . . ... . , .., , .' , ., . . ,, . .. . . . , . , . . . 1 i • I ' , L• , , , . , . . , , . , . , , . . . , .. , , . . , . . . . • ,, . . . , . . .,. . . .. . . . . .... . . , r„,...,,,,..,„,,,...,,..,:,,•„,..: „J.,,,,,,.,,,,..„,„...,. ..._.„, ,..!,,..,..,:„„..„ _,...,..,,,_ „,,„.,,.,:i , . .. . . . , . . . . . . . . . ., . . , . . .. . . . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , ... 1 i� 4x.J.:.......w«G„-„� .1.,.�...,,1':✓n.„.,J�l'._xl.«r,..,..�......w..J :uixtw...a ........d..f . , „ . , ,, . . ... . .. . . 1 . rw. P;'^' t°”^y; ;:. :,... . , :! ,, .. ,. . . 1 , ,. . , .,. . ...,... , . . .''. „ , , . . .., .. . . . : ., .:.. . , .. .. ..'„ , . .. , .. . . .. . , ,. ..,' . . .. . . ., , ..„ . . .. ., sr 1, r ,Iy, 1 1,"1,� j I IA it t_ Ir f , ,;'1":":'11' ,� . 1 "I 4 6`k f'�y V •,,,,:•••1.1.44',.•4i,,••."".17::''.:.f ,..u:.I.M._w.,:..,... .:...;...4."..:::,...J.».:„'..:,41. :..Jx,....d.,r...�,.+lle. (' Yr r � uy � l p Mo ,;41, i F, Y; 1,.• r i ' i ` 4, ,. , . " r+ �YrR r ° � a Ad� I� ' 7,,, 1 A�Y ill � t r ;A ts 1.,, w• ,r. .. F{ 1 4.•rFJ{! !Mi" rf2'`1 ,• 1r 1 �'� y'h a?. tt 1 s Arf1 ‘.r+r 1 • 1A_.. r 4,.1,x' .a F R 1 I f 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 J } 1 p"f rr II r ,Y�: 1 f,.. i 1 r :i •' .!l.l P""t= _fit l h \ 1 11111 1 1,!_ 5 �,'1 / Hay ryrh .. 0 d t•lei,■f� • y,, "..,x 1'�F' p., .''i 11.. . ' ...' "` c. 'Y 1 1•l I' J I i 1 (k Appendix l t h !1 I fi ,! a.'r r1 lt V l ' Y t . r 4"•i ', ;r pt , r 1Y�,rY ' ” 1'" :'It"Ri 1t , a,"Ils a 'lf o f I. .1: L k ,.i.��.• rr ,li 1 y t t,..t ,:N' t„lit 1 ■�;r:' ', r 7' a d, r� A �r.1 .rl.• p }i J S a,%S 1' "r l.!`„�a r r 1.� # 4 S ....f 1 1, 0 .x.V'�r� '; , :f ,,°41:Y"r k 1Y WI 1 '�� rt'.i�a��.� r` k k'I� %y v "x r 11 i Y.. 1 ^J#I �x ti '' ul s"F ■u.,"'{I 11 1 r ' 1 ,r •�. 0 V err rirJf 7�1 l� r i d"f a e,y Y 'l! y,�kr t , X14 r ' ' • • 1 • EI February 1993 Appendix . . Tigard Center Cub Foods I Appendix A v Appendix A 1 • Level of Service Concept • Level of Service (LOS) is a concept developed to quantify the degree of comfort (including such •, , A elements as travel time, number of stops, total amount of stopped delay, and impediments caused . by other vehicles) afforded to drivers as they travel through an intersection or roadway segment. I - Six grades are used to denote the,various LOS from A to F.At Table Al Level of Service Definitions (Signalized Intersections) ' • • Level of Average Delay per Vehicle to Minors Street 41, Service )' 1 ' e stopped delay, five seconds per vehicle, This Very low averag pp dela less than , occurs when progression A is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase, Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. • • Average stop delay is in the range of 5.1 to 15.0 seconds per vehicle.This enerall occurs w` u,.. p generally r with B good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles step''than for a LOS A,causing higher levels of average delay. Average stopped delay is in the range of 15.1 to 25,0 seconds per vehicle.These higher delays C may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehiclesstopping is significant at this level, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping: Average stopped delays are in the range of 25,1 to 40.9 9 seconds per vehicle,The influence of Q congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavaorable progression, long cycle length, or high volume/capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop, proportion stopping declines, Individual cycle failures are noticable i' and the ro-ortion of vehicles not sto p , Average stopped delays are in the range of 40,1 to 60,0 seconds per vehicle,This is considered to t._.. E be the limit of acceptable delay,These high delay values generally indicate poor progression,ression Ion ' '• cycle lengths, and high volume/capacity ratios, Individual cycle failures are frequent occurances. Average stop delay is in excess of 60 seconds per vehicle.This le considered to be unacceptable F to most drivers,This condition often occurs with over satur w:sn.. ct,may also occur at high , volume/capacity ratios below 1,00 with many individual fail area, Poor progression and long , - h� y Vets, h cyc a lengths s may also be contributln causes to such SIghaliked intersections The six LOS grades are described qualitatively for signalized intersections in Table Al, Addi- tionaily, Table,A2 identifies the relationship between level of service and a verage stopped delay ay S p er vehicle Using this definition, a D� LOS is generally considered. to rep res ent the, ni.nzmur acceptable design standard, Al Most of the material in this appendix is adapted from Transportation Research Highway C .an h$oa.rd; c ,. .. Capacity f . , L Special Report 209(1985) } j I i , Kittelsort d Associates, the, A-1 a _ ., J l�� II ' I February 199.E y I. Tigard Center Cub Foods Appendix A Table A2 . i Leval-of-Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections ' " Level of Service Stopped Dela y per vehicle (Seconds) r . [ _ ..„ A � 5.0 - •• ,., . L B 5.1to15.0 C 15.1to25.0 u p5,1 to 40.0 40.0 to 60� L 5 60.0 x Unsignalized interse :t"011s different a The calculation of LOS at an unsignalized intersection requires a tuff approach* The 1985 Highway Capacity Manual includes a methodology for calculating the LOS at two-way stop-con : , . itrolled intersections, For these unsignalized intersections, LOS is defined differently than for signalized intersections in that it is based upon the concept of "Reserve Capacity's (i.e., that portion of available hourly capacity that is not used). A qualitative description of the various • • service levels associated with an unsignalized intersection is presented in Table A33 A quantita- tine definition of LOS for an unsignalized intersection is presented in Table A4. 8 i I lI . kittelson &Associates, Inc, f—? J t I d 1 ' February 1993 Tigard Center Cub Foods Appendix A Table A 3 General Level of Service Descriptions for Unsignalized Intersections Level of i Average Delay per Vehicle to Minor Street IService A • Nearly all drivers find freedom of operation Very seldom is there more than one vehicle in the queue B Some drivers begin to consider the delay an inconvenience. • Occasionally there is more than one vehicle in the queue w- 1 C • Many times there is more than one vehicle in the queue. • Most drivers feel restricted, but not objectionably so. D • Often there is more than one vehicle In the queue, 9 • Divers feel quite restricted. E Represents a condition in which the demand is near or equal to the probable maximum number of vehicles that can be accomodated by the movement, • There is almost always more than one vehicle in the queue. _______ . Drivers find the dela s approaching intolerable level , Table A4 Level-of-Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections / Reserve Capacity Level of Service Expected Delay to Minor . 1 Service Y reet Traffic St . 400 A► � , h Little or no delay B Short traffic delays 300-399 . C Average traffic delays 200-299 q y ' 1'00-`�9,y Long traffic delays P 0- E Very long traffic delays ; • . 1 1 I � Whe n demand volume exceeds th e cap."a.c 1t y of the lane;ektretre delay s wiPl be encountered with queueing will( cause congestion affecting other traffic int:;rse i condition usually warm may Cttu severe c 1ntiVe>'rlenfs in the r I'rt 1701.This GOn 1t1 improvement to the inters(dtioh I , ,.t �5 I • • .t K'telsatt &Associates, !tic, A—.1 ..,_y«...,,.+...,,...y. .»,,...«..+.i..._+,__...--. .. _._..................,+.. _..,....., ..,..., ...__,,..._..., +.»..,.......««m.._..-«a... -.. -.., .,w..,.»,,..„,,....-... » m...v.,.,-.u+._..,,.u.> ».,,.__W e ........:„w.,./.,ilJ,..,. .......w.,,.«......,_.....,.....,.., _r. 1. : February 1993 , / Tigard Center Cub.Foods Appendix A The reserve capacity concept applies only to an individual traffic movement or to shared lane 5 • movements. Once the capacity of all the individual movements has been calculated arid 'their LOS and expected delays determined, an overall evaluation of the intersection can be made. Normally, the movement having the worst LOS defines the o,rerall evaluation, but this may be .• tempered by engineering judgement. An "E LOS is generally considered to represent the . • ' L minimum acceptable design standard. • It should be noted that the Draft Traffic Impact Study guidelines has differing levels of LOS for the minimum acceptable design standard for all intersections (both signalized and unsignalized) depending upon the relative contribution of project traffic to the signal warr•aiit. . _ t. Past experience with the unsignalized analysis procedure indicates this methodology is very conservative in that it tends to overestimate the magnitude of any potential problems that might ' exist, This is especially true for minor street left turn movements. For example, the Highway Capacity Manual methodology does not take into account the effects of vehicle flow platoons . ° that result from upstream signalization. Vehicles traveling in platoons tend to create greater gaps • in the traffic flow that sometimes provide additional capacity for the side closest to the signal. Therefore, the results of any unsignali,zed intersection analysis should be reviewed with this , thought In minds Generally, LOS E for the minor street left turn movement is considered to be , acceptable for an unsignalized.intersection, although it also indicates that the need for signaliza- • : t tion should be investigated. / , i' Nwi.. I � � Table A-5 Level of Service Definitions (UJnsignal ed Intersections) ., _ Level of Service Average Delay per Vehicle to Minor Street ., A ' 5 Seconds , 5 to 1 o Seconds [,.,, , , _ •, 10 to 20 Seoonds 20 to 30 Seconds 30 to 45 Seconds i • r >45 Seconds • ti r i , cittel,k'an tft As veiates,, lite. Ate 1 , . P ...............,...wrnxr.xwn4∎,..--..c..... ....m..l A February 1993 . - I Tigard Center Cub Foods . Appendix A n All-Way Stop Controlled lnterseotionsA2 • is There is no accepted procedure for a level of service analysis of an all-way stop controlled intersection. The procedure used for determining LOS for a four-way or three-way stop controlled intersection differs from that described for unsignalized intersections, This methodology, which is being reviewed by the Unsignalized Intersection Committee of the Transportation Research , Board, uses a capacity estimation method based on lieadways observed at all-way stop controlled j'' • intersection in the western United States. The procedures incorporate several important variables, `' • 1 including volumes distribution, number of lanes on each approach., and the percentage of right ,' • L and left turns at the intersection. Intersection performance is measured in parameters similar to i, signalized intersections: delay, volume/capacity ratio, and level of service using a scale of "A" through"F". Approach delay on any given leg of the intersection is calculated using the following ;; equation: L , I SV I I i I z . D=exp 3,8x C a . ec/ve. {, Where D, = vehicle delay on a given approach (s h) I f�;. SV - subject ap p roach'volume (vph) C = calculated approach capacity (vph) . .. exp = base,of natural logarithms �w In this equation, the quantity SV/C;is simply the volume-to-capacity ratio on the approach under consideration. Table A5 p resents the LOS criteria for all-way stop controlled intersections. .,. I w l I I I r ' I L r '.i , , ..„ , x I I A2 Michael,Estimating Capacity and Delay t AU-Way Sta ,Con i Ued Intersectiot.t,University Idaho, Department of Civil...artm Engineering Research R.epbrt,September 1989 I Ktttelson&Associates, Inc. 1 A-5 ,',I, � f 1 ° .• I Applied Geotechnology Inc. ' [�.' � � A report prepared for , West Coast Grocery • c/o Gordon Davis. 1020 Taylor Building, Suite 555 I Post Office Box 8774 Portland, OR 97207 uw , GEOTECENTdAL INVESTIGATII N PROPOSED T GARD CENTER j. S.W. 7`2ND AND DARTMOUThi STREET TIGARD, OREGON AGI Project No. 0-1405.01 y ,t N,1 ,,•e+"^'^r.o a t:ti"1 SAW I , by ..i hy 3 1-4\ r J , 'y t X11 CY c1C ff • ,(.. es D. Imbrie, P.E. ',4e1 l5, L � y E w:, , ,4011110k■fr--- .o.1;t4:4,!.'_'(4?d' 920,,3 '''.? .'1:-1`:"- r Robert J. 'rater; .E. +~itCti9� Vice Pees ident • ' Applied Geatechnolc gy Inc ' 2510, SW First Avenue Portland, Oregon 97201 I I .- 1 1 Dedetaber 24i 1992 I 50.3 222 2820 Telephone Horn d' Tee / .W,First Av�riu�; Portland, f 2 01 1 p I 2510 S C?I�97'201 A�503/2 1• I . , �•.� • Applied Geotechnolagy inc.. TABLE OF CONTENTS I . _ .' ), 1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Background Information ,. . . . . . 4 . . 2 x 1.2.1 Site Description . 4esesoolileoe4t4144142 1.2.2 Propf, sed Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ' 2.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS • , " 2.1 Field Investigations . . . . . . . • . 3 t'', '2.2 Laboratory Testing . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . 3 4 2.3 Subsurface Conditions . .. . . . . • . . . . . 3 2.4 Groundwater . . . . . • . . . . . . , 4 • ' . • 44444 4 t 1 3.0 COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PHASE I - SITE GRADING . . . . . . . 5 3.1 General . „ . . . . . . .. . .. . . a . . . . . . . 5 3.2 Weather and Groundwater-Related ;Considerations . . . . . . 5 x 3.3 _ 6 , S • ite Preparation . :. ��: . 3.4 Structural Fill Material ' • • . . . . . . . „ .. 6 I. •-, 3.5 Structural Fill Compaction . o . ' _ 7 � 3.6 Estimated Settlement Under Fill Loads 8 3 l' .7 Slope Requirements . .. ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.0 COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, PHASE 2 BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONS : . . 9 1i ii 4.1 General . . . 444444oe. • . . . . . . . a�i 1,F . L 4.2 Spread Footing Foundations . . . • . . . „ . . . . . . 9 h 1 4.3 Under lab and Foundation drainage .,' . . 4.4 Retaining Walls . . ` . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . 10I,, t t 4.5 Surface Drainage .I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 `t.6 "Pavement.7, . • • . . . e • . . . . ., . • . • . • . d . ♦ a 11 I. , 0 COMMENTS REGARDING ry SITE'DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . ♦ 4 12 S'•0 ' GARDIN\� . � . • ♦ .l..2 6.0 GENERAL`NOTES 13 APPENDICES Appendix A = Field Investigation Appendik B Laboratory Testing «4''•r W . .:. ., . ,..._.• .«..._. -.• ,,,,.. - ..•...-,., .....«....u..-..,a.+.-1a 41..x..r. ..._..n.,. , ..+'.._.., f,.«.•.a..:-..w..,.'.,.. •• r Applied Geotechnology Inc. . 1.0 INTRODUCTION Applied Geotechnology Inc. (AGI) is pleased to present the results of our geotechnical investigation for design of the proposed Tigard Center project. The scope of work for this project, was outlined in our proposal letter of August 18, 1992. Written authorization to proceed was received on September ^! 1, 1992. Our work addresses items of geotechnical.concern in two separate phases within 1,1 this report. Phase I addresses site grading considerations and Phase II ' ' presents recommendations for building construction. r,. 1.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The principal findings and .recommendations are briefly summarized below. . Please refer to the report text for details. I ! ► Var;table near surface soil conditions were encountered in the xrilorations' performed for' this study.y Generally, near--surface . explorations encountered deeper areas of MAN-MADE FILL within the demolishedresidentia st y 1 reet area and deeper or„gana.c soL1s in the . Vicinit of the creek � y (average 4 feet in 'depth. Loose to medium dense, brown sandy SILT to, SILT with some fine sand and clay was encountered below these near-surface” soils, to. ani- average depth of . approximately 20 feet. :NBelow the brown sandy SILT, stiff to hard, gray, clayey SILT with trace fine sand was observed. e The groundwater surface at this site is very shallow. Immediately ` after 'our field investigation water ievele were measured at depths 4 ranging from approximately 3 to 8 feet below the existing ground E' surface. These water' levels were taken during a prolonged dry weather period. The measured water levels in December rose to within 1 to 3 feet of the surface. e The soils on the project site are typically fine-grained, moisture sensitive materials that will not be compactible to structural fill • specifications at their existing moisture content s. In addition,tion, these soils will rford It p r oor construction vehicle support. The use of the al fills is limited to the dry summer Months, , generally the period from mid-June to mid-October, when extensive tilling drying and dr. in is feasible. f' is The proposed deep cuts will encounter groundwater and ` deep 9 d wet soils at any time as dewater� g,a slope drainage. ge `and protection, ' considerations such ' �• n rairia construction cr�nsi Y Special desa, nand °t on wall drainage, and sub grade stabilization Will be re b 9 and retaining wal Will required. It, A 2 to 3 week construction delay period between structural fill placement the pro graded foundation Constriction is � eau' to minimize settlement radeffects on the structure�' re :red t. " tlement e. and n the structure due to the added fill loads. II 11 t • y� I •. Applied Geotechnology Inc. Provided that adequate dewatering and subgrade stabilization is incorporated into construction documents, conventional spread footings would be suitable for the proposed site A maximum allowable contact pressure of 2,000 psf is recommended when the footings bear in structural fill or the upper 10 feet of undisturbed native soils. . Footings which bear below a depth of 10 feet in native soils will be subject to upward flowing groundwater which will likely produce soft, ` unstable soil, condit ions. 1.2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1.4.1 Site Desc:rip_tion la F The site is located in Tigard approximately 7 miles southwest of the Portland s, ;' ' Central Business District near the east quadrant of the Highway 217 and ` Pacific Highway intersection. The property is approximately 27 acres in area and the westerly quarter is bisected by an unnamed tributary of Fenno Creek. E ,• The majority of the site (the eastern portion) slopes towards the creek to the ' e. .., west at an approximate 5% gradient (refer to Figure 2) . There is an w • Y, approximately 35-foot elevation difference between 72nd Avenue and the creek. • The site has recently been stripped and the existing structures removed. It it our understanding that approximately 20 single-family residences were u located along 72nd Avenue and th 'now abandoned Duvall, Street.., Reportedly, . il. O many of the residences .had basements. with sumps and pumps.. It is. also our 11 I • , 'LL, understands 9 that underground utilities consisted only of water lines and '' :septic tanks; the tanks have reportedly been removed b i but the drain field 4 leach lines and water lines currently remain. • . [ 1.2.2 Proposed Construction Based on a review of the tentative plans, dated September 8, 1992, we . _ understand that a 75,400 square-foot Cub Foods store and 74,650 sgtIare feet of attached unspecified retail shops are planned at the northeast corner of the property: Current plans indicate the store building will be stepped ' •, downward to the west, however, cuts of up to 17 feet at the east end may be required. It is understood that site grading will be required to achieve a maximum 2.5 percent finish gradient in the parking area. Based on this order of 15 to 20 feet. The structures and fills � to be on the � requirement, maximum depths of c 'lls are structures will, probably consist of block masonry �; or concrete tilt-up with a e -g Anticipated building• r addition, 1.48 acres at the southeast corner is available as separate retail store area. '' 1 w il : I� 3 F I„IIµ. } •1 X07, . 4 r e • ” I • I .w • Applied Geotechnology Inc,. y/y 2.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS�VE�Yb TIGA t) TI NS 2e1 FIELD INVESTIGATION Our scope of work included six test borings to depths of approximately 36 to 46 feet and eight test pits to 6 to 12 feet in depth. The locations of all explorations are shown on Figure 2. The exploration and sampling methods and the logs of borings and test pits are presented in. Appendix A. I , 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING r The laboratory testing program consisted of visual classification, water contents, in-place densities, consolidation tests, Atterberg Limits, a compaction test, a direct shear test, resilient modulus testing, sieve analyses,y , and soil: expansion tests. Test procedures and results are described in Appendix B. i , 2.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The explorations performed for this study encountered variable near-surface } conditions. MAN-MADE FILL was encountered in 6 oUt of 14 explorations to r L depths ranging from 0.5 to.4 feet. Depths of MAN-MADE FILL may extend to 8+ feet in areas where basements: were...previously located. Organic soils were .. . .. . ,A encountered to a depth of.4:5 -feet-near the creek which bisects the site Four dietinct subsurface units were identified and are summarized belowr, Soft to medium stiff SILT /MAN-MADE FI'LLZ,. Soft to medium stiff, brown, SILT with trace fine sand and clay and occasional construction • L debris was encountered at the ground surface in many of the explorations in the northeast quarter of the site. Unit thiekness averaged approximately 3 feet and ranged from 0 to 5 , feet, but may extend to a depth of 8 feet in former basement areas. 1a Medium stiff organic SILT. Medium stiff, gray, organic SILT was encountered only in boring B-4 to a depth of 4.5 feet. ' 4.Y Stiff to loose to medium dense SILT with some. fine salad and clang' ' ' [e fine sand and clay to fine sandy SILT SILT with some fine sandy SILT. Loose to medium dense, brown 'and gray S y s dy ILT was encountered over the entire site beneath the MAN-MADE FILL, organic soils, and thin cultivated tone The upper 10 feet wa . ex loration�. pp mostly SILT and ' i [..., in all of the p fe as m' I T a be low 20 feet predominantly sandy SILT.ILT. Thi s u nit n was present e nt ip to o depths extendin to 19 24 feet. N values' in the unit rang ed from to 46 bpf and averaged 11 bpf. N atural wat er contents (from th e exploratory borings) ran g ed from 27 to 51 percent and averaged 35 . percent. The samples were typically noted as wet and we ll measurements V. below3 that this zone tsground surface at supports the time of our field explorations feet to ations d i' p y SILT with trace fine sand. Stiff to hard was encountered % SILL below the sandy SSLT� S s.f to tia'rd cla e ThiS unit extended beyond � ranged from ° with trace fine sand is�un51L nd ,the explored depths. �`--values ra' clayey h to 50 bpf and averaged 25 bpf.: Naturalll water contents ranged from 25 b -3 I I • ' a..,r.., ,....,a....,.:..a1'a.a ...r., .... .. .- ... i,..,.._,.,..,a,r,..nse:.r..._,..«....n........4,.A.er...,,... ..,,.. i..:, :.ur...n...sh Jr...,..nrrr•k„,r..rn�...,. -. . - -.i _. -, .,e.r .r,..r,r,r.0.....-r,. ..:a,r.,.,... .- ..r...r,-s...4+.=., s • ' Applied Geotechnoiogy lnc. r to 75 percent and averaged 40 percent. The samples were typically identified as moist to wet. 1.a A generalized subsurface section is presented on, Figure 3. r ..:a 2.4 GROUNDWATER r The static water table was measured in the four observation wells one week after completiri of the borings and estimated from sample moisture condition. during drilling in the other borings. These groundwater depths are shown on the boring logs in Appendix A. In September, the average depth to water was , 5.5 feet; the range of depths was approximately 3 to 8 feet, shallowing towards the creek. It is important to note that the;ae readings were taken towards the end of a summer during an unusually dry year. Another set of readings were taken on December 11, 1992 as shown on the logs. Those readings indicated the groundwater to be within 1.2 to 2.6 feet of the ground surface; average depth 1,7 feet. 7"1 Based on the significant'rise of the groundwater table between September and. December, we anticipate that the groundwater levels will approach the ground surface over much of the site during the wet winter and spring months. • 1r a. I L1 HL 1. w'. a 4 C .\ 6 / . . • • "—,' , . , . . ' • --' , • • • • 4 '. . 0 .11 , • • , ., - Applied Geotechnology Inc. , . 1 „ -' 3.0 COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ” . ' f PHASE 1 - SITE GRADING • c• 1 , , V ,o, . , 3.1 GENERAL • ' "' ' v . [ The shallow groundwater table and the proposed deep cuts pose the greatest • difficulties for site development. All planned cut areas will intersect the ' groundwater table. Cuts less than about 10 feet deep will occur in predominantly silt; cuts deeper than about 10 feet will occur within more pervious, sandy silts. Deep cuts in the sandy silts will require special .. drainage measures at the cuts, and beneath buildings and pavements. .,, 1 • . L:„ Imported granular fill and extensive drying of native soils will be required 00 '>, to achieve compaction and proper subgrade support within the planned cuts and fills. • ,,' L . . 3.2 WEATHER AND GROUNDWATER-RELATED CONSIDERATIONS , 1, ' r, Native soil Compaction. We presume that cuts and fills will be balanced to avoid, importing or wasting soils. Use of the native soils for any grading activity will necessitate that the work be performed during the dry summer . I, months, generally from mid-June to mid-October. The high moisture contents ,.., in the native soils (about 35%) must be dried to about 17%, the optimum for . compaction. This will require significant drying periods between each 'IP , compacted lift. The excavation, aeration, and compaction cannot be performed L in a continuous operation. The native silts cannot be properly moisture • . . conditioned and compacted during the wet winter months. , General Excavation. Excavation in the deeper cuts, within 3 feet of subgrade, . L should be performed temotely, avoidiri on the final subgrade. our . . experience suggests that: a traechoe loading onto dump trucks, both working . from the high bank, is the method of least diSturbance. The trackhoe should be equipped with a smooth-edged bucket. Once subgrade is achieved, dump ' trucks and other rubber-tired equipment should not be allowed to run directly ....., over the excavated subgrade. Construction Traffic. Wet periods will also affect construction operations on the site. Construction traffic will likely cause disturbance and pumping / of silt subgrades. If it necessary to run trucks over the subgrade, special I / haul roads should be built. As a minimum, we recommend stabilization with a geotextile (Amoco 4545 or equal) and aft 18-inch thick layer of 000T 1.5"-0 crushed aggregate base. Additional bade rock should be added, as required. It is possible that similar haul, road stabilization will be required even during the summer at this site due ho the presence of groundWater. Stabilizing Sailding_EgA. We anticipate that construction operations within. , cut areas will experience upward flowing groundwater, tending to destabilize -. ' • the surface grades to varying degrees. consttuction traffic and foundation bearing areas could be adversely affected within the building footprint, The i . , . severity of the condition cannot be accurately predicted, therefore we recommend that the final grades be reviewed immediately following excavation. ' It" If the subgrades within the cut areas remain stable and the weather cooperates, no special stabilizing pad is required for the building. If the '. .., • I adverse groundwater conditions cause instability of the subgrades, we . .-- ...-= . • . ., ,Try '' , , I .1 ' ir.;'' " 4 ' '41 /. , 1 • a . , 1 , . . . , . . ... .' ., . . , . • . . • , ' . , , . ..• , Applied Geatechnology Inc. ' .. , - . . recommend that the entire building pad be overexcavated by at least 3 feet . . e ' ' below base of slab, a non-woven filter fabric placed over the subgrade, and . crushed base rock placed and compacted to create a stable pad for construction. ODOT 1"-0 aggregate base is recommended. The upper 10 inches . , of the pad must be removed prior to placing the required underslab drainage - zone (8" drain gravel plus 2" base aggregate) . The removed material may be used for base aggregate in parking and drive area . Construction Dewateslag. Temporary construction dewatering may be required ---_-___-- , . . in the deeper cut areas, more than 10 feet below the existing ground surface. • 0. Shallow ditches and deep trench (french) drains should be utilized to control . e the ground and surface waters. Slopes, retaining walls, and building slabs . ■ and foundations will require permanent drainage systems incorporated into , their design. .. . ,. 3.3 SITE PREPARATION The majority of the site has been recently stripped. Prior to start of ,. grading operations, we recommend that any soft MAN-MADE FILLS, leach line • , . systems, organic soils, grass, roots over 2 inches in diameter, and debris, be removed from beneath all building areas and for a distance of 5 feet beyond I.11. the perimeter footing line. A removal depth to 18 inches beneath the fill areas within the Cub Foods/Retail building is indicated by the explorations. . Deeper removal of fill materials (up to 8 feet) is anticipated in areas of previous structures with basements and where, organic soils are present • 64. . (possibly near the creek) . An engineer should review the stripping and stripped subgrades to ensure that organic soils, uncontrolled fill or other materials which may be unsuitable for structural fill support do not exist. , . Where loosely backfilled test pits or filled former basements occur within '. - building or pavement areas, the loose soils should be totally removed to • expose native soils, then replaced with granular backfilL ODOT 3/4"-0 . crushed base rock is recommended. It should be placed in 8-inch maximum lifts L and compacted with manually-guided mechanical compactors to grade. Compact ‘..• to 90 percent ASTM D1557 to within 3 feet of subgrade and to 93 percent for the upper 3 feet. 4 .1 In pavement area where structural fill is required, the surface should be stripped of all grassy toots, vegetation, or debris, and moisture-conditioned , • to near the optimum moisture content and compacted to 92 percent of ASTM b1557 . (modified Proctor) . .,, , 8.4 STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIAL i 1 1 . Native Silts, Structural fill during the dry summer months may consist of either native, on-site non-organie soils or select, imported,granular material .. ,R ,- as described beloW. As noted previously, the hat3Ve, non-organid SILTS are very moist, fine-grained materials that Will riot be coMpaCtible to structural , ' . fill specifications at their existing moistute contents without drying from 1 their natural moisture content of 35% to the optimum moisture content of 17%. / Ev en with optimum hot and dry weather conditions, a 6-inch thick loose lift ‘r r • . may requite much of a day drying before reaching optimum moisture content. Large areas Are required for aeration. • . . ..„, t ,, 1 • . . , ' . . • . ...- • Applied Geotechndlogy Inc. Imoorted MateXials. If imported material is to be used for structural fill, the material suitability should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Engineer. The • . , review should include the source of the material and satisfactory proof that the soils do not contain environmental contaminants. If wet weather fill construction is anticipated, it will be necessary to use - relatively clean :granular, materials. These should be sands, gravels, or combinations', w hich contain less than about 5% fines. The fines must be non- plastic,. The fines content is not always a measure of suitability for all- . weather fill material; it is only a guide. ODOT quality crushed rock normally �"' containe higher percentages, but can be used in most situations. • 1 3.5 STRUCTURAL FILL COMP iCTION Structural fill (fill placed below floors, footings, pavements, etc.) should be spread in maximum 9-inch loose lifts for compaction by heavy, self-- propelled or tractor-towed compactors and maximum. 6-inch loose lifts for 4. light, manually-guided ,compactors. Each lift should be thoroughly compacted ' to the requited criterion with equipment suitable to the soil types being com- pacted. We recommend that the structural fill attain minimum dry densities based on ASTM D1557 (AASHTO T180) , Modified Proctor as noted below. • [ Prior to compacting each left, the fill should be properly moisture conditioned,�by drying 'or the addition of uniform applications of water, as required, to achieve a moisture content which is within ±2 percent of the L., optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM YD15557 (AASHTO T180) . All . , compacted fill surfaces should be firm and yield only slightly beneath rubber-tired, construction equipment, Ville which rut, pump, or weave should . be considered bci possess' excess moisture and are not acceptable. These should be removed and replaced with fill material of proper moisture content or the � material dried, to the proper, moisture content as specified herein. ASTM D1557 p licit i.on Iiniimum Oompaction Granular], Native Soils beeegreeate Base . Beneath Foundations 92% eel% Beneath Floor Slabs 92% 93% Beneath Pvements Base course 1 95% subgrade�e soyls 92% 93% lls Z rt ch or 'Footing'�Ba ck 3,a: Wall, r Below 3 feet 90% 90% IJ`pper 3 feet X12% 93% Lan�dsdapint or Nonstructural Fill 85 [ 1 totes (1) use lightweight, manually guided compactors within 3 feet of all embedded walls. (2) Where corif �.dts occur between values, the, higher percentage shall ..govern. � ........:..:,.: ... 1, ' 1, { , '/. Applied Geotechnology Inc. , 3.6 ESTIMATED SETTLEMENT UNDER FILL LOADS L Maximum settlement due to fill loads is estimated at 1.5 inches beneath 15 , feet of fill. We anticipate that settlements will occur relatively quickly, within 2 to 3 weeks of load application. The maximum fill depth location in the building pad should be monitored for settlement for a period of 2 to 3 " weeks after completion �• p �.on of the fill and prior to commencing foundation construction. 3.7 SLOPE REQUIREMENTS , Based on stability analyses performed using the residual shear strengths obtained from our direct shear test, a soil unit weight of 125 cf, and a p 2H:1V gradient for fill slopes built with native soils, cut, and fill slopes . should be stable to a maximum height of approximately 20 feet. Because the deepest planned cut slopes extend far below the groundwater surface, groundwater seepage may cause slumping and other types of shallow failures in i • • the upper 3 to 4 feet of the slope surface. It may be necessary to excavate yr in stages, allowing time for steady state drainage conditions to develop �" between excavation episodes. H F As part of the permanent drainage system, we recommend that a trench drain be installed at the toe of all cut slopes. The drain should be installed to a L. minimum depth equal to 1/2 the height of the slope above, or 5 feet, whichever • is greater. The drain should be designed in accordance with Figure 4. Trench [- drains will draw the intercepted groundwater table down and iMprove the soil k . •• stability at the slope face and for some distance beyond the toe. We recommend that the drains be placed during the initial stages of grading, if , ° possible. It may be necessary to construct the drains in short segments to ' avoid collapse of the trench walls. { Additional trench drains may be required at other site locations it wet and unstable soil conditions persist. Additional options for improving surficial slope stability include: (1) approximately izntal drains (hydraugers) drilled Z) and installed into nular buttress o e at horizontal � P 10 to 20 foot spacings, free-draining g ,, and over the toe of the slope, or replacing the toe, (3') a retaining wall pnd _ � , ,n and g i system as a mechanically anically stabilized earth wall) . These additional options may be necessary once the sloe has been cut and its sub rains e s s performance evaluated. All fill slope sufficiently compacted s . drought plants as soon as � site l T r. lanted with p p � ible after construction plop es shQl�ld ossibl p not be over irrigated, It IS suggested that fill slopes b ' S e trimmed back for ma cimizing surficial compaction. overbuilt and ' r „ P r,' , " : . • • v • q .. ' - t i rn r1 • Applied taeoxechno6Agy Inc. 4.0 COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS • PHASE 2 - BUILDING CONSTRUCTION 4.1 GENERAL t �. Building in construction should not commence until the fill settlement monitoring data indicates that settlement is, complete and has been reviewed by the ie Engineer. We anticipate a minimum construction delay of 2 to 3 weeks will be • required to observe building pad settlements During this time, the cut areas should be reviewed for stability, and the need for a granular building pad determined, iJ + 4.2 SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS 1 Field explorations and laboratory testing, conducted for this study, indicate that a spread footing foundation system is feasible for the proposed structures (tall one-story buildings, retaining walls etc.) on the native '' silts or on structural fill. The foundation bearing surfaces must be free from disturbance by groundwater or construction traffic. We recommend that spread footings be designed for a maximum allowable soil t pressure of 2000 psf for footings which bear on structural fill or firm native L soils. Native soil subgrades should be reviewed as they are exposed '` (equipment should not be allowed to run directly on native subgrades) . Based on our explorations, native soil below a depth. of 10 feet may l' require stabilization with a granular fill. All footings should be located at least • 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade for frost protection and bearing/settlement requirements. Minimum foundation dimensions of 18 inches L for continuous footings and 24 inches for column footings are recoMmended. Following excavations the bearing surfaces should be thoroughly compacted or •. cleaned of loosened or disturbed soil, using hand methods, if necessary. The 9 surfaces reviewed by the required overexcavation for cleaned bearing surfac es should be rev` 'table su} g;�ade soils and the depth and width of any r qu d o n , ■ stabilizing fill; If soft areas are noted below foundation bearing areas1 a ti • minimum 18-inch overexcavation and replacement structural fill will be necessary in accordance with Figure 5 • For footings founded on structural fill or firm native soils as recommended above and a real applied footing stress of ';',,000 psf,, total and differential settlements are anticipated ated not to exceed 1 inch i � footing ' ch and 1.� 2 inch over a 20-foot bay, respectively. .•. 4.3 UNDERSLAB AND FOUNDATION ,D INAG We recommend' that a cunt' s footing drain be placed around the perimeter all buildings and behind any loading walls o.. o► redommeneed peri eter drain detail�isp presented on Figure 6. donnect drains to the nearest footing drainage. A perimeter foot�n ,� l.�ble drains artist storm systetr or surface dx:tchd �.f avai.� Becrause of th 'nter'cepted groundwater conditions, We recommend that any,slabs e 1 iodated. over cut areas and 10, feet beyond, be provided with a continuous underslab drainage system. The system should, consist of a. minimum 8-inch , I 4J' 1 N • 4' t ' t n 1 , . , . ' . ' . . .. . ' . . , , :,. ., Applied Geotechnology Inc. - , layer of drain gravel (3/4" to 1.5" crushed rock) placed below the slab and, above a non-woven geotextile. The drain gravel is topped by 2 inches of 1"-O 1: ODOT base aggregate to form a stable base upon which to cast the slab. Four- ., 1 ' inch perforated drain pipes, sloped to drain and spaced at maximum 15-foot intervals, should be located at and below the drainage zone. An interior drain pipe should be located within about 5 feet of the perimeter footing. We recommend rigid perforated PVC pipe for all drains. A recommended underslab drainage detail is presented on Figure 4. Compaction of the drain rock should be accomplished using suitable lightweight equipment to prevent 1 damage to the pipes. At all other slab areas (where slabs are located over filled areas) we recommend that the slabs be founded over a minimum of 10 inches of crushed , aggregate (ODOT quality, l"-O) . A vapor barrier is required below the slab . ,, . in filled areas. Soil and groundwater conditions at this site represent severe conditions for . moisture migration. We recommend that a vapor barrier be placed beneath all I 4 slab areas. Such protection is especially important if moisture-sensitive 1 floor coverings (cemented floor tile, carpete, etc. ) will be placed over the slabs. We recommend vapor barrier materials that are spedially Oasigned for i . the applieation, products of recognized long-term stability when buried in a damp soil environment, The vapor barrier should be located near the base of s , b the slab. Please note that there is considerable local difference of opinion: a) in the use of vapor barriers, b) in providing concrete drainage to facilitate finishing and prevent cracking, and c) in methods to protect the membrane from ' punctures during construction. A 2-inch sand zone is commonly placed over the vapor barrier to prevent damage during construction. We tmcommend that your n, experience be used as a guide in determining whether a sand zone is required , and where the sand zone should be located relative to the vapor barrier. • i . . . 1,..., 4.4 RETA/NING WALLS • For free-standing walls, designed to deflect at the top, we recommend that 1 , latere equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf be used for design. For basement r walls, restrained from top deflection, an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf 1 e ,,, is recommended. Both recommendations assume that the backfill behind the I . walls will be fully drained, granular material and that no other surcharges 1 . exist. A retaining wall subdrainage system should be incorporated into the - 1...,,I design as shown on Figure 6. I° h 1 . • , Positive surface dranage Should be provided around the building and in paved 1 areas directing surface runoff away from strUctUres to A suitable discharge , 4 . . r 1, 1 ' . r 4 - 1 4 1 , , 4 • • a . • ....i...1»l«...,I...w,l::_....7.«.........,a.W...__,.a..,..,..r_..r.r ,.« ,. i.,iI.J.I-,.<...r..♦s....H......MJ.,.J..r.,.s.J..J.....,.s_,. ....,,.x«r...tiAl.:-...,....«..,«,1«+.,.rte:.+.,.,..a..+v,«..« n.,,..,n. n... J� r.r ,........r.,.... ,.I n,. r.x, ,. ., „ - .1,1' Applied Geotechnology.Inc. 4.6 PAVEMENTS • The resilient modulus test results are presented graphically in Appendix B. + • Based on the results of our laboratory testing, the selected design resilient modulus was 3,000 for an undisturbed native or compacted native subgrade (minimum 92% relative compaction) . • Based on the design resilient modulus, alternative pavement sections were Ir. determined and presented on Figure 7 (pavement section vs.. equivalent axle load) . The alternative sections were determined using the Asphalt Institute procedures outlined in their Manual Series No. 1 dated February, 1992. The anticipated traffic over the truck routes can be translated into an 18-kip EAL I. over the desired design life and the alternative pavement sections taken from Figure 7. . Parking areas and main drive areas within parking areas can be similarly designed. We recommend that parking areas have a minimum section of 2.5 inches of asphaltic concrete, over 6 inches of aggregate base, over a ' compacted subgrade (minimum 92 percent ASTM D1557) . The main drive areas in (1 the parking area should have a minimum of 3 inches of asphaltic concrete. We further suggest that a minimum pavement gradient of 1.5% be maintained at all catch basin approaches to prevent "bird baths". The aggregate base should conform to the 1991 ODOT Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, Section 02630. The 1 '-0 gradation is recommended. ,. ,l • .M.. • f I ♦ I I ...w.:n.....y...r..s::Lw....a..n...,.u..t.raux-.tr.-..re.«,..rw.,...4 ,..., r�.,...v,.4..rr.a v..-..•r_-t..»...a..i:u. .... . ,-... -i r.ar. _._......-F:_.-aw.y.r«.o-...�w..r.,..r x..n-,+., ,, - ., .,..✓....... at ...e_.•... ., ..._xrw.«ldr. ' • • Applied,GeatechnoIogy Inc. 5.0 COMMENTS REGARDING SITE. DEVELOPMENT In our opinion, the planning process should consider the various problems noted in this report and the associated costs to address the soluf.iJns. In this regard, we suggest that every effort be made to minimize the quantity of site grading by minimizing the depth of cuts and constructing the buildings as close to existing grades as possible. The added costs to dry the wet soils (for filling) and drain the cut areas could be significant. The need for internal slope drainage, toe stabilizing fills, and trench drains over other graded cut areas cannot be determined until the site is graded and 9 ! carefully reviewed. We propose that a very conservative construction budget be established to provide for these extra requirements, if they are needed. The site grading for this pl oject is complicated by the high groundwater table ,n' and the possible need for extra drainage measures. Additionally, only a few contractors in the area are thoroughly familiar with compaction of wet, fine- ' grained materials. An earthwork contractor, who is willing to work with the , Owner and Engineer to resolve the possible problems associated with the groundwater conditions, is preferred. We urge you to consider a .negotiated grading contract with a qualified earthwork contractor. A mistaken low bidder could have a significant impact on the schedule, management and budget for the project. • • rr • -12- • ..d..u+.....i L'..i..µ 1 I w.e-,..n-w« ..,.....,. .,...�..,,H.o-_,.,.a,,«.ul+.nm.n,...„H...N.u4u,...,x,._.. i. _ _.. , _ ...4-..4.... .,t .,.« F y/ Applied Geotechnology Inc. 6.0 GENERAL NOTES rsl, This report was prepared solely for the Owner and Engineer for the design of the project. We encourage its review by bidders and/or the Contractor as it relates to factual data only (logs of borings, test pits and laboratory data). e, The opinions and recommendations contained within the report are not intended to be nor should they be construed to represent a warranty of subsurface ~' conditions but are forwarded to assist in the planning and design process. !'~ ' ,i, If, during construction, unexpected subsuraace conditions are encountered within excavations, we should be notified at once so that we may review such • x;� Conditions and revise our recommendations, if necessary. We request that we be retained to review the applicable portions of the plans and specifications for the project prior to bidding for conformance to our recommendations. We would be pleased to provide additional input, as necessary, during the design process. As noted in this report, there are some special conditions which should be reviewed during construction. We request that we be retained to provide these on-site observations and assist you with decisions that must be made during construction. Please feel free to contact us for this work as ", well as for any questions you might have regarding this report. ' n - l■ , • • i 1 ' '' / . ' r ICI -13-I 'K t �„ h o n I 1 - 4444 f w.el1srinaslas! rraaiNONIIN' ., Y"" '••;��:�1 "�.� "w,. 1f it �.�.,,....ti,a•-1l«„w `»�.., � ,. � I "'aA`, ...,.� "a --4 .4., '.4'.., ...x.11 .t`�+ i,wj'�rb•� � ,� "L„.. L",” .. .`�4 �' y"..»,....-_..."_r— 1 tt,,"" .� Kr�1w, �, .�. .;i :. ,;eta ,�.... sn ll tell'/ ~S w... » !' ,, c s. I f `W�tw �� p , —..- .i t f..S ttt"_..i ,,. "rj-1.1,= �j/ 1 ,.� � - ,{,1 „; ,, 'rye°,* ,,,.,, � py. .it .., -, �. l ...11,-„,...,,I.:.. , „w.,..,.-r'.;, a 1 y,,`.»�..� „,.. „ , '! i� ” .u'.�M f �rrr,..w': 4s, � �� ,kLL'. q1.""'`+w ��„�,". ,.-a..,.»,.,...�.�",,,,"""✓.�' (�`''f �,� '� ti µcar ....1 Kt,�,,«. ew ^" � ..� t ;l .....7in. .,,...� h,Hi'ai rf e 5 '1 1 ` by" I 1. . " �,{� .a.n�".I «, i r e '� 7 �,.,;,✓w.. ci.,..�,,w.";1. »« 4!cr r I�.!xt. �• y., . /1',- uj 7-, , �? L=; uhTjGu st. wv5? �i�re+� n. ,. = �4. r. ,.... r ..r s. as ' ii_..)» -)--..r.," • �)/�-w yam »1 k 1' 1 �� n�I �` 1 "' ., CPlor±. ' t r(Cx.c.,+ti,:. ��"?f r.y....�....3 L L:3�".�'ia J 1- -(."n r.rwr w 't �,v+c".....r'.' 7 ✓,r... 0 9t .. � T"11 1 w i�r )✓ f v,�t , ..r" 1...+...-..d, w� " S''�7 i •Yr �.i'`..--'-')". 7.1 -rte '1, ›,',,'i " .I ,,,... ----r.."--F--.,,� ,: , . /' t . % ,T '�� I+r SikH;irr ••�`y Gf( ,!/}, /!n' . L ,, t r0/ ', .y,r"'.+---7- I T" '..,�\ It O S t 1 //.�'//yrj�' !' aL YI aprp nAaa1�t...«��'�Y, h�'. iii 1 r '"` w„�..,w, 'rC 1�' � � �J , ».� �,.�”P 'fit �,, } ,)'„:,; 2"/ II A'n,L.mt F 11 Y , . *4:14, ---1`,..,,,! "ii ILI 1 t.,, \ , •un u T.�ltfl. x 1 ��f"� r ,,, ,`��..w',��`t ,,,,',::4,,...,.-- 1244,--1.-_-113,....1 414tJ . --r'--.-1 u, �,-....A. 'i .r,,.. tr. , i �� \.�\ ""s � r ".ww,^v'1..ti y 7� St,, /,,b I C7 1 ~ wi I. �.�Gt." b i•ti^ �' � ff.:. ,,, ,.,,, +:6 h.... k; i nfa'R,k'' i:.r...+.....Y'?".. ,' rl� ,'$±rct`\ �,--/ f/ ,�''J�' .ti's `' la , '----N., ,wt(,J "�•"�Lr 1 ':*«'...z11^.1,0...'.... .^ �j Li • �� � ,�. 1. .'' r y"n•``�5 "e� . i �0 '= !: d 50,t odd s.,' J's.ct ' --', 'A`",% <ft,• '�\ //A. S(,K"'j& ` ( W..'. wl'br.w:,nLy.r•'' ...1 !^�•ii I{Vlf ( '"q: </:;1 �� :rri i i ""- ti-1,,,kGc r T, 'a tt ' 'I'm`I r`'i � �I �`` ,t tUr 4'..""`". µ' "'� K,1 4 1 ,/ k� � y ) t�k, �T.K. ...i w..' ,• f._ , � 4.SITE• 11*44 e.' 'F PF � f �T T �:, " ; I r .40.146-- s•! :001,I�, . n ., [ M i 1K • k1n r Y �� ' fi. � ,./, 0;f,t !i[N g t��V "��""�� 'i�°� , C,„ y Wr rnr I �. t'y' r .t ,9t'wb � q 4 y ' u � M h, , r.M A* t 4 arri � »_,0_f . ^ �s i1+�, , '� /K• • �1 4� e'"±, "..T"-- r s w. . � � ,, s d N► tT " � C-, ?iv- ,..) n. . r«..� , ,t ' 1 ' Vp � p' - 5 t"i \10 ""'y "``•' . , r3 �'V , ;h. y Lt,l, t j `=`' ��. - G y .`�t1 I*- "" r ��r, • ,G '"... i 2 .„,, N. It,w. �. r i..q,r nXw 7 ,'� / i w 1 tt t . . ' . ,,, ce ''.'4 of'it.', t,J•' C J � ,t .w""="."". = •• P " II _ ' . r ii .' , . f i 4.••••..../ ,i"" : • ,,,),. 1, 7,'IP'.-8 ,,' .7 r .. I .'' 11„ ' -,' .'' : , . 1 'V 7-- : : , : 1 ,--/1 / , . ' E1-4 . ra, . . ., , tv_ . ,, . I a 1 ,",' � A 9499 �/ri (���J � ' : . , "I,P 00)r'''111411" ' ' t' , '. ' , i il/I /I/ 2W�'h7:1�a' • .F I , , I '8..... (3.5) \ .. , - .. l . J.Z°'Y 1 l f„'�� 11 *�„L;,J . vs 'I' � 1 � ai { �4„ i` ' tK M I 1N 1, 1 t li!1.1 J , (''' 'iii T,-6, ` �,• / 1€: L \� ' L . . . . . , . . . , .. , . . . : . , . ,, . ..... .. . . . . . . ... , ,,, , . � C=* � r r W iyN�r11Y MIIl�� r"1•,_. L,,, , . �` ti� d . , . , IB-C_ ,, ' '"1/4"=;:,,,,-:,wrr OA":7*'"'7--"4---j-----_,"'7"-'(I'9) 44.--, ''�� l. '"."*-:— '''''''''"-..' '',' ,' ' ''''i '' ' ' '1 { Tigard at•ti, it , . 0414�R titi..ioi Wit ^✓ I,Ckl d 1 . ai1Lq Mitt .._. : L/ri- I , L 100nd Arir Woe rl •�• •.. :.�» 7U tprosi •r• .y. ' f'Mlb+ LT ipll ofK1'd "�,;,., as � � roN DA1n55.., i>awW 6�i1 kMvt Arid eo flSO d'. ,, unoa«xw.aarnw iYoiW*7.,, ( I. 'ammo,uijoW vrioi, 1'uwp Nei L7 PW1tloo�i � ' � ' Natio iiiiiowkirt iii ctY' ti.Arse t,lti is wY ^ " .. i ' M . i ,,,, I' Yu • • • LEGEND TP- 1 Exploratory Test Pit made by Applied Geotechnology'Inc. T� f. A( Exploratory Boring made by Applied Geotecttnology Inc. 1% (3.4) (Depth to Groundwater in September 1992) ,,, ' 1.111 d�iYkk GNLY ¶�,� — [141 [Depth to Groundwater in December 1992] : ... ... _ 1 B-1 e' , [2.6] i'` L , .IL- -2f l • • Monk (4.7) IN • Ili ...3 \ YN r, • • MEW MOM t w ■ «► , fP-2 ► 1420 • zap __t, , Li, . , . .2 r._:� 10 150 0 150 300 \. SCALE IN rEE7 � \ ■■ Appilad Goottchnoiogy inc. EXPLO ATIO N LOCATION PLANFl u GeotecArvcalEngineerlrt Geology&Hydrogeology Tigard Center Tigard, Oregon • • JOEL NIUME3 R DRAWN APPROVED D L7A7E REVISEC� t A7E 14as e+ KPVV e N d 0 41 • ■ . + A.,.•..7-�.......................:w ,_.i,.u.,. .�� ... .. aw......r w, L L,( 1 i ..�,,.1,.—,:.. `� , r .. ._ _ - ...I.r.... ..u..a:...,-3..: .;;.+.,..,_J....f.+«.M�....Ai.aN..,.l:a.,..:,. ....i:..-�-.,w:a..+.,:,�..».L.iM�w......, u.as.,J.:-..r•.-:,.,.,im..,r,.-fi..,.xa..w,::., eJ.«.�r.,,..,.,..:.lM-i.Jn�:.�n.-,..anw4^..a 1 4 ' i•. r Cub Foods on' ', Proposed -___. • F ,,+ 300 I I -3' *' 8-4 ) Approx. Proposed Grade 110 ft. H , • �.� r 200 �? _ — _._. ._ __._ - --- —- .� ____ ._.. Y,_ ---- '� Loose to medium dense, fine sandy SILT (Alluviurri) �--Medium dense to very stiff Y� some.'C � C1Ce„ to som clay SILT w r h r I , I . Structural Ell!l I i Y{` 4 , y , I � ' ' � � i � � � ' . i H 1 4 2b0 0 200 400 r -mow VEFTICAL Ad HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 1 . , I I I I I A li rr' w � ` e � r sn F _ n a1 ° ' / r `+n.. • • • ' .•.•,.da.....-.ar,,,..,.-.m,.—}.w».,,..,- ....,.. .t,t «..•t «k:r..9.t:,..,.... ...4.•,....k...«,..4L..,,,+„,.„,k,._.-... r l..»�.1.:,-,..,.:t»'t.xi:,.. ......,,.• .w.,.W,.,...,aa.......,,.....«.,..«- ...:,,u,',,._..;+r...,k-:...n:.,M.i..»M..rt..,r,...,;X-...,wk:...,w i &. t 4 . I • a • n' •ed1 Cub Foods and Retail Buildings - -- B-I Pro 300& 9 0 ��t` . Existing .Grade ' 8-2 3 8° posed Grade de i J co U u. .....�., r..�� ��...�. .•.�..� ..�. __ _ .�.,r.-+ ; �. ...r +...,.rte !"�""'r �....�' ��, ., 'LOO Y+ - .+i.,”.r.0 w,.+ _.... `'�� ,,,.,rte:"^`�, ""�� Variable depth MAN--MAD FILL ''8c ORGANIC SOILS ' w } • -dii� i dense, .iLT (Alluvium) • IOa stiff • to very ,/' • •c to same cloy . d N, a echn Ptr�u�ir Geotechnical i:ngineeritig ' SUBSURFACE 3 Geology&Hydrb eo1ogY .Tigard 'Center a • g rt e Qr 1.)n JOU ME R I DRAWN � APPROVED oAle. F4EVISED vts�.�... ,...,... DATE • y�{ fF ....a t . . Jr Al • • , 14 A • Rock Buttress • Slab ' ------^ H ,. : i 5 Mitt G •4 '......4_,.. , 1, .. '1.� (S���Under Slob --7-7-'77-77- � � � y�.y� • ,M .� De�Ecsii�� Below o1.0, 4 bb Gr 0 ('' d er �y '.,p Od Q v, d,»t� 0 6 4 f � ��',.�'Yd 4 ; ww Granular .�� Ill� • Structural , ~' mill _ = ' • -------X w Filter Fabric • • _... 3i Aggregate B . . warrent constr , use ODOR" quail • 4, . �r tv •c+ h ... , a . �, ",0 ----Vapor Barrier :... .. o e 8 a ,y 4y ,°,,, la Tof I _0,� Br�so Aggregate "b° 0 a 0 0o% .. COi•npaotod Filter . Subgrades Fabric FILL AREA CUT ►: NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1, Drain Cravel to, be 3/4"-1 12 iY crushed rock, clean ' •,•111.• 2. Filter Fabric - A�atf4 c h� � u,v�Men �3, Sand - fine aggregate r concrete or other approved free draining iond ' 4 ease Aggregate M per OJOT Standard S etifiodtioris for 4',1 Highway Ooristruction (1991) Section 026329 I , '',1'''''? 5, Vapor ' , , r a t�ier � See Te a a • ' , i YnriaiaMC4irHrurraa�, '...\\.„.„,,, 1„.......». ...,...w,,,....,.... ,..a...,..w,4,4:,..,,.._.,....,,.....1,..,,,'-.- ,..w_,.._.........i.....+.,,v,...94.tl.,.J4.:...M...,.,,4,......r.,.«.........a...".,...,.u. .w,''w''",...r 1.,...m».:,N.t.,:r......„.-...,..._r.u..,.,,a,.....r_ ...«,....u._.. yy I • I • ',,. Original 'Grade \ iTh2 ` ,may Horizontal ., • I e' s • �' " " •° Sand Toe Drain As Required f( F 4! , 6' �Rr -- -- Trench Drain See o Detail This Sheet Sand i ;. `, I ' ' 6" ADS Drainguard �2 car (fabric wrapped slotted rriin w B' 1-rent Bdse Building Pad �- if conditions „ ' 'flexible pipe) slope -ren l c oristruct cut 'areas and 10' beyond. f min. 0.53"'tn drain �tr - ODOT duality I -0 base aggregate, i lalr. l 1' min. TRENCH DRAIN DETAIL NOT TO SCALE . ...� r 4 .5S1 cb' —2" Sand -2" ) Base Aggregate c % c o Q g O a OO qq nC o O a b O o O°o :„Qo 0 8n 31 �W G AII1 0 G Q -21 �_O- O O O O-ae-.caha�: up._=O -•.._r�.._.,o Y i .' �+V Y tl/ n 4 Perforared rigid PVC Draa r7 Pipe, 'min. 0.5% gradient �IJT CUT AREA 0` BEYOND CUT AREAS NOT TO SCALE r4 1 41 ' 1 ..,: . i bR ,IrNAG DETAIL FIGURE Applied eata+G ,�sogy Inc. ' Geotechnlael Engineering - • + 7 i Ord Celiter • Geology&Hydrog eolc 0y Tigard, �re a . ;•` ISE° DATE JOB NUMBER DRAWN AWpRC7VFD�W' C1AT� REV 140 .di �.�.....�.. I{I'1ll! I I � I , 1 •r ' w r I I 1 1 • a. \ , „ . Yy�',{<51 4 '�p(1�� I ° BACKFILL: • if- c I , z • c 1* 4 „,/ . ' ��IIw�R. 4' rte.,,o.,,,.....Q 4 d' �►�i A• 1 T Flir I . ;� MAN-MADE FILL • --REPLACEMEI•IT FILL 7 2 ay NATIVE SOILS L e + Z - rym"'" 1 . • : ° , . , il.. Srp y� }'� A py �i C NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1, AU He ►leoement Pill & Backfiil to be "Structural dill" See Tuft, ) . i pp ed chnokkgy bnc OVER X AVATIOI!l � �t• ��ro�e 6l=il��!I.:,� EC+�E�i r+«uR� Gotech l aI erIng' EELW FOIJNDATION II 5 1 ro.a egv l av g gv Tigard Center ' JOB NUMBER PRAWN APPROVED L 1'."d(dr �DATE REVISED CAFE �..a 1�U 50 1 GNp Ik;I L4i0G-...:..r.wrrr....n:.+r.�wi...:i .,.. 1 • ,n. . • I • . 6" seal of compacted native soil -- Slab . . r I I .. in landscaped areas only . a ... 4 Asphalt. or Landscaping Soil, as required elope surface ;a s, I '' I e I° I to drain) , `' 4 Drain. Rock ^' • ice+/'\ I e I, I I I I K amin. • ; I , I • • O.:0 O p. • 0 1, ' '�44,4,—..." a O � d'a 8« • Y Q .. ..?,.....,,,..........0. , Base Rock • � .�, Filter Fabric � 0 � � i+�$�. ..'' '+ • «0 0 ;0 Is*o•q •«0.•c:0•«�.•O« n0 • ♦ • •• O. O. O • . d O«0 Y •• 0 ,i I I •BO►O'•" Ai0+ •O••p0 �OO•tl0�0 0j0 , A • .� . pa.O•0 0dMO. « p«•Drain Gravel — • •,O•• • 4 d . • • .,••b• •O • • «O' . d Q OQO •• • •'0:•q Perforated • .0 0 •n 0.-00. .0.Y • o• Y.0 .• ., « . ; 9 O •O,0 p O`O•Q• ««O•O• i• r. Drain Pipe (6"), r—•- • • O •� • Q r • O ` .0• O O«0. �,„ .O. • • r0. • . rte' • 4, ' ,,, r l 2 �.-.....• .\ SCHEIr1 ATtC NOT TO SCALE ..� .. NOTES: I. Filter Fabric is non-woven geotextile (Propex 4545, •1 • Mirafi 140N or equivalent), ` � 2. Drain pipe to be perforated/rigid PVC. Lay Drain Pipe on minimum 0.5% radient, widening G excavation as required, Maintain pipe above 2; 1 slope, � shown. 1, 4 , . 3, Drain Gravel to be clean washed/crushed 3/4" to 1-1/2" - , gravel , 4. Where pavements or walks span baakfill zone, eliminate i soil seal 84 landscape soil. Backfill with l"-O !. Native soi p ODOT quality base aggi~eclat . . ti , • 1w µ .,,' • Appile Gootectiolog Inc. �.M.»w....�.� PI OURE RIMET FOOTI GeDtechicei Engineering : Tigard Center .c ni�gy Hydra geology + i • r , Tigard Oregon JOB NUMBER DRAWN I APPROVED DATE .«.:�,.�,.. . REVISEb DATE ■ �^• 1405,01 CPW 1�123)02 I 1 . e V 101, • 'l. •...I r...rn..... �. w :', ''''..- . / 12 'seal of compacted I' '� areas only). Use base • i q aggregate below pavements cl - • General Backfill (Use clean, washed 1 river sand no Filter Fabric required)' min., Filter Fabric (Amoco 4545 or equal) , -.... , ----/A . , ,., .. ...: , . Drain Gravel o ,.` + ' Perforated Drain Pipe (6") •. /r,c?&+5'�� `..."' r fir,.. 1 y' \` • , r I r ' SCHEMATIC - NOT TO SCALE ,. NOTES: I I I I. Filter Fabri c is n o n w ove n c)eotextile (Amoco 4545, 1 Mirafi 140i'J, or e�l�uivalent) 2. Drain pipe to be perforated rigid PVC, Lay Drain Pipe on minimum 0,5% gradient, widening excavation as required, Maintain pipe above 2:I slope, as shown. I 3, All granular backfill is recommended for support of slabs, pavements, etc. (See text for structural fill). 4, Drain gravel to be clean washed 3/4" to 11/2" gravel, 1 " • r r I FIGURE pp Biie��� �e� gy WALL SUBD A!N DETA L Geoteohnical Engineering • Geology i Hydrogeology i 1 lgardl Center r "" Tigard, Oregon . , NUMB C�Rr WNa. APPROVED�.. DATE REVISED i405.0 �� I pW 101191g DATE M..1110.1A01,0001•106,1101•101.1 n tl,'f 1 „ ' ire , ' Y '' t - f {1 'h'r -I. I r i- PAVEMENT AVE M SECTION VS. EQUIVALENT AXLE LOAD _ - r 3,:€ 00 MART = 60°F • 2 - - f_ t I f _ I. l I I I I r E i i r� 1 1 1 i I _I } I j11i - - I E r--i I I�- - I - i 1 �_ 1 - ` c t m i t t I I - `.�. 1 1 J1F11 1 ! 1.= 1 I I: ! f i ( I 1 € I I 1 _ _ [ 1 I I �1 } 1 I ' it i 1 1 i I t i #� t _,Se I f i I I i i i , - - -- _ 1 1 1 ` ( .. ... . I ,_, 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I - 1 I=_ - 1 1 I t i�(��a I 3�� t i 1, I 1 i- 1 - - =1 .Cj ui - i i t_ [ I �J _ i t 1 1 i 1 i i T_ t I - j _ _ - 1 . 1 I I f I `� ( i 1 i 1 I 1 1- I 11 1 ,}�_ i i 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 6_ .0- - i I I 1 i i_---I-- - t--I I 1 1 I I 1 t I I i 4! - - i i - t , 1 I t _ E I I t I t i £ i Y 1 i i 1 1 1 f - - - -- C -- - t 1 I. - i I i [ 1 i I i , t ( i 1 1 t [ ll i �.V. IE 1 • - r I I 1 I I - -+- - 1 € i 4 t I . _ . _, - - - 1 1 ► I `-I 1 I- -- '-1- 1 I U� 1 I ! 1 ( 1 ji ' I ] i I 1 E . <-- - - I _ 1 [ I - I I _ __1` 1 t I k I E I_ i 1 EI I III , _ u...9,__ s ---Note:See text for rnimim11 _ pavement design in parking: ., - Equivalent Axle Lo C!d (EAL) _ -__ i _ At w areas-area and main drives serving:parking-areas _ Re-f: Thickness Design Applied Geotechnoloey Inc. PAVEMENT DESIGN CHART FIGURE . ,_ .: _ Asphalt Institute _ Geatechnical Engineetinr� ; Tigard Center MS-- Feb .1 9 i Geology&Nydroeo;tagy F - T Tigard, Oregon - ' JOB-NUMBER DRAWN _ APPROVED DATE REVISED D ATE r = _ • 14.05.01- KM - - 10/27/92 i- • v, .„ - 1 " . ., .. . I . . . . . Applied Geotechnology Inc. , . APPENDIX A ''-•:'; , , FIELD INVESTIGATION 1' TIGARD CENTER TIGARD, OREGON ganlpsagry:Borincig. Our scope of work included six exploratory test borings, designated 8-1 through B-6 which were field located approximately as shown on the Explorations Location Plan, Figure 2. The test borings were drilled with a mud rotary drill rig under subcontract to Subterranean, Inc. of Sumner, ' ' Washington on August 31 and September 1, 1992. . - - Within the borings, samples were typically taken at 2.5-foot interyals in the . upper 20 feet and 5-foot intervals below that point. Most sampling was „ fi \; I performed by the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) method (ASTM D1586) which drives a 2-inch O.D. split barrel sampling tube into the soil with blows from e .. a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to ., Le drive the sampler each of three 6-inch increments is recorded and the gum of . - ' ' the blows for the final 12 inches of penetration is regarded as the N-value • or SPT resistance. The N-value is a measure of the relative density of sands . . or the strength/consistency of clayey, cohesive soils and is recorded as blows , , per foot (bpf) . Following removal of the sampler from the boring and field 1. - classification of the sample, representative soil samples were taken from the , split barrel and saved in airtight jars. The jars were identified and ,. ,I returned to our laboratory. In addition to SPT sampling, thin-walled tube samples were substituted in the . . sampling interval to obtain relatively undisturbed samples for poosible ' laboratory testing. ASTM D-1587 procedures were used. These consist of . hydraulically pushing 3-inch, thin-walled steel tubes below the base of the e boring and carefully removing the tube from the hole. The ends of the tubes \ , were sealed to prevent moisture loss, were identified and returned to our . , ' .. . .f. ' [ laboratory for extrusion, classification and testing, as required. " . All test borings were logged by an experienced geologist from our staff. Our . . geologist directed the sampling program and recorded sample depth/type, identified all jar/tube samples, field classified the soils, recorded relative . . drill action, and developed a preliminary log of the soil unitS encountered. Final logs of the test borings are presented on Figures A-1 through A-6, These reflect the deecriptionS of soil units encountered and their relative depths from the ground surade. The SPT resistance values (N-Yaluee) and [ natural moisture contents of the samples are plotted graphically. Information • relative to groundwater is also presented on the Logs o Borings. . , 4 • . ... Exploratory Teat Pits. In addition to the 'borings, our scope of work included a series of eight test pits, designated TPe,1 through TP-8 and located approximately as shown oh Figure 2, The Test Pita were excavated on SePteMber • 8, 1992 to depths of 6.5 to 12.5 feet with a tractor-mounted badkhoe Under i• subcontract to W. Moe & sons of Portland, Oregon. 0 within the test pits, representative samples of the variouS soil units were , to and placed in airtight jars along with bulk bag samples. Relative • , • strength measurements were made at frequent intervals In the test its with 1 . ' 1 . .`,.. 1 0 ' ' . .. , . . I . , . Appalled Geotechtriology Inc. . . . . .. a Pocket Penetrometer, a manually operated device used to approximately . determine the in situ relative strength of cohesive soils. An experienced I.. geologist from our firm classified the soil units, logged the test pits, obtained the required samples, and generally directed the field operations. , . ,•• Logs of the exploratory test pits are presented on Figures A-7 through A-15. , • 1 , l • , . , . , . • . • .. . - , . . , 1 , • i 1 1 i • • ,..• • • • , 1' • [. 1 • , i .. , , 1 f r . t l• • -.4 - ' , • '" ,, [ r t . • ',. 1 .t 4,6 • 1 . ,. t. , .,• • • , 1 ' • , f i . ,r1 , . . •, - . , STANDARD . . SOIL DESCRIPTION w w w PENETRATION RESISTANCE s a.--I DLucc z w (140 LB.WEIGHT,30"DROP) <0 tI : O0Q u- A N-VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT c�9 SURFACE ELEVATION 225± feet CO c9 o �� �25 50 Loose, brown SILT with some fine 0 • • • Io . : sand; damp, trace to some clay. j . :. • . . .* • . • • : ',', . (MAN-MADE FILL).... — „_ _ ,_ _ _ _ _ _. 3.5 va Z.."' • • : . : : : 6. . , . . , , • • I Loose, brown SILT; moist st to wee 1 p , trace clay to 7 feet p • •I . • •• • . • •. : I 0 't, ..,,. . .1. . . . t./'y • , ,I . , , . . , • ,.a1w . . t IY 15 4.4•..••14•• ..•.a.,.a•J•,.:•••,••••.u•.•.••.............4.40,0004 c''• .. [ b4,d ._ ..... -- •._.._ — _...• �•.. ._ ._._. — _._. —.. 16 0 1 , . . • •• , 4 • • . . . . . •• Loose, gray, fine sandy SILT; wet . . : : : : : • • . • : . : • : ,... ' • • a . . 4 , . , Z , , 4 . . . • � ' . ..r .....r• .r�..a ter••. ..■•.. �...* ....••r r.n� •�.•.. ...... ...., 19„0 , . . . • , , . . . . . 4 • . , . f •• Loose, gray SILT with someafine, sand, . . - 20 .,.; trace clay; wet c)1-- . • : : : . : , , • : : : : : : ° 1 • �.._. ..... •._._ — ,.._,_ _._. _.. . .__. __ __ - 24.0 , •. 4 •• J . , . . . • ■• 4 . . 4• • • • • 4 . • • Very stiff to hard, brown to gray, 25 .•....•..,.......a.,.•. • ,.,......a...4......1.41,...,..,:.• ,44544•4, clayey SILT; uamp ,-+ . . . , . , , , .Q I . v) - 4444 , i .. , . ' ' , [....., 1 CV 30.a......•••4•••4.,.ra„•••,.,.•..••.7.:4...,.u„•...aa aa........0....... , t . 1, i 1� 35 , . 1 . • a . , • 1 2.1."0,0.SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED IMPERVIOUS SEAL .WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT f u 3.0"0.0.THIN WALL SAMPLE ATTEPFERG LIMITS WATER LEVEL FOR DATE SHOWN El GRAM SAMPLE LIQUID..MIT '-•—NATURAL WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP I ' SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED PLASTIC LIMIT I . ",j. J Tr O YEAR E 1 SOIL bESCRIpTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2.WATER LEVEL IS EOIt DAIS SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME � • ,. Applied Geotoc t�+alo inc. Log o Boring B 1 1+;URE I. Geotechnioel Erioneenng I. Geology&Hydrogoology Tigard Centel i �" i i ti Tigard, Oregon 0 5 ' (, ;; JOB NUMBER DRAWN APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE I 1405a01, 1PI1J /15/ 2 „• i�� 4444. _.: . . .,..•.. . ,....... 4444._4444... 444:4. 4444. .. .., ... .,u.�.. ,� ,,.. .. •. .. .. 4444. 4444... ,. .. .. , A . 4 • • • ,,� . , ' o. STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION i. w Z •1-- PENETRATION RESISTANCE • a ate. }z w (140 LB.WEIGHT,30"DROP) <0 a.u. 2 O I--, A-u- A N•VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT [ cc SURFACE ELEVATION �z cQn �§ oz 0 25 50 i' 35 �5 .. I .. Hard, gray, clayey SILT; damp : : : : . . *T3, f' • • . 45 55 l ' ' —�-- ___. J, : : : : " : : : : ; ' : : �,, , - -----�-,� 46.5 , . 1 , • Bottom of Boring, completed 9/1/92 . . „.. : : : l 1 Notes: • . 1. Piezometer installed. : • 1 . . 50,•u•.1•••.•1.1.•IU 111.•••/1.••.oy140•44.1•a...Ul:.•HJL1 • . . . . . • • 1 • 7 1 1 ♦ . . . 1 . 4 . • 4' p 1 . • • • 1 • . • 1 • • 1 • . . 4 I:. LAB /E UUS/�.�y•• Y DATA .+Y •+-a •w . • •+ • ' • ' ' 1 • • • • • • • • 1 . • • t •u4 Lll4.. DENSITY✓ .� ' Y • 1 1 • 1 • • �• ' Sample [ -.. 5 5..Y•.1......1.1.1•.•.••....1.1•....1.1.•,.1.A...../•1...1.1••1.14.11..1•••.•(~ ' Sample Depth ~a -`•:wc 1 1 • • . • : t st Na (ft,) (pcf) (Pcf) (%) .; . . . . . . . . . . 1 • • •. mw . 126.2 103.3 22 .2 . s-�� 1.1-1.7 12 . . ' S-lb 0.4-�1.0 123.3 103.6 19.1. ' S-3a 4:4.5.0 126.3 98.8 27.9 : . : • , : , . , , ' • 1 , 1 • , . . • • 1 . . . . . A 'I • S-3 b 3.7-4,3 1 4.5 95.0 31 0 60.......................................1•.•••...........1.1•,......1, •.•A 4 • I 6 • 0 . . . . . . . 1 4 . 4• }} . 1 . , . . . 1 . •• 1 •• : • 1 . . 1 . • f . • 1 • • • 1 . . • 1 . . . . . . • ■ 65.I.i•••1•i•.1••.•..sl.•..............••i....t•••...t.•.......•••Y•1.11.••.i.•..- • � . 1 . I . 1 1 • � • • f 4 f 1 • • • • • • • • . • • • I • • • • • . • 0 25 50 1 • , 2.5"0.0.SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED , U IMPERVIOUS SEAL +�WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT • " THIN WALL TERBERO LIMITS C 3,C1 0. .T SAMPLE AT WATER LEVEL.raR DATE SHOWN GRAB SAMPLE I ';6 ..t LIOUIO LIMIT *• SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED L l"`'NATURAL WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP PLASTIC LIMIT I SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE'AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL, 2 WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF'TEAR f , Applied Geetectirmolagy Rick Lag of Boring B 4'i Engineering B. Geology&Hydrogeology Tigard COlitek Tigard, Oregon A 1 2 - • c�a , , NUMBER DRAWN APPROVED d YE' I REtttiED DA � � �� + 1. 1405,01 KPW 9/15/92 •. +i • • I n S • I U SOIL DESCRIPTION w z I— PENETRATION RESISTANCE ' o STANDARD C { ..,..1--w ( w f=„w (140 LB.WEIGHT,30"DROP) a u : Or c-u A N-VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT rw �9 SURFACE ELEVATION 225± feet ©z g D o? 0 25 50 Medium um stiff,, brown SILT with some 0 : w SF fine sand and clay; damp. .._. : : : _.� (MAN-MADE FILL) kI 04 Loose to medium dense, brown SILT ____ ' • ♦ . • , • , 1 �-- 5 0 5 , t,v with some fine sand; moist to wet, , Q, ,, trace clay v . ` • • . . 6.a . . 1 , ;I 1 1 12i. 1 •1 1 1 1 I • , ' fey' • 1 • • , f ♦ • 1 • ,y pj[�`��i�, �l .gyp . • •• •1 ♦, • • � • • 1 . ■ ull T;. • ♦ • 1 1 I 1 . 1 1 1 . ♦ • 1 • , W 5 .I,1 .1111.1'•♦.11.1.1111•.♦1....) l.' L �.: . becomes fine, sandy SILT at 18' 4 1 rn 20• . . ..H '''. 22.0 Ca : : • A: : : ` : ' ` : 0 ♦ : : : I cn 24.0 ♦ , 11 . 1 • • r • • . , • . • C t( . : • • . . .�.M I : , • • • • �I Very stiff, g ra y SILT with some Clay; moist to wet, trace fine sand _ l 30 fYI.•IIYI111.....1,....•1111Y•11♦.....,,ii.♦♦11,f•11r•.,•••1la•1.1 YI IrI 1,1N r.u{ y . 1 j T: : : : :♦ • ♦ ♦ . 1 1 . 1 '• . • a . . ♦ 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 ♦ • • • • • ♦ . •w 1 I 1 1 r 135 . . 1 , , - d 1 �1:�. I _ ,w, 41 .�.... ...�r..•.��r 1 .. 4.: 0 25 5d ,• ; .J,.`;: 12•Q"OD,SPI_Il SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED IMPERVIOUS SEAL WATER CONTENT IN PEPCENT 1,� r' ; f 3.0"0,0.THIN WALL SAMPLE AT'rERBEPG LIMITS S7 WATER LEVEL FOR DATE SHOWN ® GRAB SAMPLE I �---1 • L .,LIquID LIMir ' ,... * SAMPLE NOT'RECOVERED "� NATURAL WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP PLASTIC LIMIT 1.SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACE5'ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2.''WATEFI LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN ayD MAY VARY;WITH TIME OF YEAR Appiled GeoteOhnology GeoteohnICal Engineering Tig Tigard Center I Geology&Hydrbrjeology 1 ,l rt 4 Tigard, CSI egon ig . P DA E RED JOB NUMBER DRAWN A PRgVEp b 5 01 KPW � , � 9/15/02 ♦ 8 • r ,_ , 7 \ ' ' . . , t . -, . I STANDARD v SOIL DESCRIPTIONI �... w ° PENETRATION RESISTANCE l a. h Li, w z r (140 LB„WEIGI-IT,30"DROP) t3 O � .z O I-- �-u N VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT { o SURFACE ELEVATION y oz vi ez 0 25 50 35 I„ Very stiff, gray SILT with some clay, („*.r), I trace fine sand r ■ d• 40 41.5 V • • , 1 • • , I ' ,, Bottom of Boring, completed 9/1/92 u., r. Notes: 5 1. Piezometer installed. 45 ..• ♦."• I' • LAB DENSITY DATA ` . 50.. ^� u11 UINU.•U.IH•., 1,.1.,1..,,.•1NU••1•,•f,H•bfu ••.Ind• •.•_ • Sample Depth ,°w 2('d WC I • . Na (ft.) (pcf) (pcf) I /a) / . • 1'' S-1a 1.4-2.0 104.9 87.4 267U • , • S-1b 0.7-1.3 104.5 86.7 20.6 : : : : : : : : ; ` 6.6-7.2 123.2 93.6.. 31.6 I S�Oa 1 • • + S-3b 5.9-6.5. 126.4 96.1-, .31.5 ; , • . , Y • • , , . • 1 S-3c 5.2-5.8 125.5 96.1 • '30.5 55 4 , • , 1 • t I • ' ' :. 1 I 60 ,,.. .. 2••IH....NbfYf,1U.1••.♦1+1♦.H•/1•14 , ,,' ' [ . , . . . . 0 25 50 I rw� 2,0"O.D,SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE F SAMPLER PUSHED IMPERVIOUS SEAL 0 WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT 3,0"0•D,THIN WALL SAMPLE ATTERBERO LIMITS WATER LEVEL FOR DATE SHOWN GRAB SAMPLE ��-LIIiUIDLIMIT , * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED L NATURAL WATER CONTENT �OBSERVATIONWELL TIP PLASTIC LIMIT I.SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERPACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL 2 WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OP YEAR I ' Applied G of � �� r��: FIGURE� �g Cf �CP,�g � 2 1 . . a�D�echnlcel Engineering y and enter �„I Geology 6 -ydrogeology I 1 I 2 2 9 Tigard, re on ,. aunt, JOB,•...•.,.,.. ER DRAW N APPROVED DATE... REVISED DATE , 1510 KPW 9/15/92 , I „, / :d • • • t , STANDARD _ SOIL DESCRIPTION _, w 2 1- PENETRATION RESISTANCE , El, o w ,..w (140 LB,WEIGHT,30"DROP) " ; <C!",' 0-LL. 's Q H o-LL ei N•VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT -Q SURFACE ELEVATION 2051' feet oz a oz 25' 50 : Stiff, brown SILT with some fine -, Q , , . ,• ,---• r . . ' , 4 pr �1 sand; damp, trace clay. (probable " 1.0 Le) c•.I \ MAN-MADE FILL) / 01 a° • 1._..._ __ _ — — _.... _._ __.1 nI Co A Very stiff, brown and gray SILT; �. 4.0 damp to moist, trace to some clay . : : : : • . 1 { ' '• Medium dense, brown SALT with trace r' f , �' " : : . . . . . to some fine sand and clay; moist d. . . f : : : : : : : • , to wet + — — ___.. * ........ .- — —- 9.0 ; Very loose to medium dense, brown, . . . . . . . . 1 r fine, sandy SILT; wet, trace clay '�? 10 s. . , . { . f" I . . . . r . . . to 18 feet : . . : : • : : . . 4 . . t..0 t) n+ ® , , [ , 1,-, • ; l. thin silt layer at 18' , sandy 00 • SILT becomes gray . f . . . . , A . . • _ •}n OA 444..4......f..4...f.4...ai.4.../..1..H...,N.H. �^ :;' u A' : : : : . F : { : : : ...4... �� �� __ ..�� _.* Orr ........_ r.._w ...n._ ** �.._••� M 2 3 Y . { . 1 1 Y . . . 1 . 4 . . ) ' ,/, ' Stiff, gray SILT; moist to wet, trace : : : : : : : : : : ; : : ' ' k; ' fine sand and clay : , . 1 . 4 . . . y © fHf 11..44.1..111 H11..HN41H 4..4....•..1..11.11HH4111 �, ullE,4 ._...--. ....r_-..,_ 27.0 ; . . • Hard, gray, clayey SILT; damp . ' 1„4.1 {....,..14.4.1. ,..1...............114.11.....S-' 3 U 1 . . . yl { , . . v)1 , . . . , . . I';. . . . . . . I. . . . , . . . , . . [ v) , . . . {`. . . . . . . 0 2f5 50 V 1 '- 2..0”O.0.SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED , IMPERVIOUS SEAL 0 WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT , . ;3.0'1 O.D,THIN WALL SAMPLE ATTERBERG LIMITS G 32_, WATER LEVEL FOR DATE SHOWN Y CA GRAB SAMPLE -w-a't-W " ,. L-• VUID LIMIT * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED ("`NATURAL WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP PLASTIC LIMIT 'I SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAI, 2 WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR .tee . AFPHec Geote~tiriolrgY Bka Log of Boring B.3 1 FIG „_4 Geoteohnieal Engineering Tigard rd tenter 0. Geology&Hlyclrogeology ,�, 1 ,.,,.:',../... i ' T9 a DATE Oregon REVISED 1 DRAWN --. -- APPROVED............ DATE � 1 1 JOE NUMBER 1: 1 1 IOW, 9/15/9•... 4c�5 0 ` `. 1)` STANDARD z SOIL DESCRIPTION L•, w z F. PENETRATION RESISTANCE ' ,,, ' a. m u a n ffl ti (140 LB,WEIGHT,30"DROP) [ ,, . a u m Q w u.. A N-VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT . ' 09 SURFACE ELEVATION oZ ci) C1 o? 0 25 50 • r' Hard, gray, clayey SILT, moist r F 59 0 I • -" �o �j rfr 14 - 41.5y, . - .. , Bottom of 3ori ng, completed 9/1/92 . : : • : : : • • . • • • • f . i • rw.1 r A I..Notes: 1. Hole backf i l l ed with bentonite. 45 y I: 2. Groundwater level estimated 1: I • from sample moisture condition. : : : : : : : • : • : : ; : 1 . . • . . • • I . , . . . . . 46 . • • , J • . , ., 50 0.4,1.•Yi....1.L.,........i......,•..,.•.0...Y1.....•....., 1' , LAB DENSITY DATA • . i . . . . . ; , , L Sample Depth w 5d We , : ' ' : : : ' : : : : : 1 • • • No. (ft.)_ (pcf) (pcf) (%) • . . , : , . . • : 1' ' : , . : . : S-la 1.8-1.9 11 .9 96.2 19»4 [ S-lb 0.6-1,2 . 110.2; 95.7 . 25.1' J.:. S-1 c 0.0-0.6 117.7 102.6 „,,. .14.5 . • . . '5 1.•..••.•1.•..••..,..•...•..•....•:` . . • • • • S-3a 6.2-6.8 123.2 91.5 34.6 , , , • • . : : : : : : • • • • • . n L S-r3b 5.5-6.1, 123.3 92.8 32.8 . • • • . . . . • • • 8 . , . S--12a 34.034.6 114.1 75.0 52.0 S-12b 33.3-33.9 115.6 77.9 48.4 : • . A . : ; . • .�_ S-12c 32.6-33,2 113.2 75.8 4 , . , . . . . • , . • , 1 • . U0 ,.Y....ui. ,,, 6 5••••••••••••••..•.•.1••,/1{■•1•'••••.•••,.•,.........1..•1#1.••••••••,e Y.•f.••• 65 • . ; ' !i PM . • A 1 , 4 0 25 50 1 L 2,01?J.D.SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED .I, IMPERVICUSSEAL at WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT • atr O.D.THIN WALL SAMPLE AfTERBERG LIMITS . WATCH LEVEL FOR DATE HOWN E GRAB SAMPLE F ® I �--LIOUID LIMIT * SAMPLE NOT RECOVEFFED L Lam"NATtJRAt•WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP I , PLASTIC LIMIT , 1,SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES APE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY ES GRADUAL 2 WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF'',EAR e ' • v Applied Geotechhhology�inc." Log of E3oting B-3 r ICiU�i1 T, Gebtebhlilcal Engineering Geology&HydrOgeaingy ig�rd center ,.. ... , t Tigard, Oregon OEN NUMBER ..._.'...� . tort: �$ JOE Utu DRAWN APPROVED � DA1� RE A SED DATE r:.»... 9�(i5/ , • • . t 1 I • . P „__.. �..•.„1111 STANDARD o SOIL DESCRIPTION zW r-• PENETRATION RESISTANCE E Dc F=.. (140 LB,WEIGHT,30”DROP) c ' w G1_ Q ♦ N-VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT : r 0� SURFACE ELEVATION 184± feet ¢z 3n S o— 0 25 50 ��� Man-Made Fill over: �,— 0 p . . !�1 , �, . . . 1 Medium stiff, gray ORGANIC SILT; �' 1. ' ; ; • . ; 1 , 0 r ce fine sand 'and. 1 . to moist, a damp o , p clay. (ORGANIC SOIL) ? • • •„ : . ; Loose to medium dense, gray SILT 5• ` +� . . with some fine sand, wet. m o (.” �, N. trace clay at 10 feet T 10 :1111.., I ; • I some wood debris at 15' , trace clay :11:,11: ..:.,:.1::♦:...f:..;:,♦1:..•:...;...•,;1,.11,,,.,;I L I below 15 feet � 15 . ; . . ;4Y • • • 1 1 1 f ' • , • • • • • 1 . • : • 1 • �,•, ^.. •ur ! t 1 1 1 1 1 • ..H• H•w•ro r.c•a.wnn rr.•� rr,wY �.r•r ,/'�{ 1 • 1 ..� . �.._ 1.1_1.1 19� • . Medium stiff to#very stiff, gray. ` `.. ' ''20 . ,:;.1,,1,,....1,.1. , 11:1!!:11!,. , . • ; SILT; moist to wet, trace: fi ne�,:sand � r • ; ; : : . . ` ' w'1 � � :�.. , ''�4• and clay, trace wood debris. ; • • . 1 1 '1 • i • ' • i • I ; . . . . ; some clay below 30 feet 30,---.------•,...-..,,..4i... H H • ....._...../,...N E „ f{f{f{iifYd5,Y3444......••• • � ! 1 1 1 1 . . VVd�VJ z • ...:, 0 2.5 50 , , r, � PUSHED SAMPLER P 0 0.0.SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE � P SAM F R 4 IMPERVIOUS SEAL 6 WATER CONTENT,I N PERCENT u 8,0110.0.THIN WALL SAMPLE ATTERBERG LIMITS C;7,;� WATER LEVEL„FOR DATE SHOWN ' M GRAB SAMPLE I— Y--•1 LIl7UIp LIMIT ON WELL TIP 4 * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED, L NATURAL WATER CONTENT r C�BSER v ATl PLASTIC I.IA41T i,SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL, g.WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR ' Applied Geo dopy ri FICA rchn� � mfiBr3d URE r Geote,ohnlcal Engineering • Geology&Hydrogeology Tig �d' c,n �r ... .— . :. Te Ord z Oregon. . ..- . I 0 :�... . JOB NUMBER 1 DRAWN, APPROVED DATE RE: DATE 1 .. r•O1 KP 9/16/92 40a ....�....:._._......�... 1111 --- • ,, .,.. . . •........,,•.1111<•.� ,fi=� :1:111 .. 1111.. . ,111:1., ........., 1111... .. ..... . .:.... ... ,. ...r..., 1111 _„ ..• .. ... .....• ..... ... , n 4 Y I, STANDARD o , SOIL DESCRIPTION zw w z r- PENETRATION RESISTANCE ax f.-u.9 a =w w (140 LB.WEIGHT,30"DROP) ' , ' ¢c u. o,- i- A N•VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT C79 SURFACE ELEVATION' pz a7 C7 o? .0 25 50 f, Medium stiff I to Very stiff, gray T 35 • • ; . �\AIL. : : ' M clayey SILT; moist to wet, trace 36.5 ; fine sand . ♦ • • Bottom of Boring, completed 8/31/92 » Notes: 40 • I,, W. 1.. Piezometer installed. 4 4 1 . 4 4 1 . 4 . 4 • 1 ♦ 1 Y 45 » . . . w1. LAeB DENSITY DATA I. Sample Depth tai We I Jo. (ft.) (pcf) (pcf) (w) . . . : 4 .' 1 . I S-la 0.3-0.9 121.0 98.8 22.4 S-3a 6.2-6.8 124.4-• 95.3 30.6 50 S-3b 5.0 5.6 12 .5 92.2 35.0 '1 1 4 1 4 ( { , 4 4 4 4 4 1 • I, iI 4 . . . . . . . . . . . , . . 41 • . 1 , 141 • - 6,1 m......f•Lt/11...H•......14.44♦1•♦.41 Y11 r♦.1..........1•..♦Hx•1.4.04J•1 , ■ '•-., 1 • Y 1 . { 1 1. 1 �I 4 4 4 4 ♦ . 1 . ♦ 1 I, • 44 0 4 • • t3t . • • . . . . . • 6 ..ub.♦........4.11♦.....,41.....1.Ud41.n.444.......U..nN 4 r . iS I..� 1 4 . . 1 4 , • • 4 4 r a 1251 1 50 ` 2.0"O.Q.SPLIT IMPERVIOUS SEAL 0 WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED 3,0"O,D•THIN WALL SAMPLE ATTERI3✓=RG LIMITS ., WATER LEVEL,FOR DATE SHOWN I IX t3RAE SAMPLE 1_0_4 t.....1.1 ' LIQUID LIMIT * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED NATURAL.WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP l+ I—PLASTIC LIMIT 1, • . '1 SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGEE MAY BE GRADUAL 2 WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF NEAP p, � w Al �iti1�x @C� �� PP technallo !kid. Log of Boring B,4 ALP Geotechnical Engineering , i d Center A Gelo�v&H dro g of �v T s r ' Tigard, Oregon coot, JOB NUMBER DRAWN I APPROVED 1 DATE R E bI5ED O•T» 1405.01 ICPW 1 1 t/15/92 tl ... A'', ' ' . \ . ' , • 4 ' 0 " . C4 . ., e r _ .... ..+. _. 1 __ .._ ,r..., _.�.,.�Y_,1w. _..r.... ...._ w.,-..i..,.r._..�.._..„ .,....,... ....• .s... _.- i STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION -�. w zcc z PENETRATION RESISTANCE ►–ww E m w , 1..1.1 (140 LB.WEIGHT,30"DROP) l' ¢� w i± g.'O Q w u- A N-VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT c.c E9 SURFACE ELEVATION 182± feet G? o,, ©. 0 25 50 Medium stiff to stiff, brown SILT; '-�� 0 y�' . : : : : . : . : . .• w damp, trace to some fine sand and "' I: • ` ; clay probable MANS-MADE, FILL) 2.5 Stiff, brown and gray SILT; moist, 'r "; �� R, it ltrace to some fine sand and clay 1. •1.:.,.......,........tr L. .. ___ -- --1 ;l: Loose to medium dense, brown SILT L' �' • : : : : : . : ' ; ' • with some fine sand; wet, trace clay �-. • , • , . . . . . . . and organ'cs �, . LQ i' ---- • • , • • • • • • • • • . , c 13.0 � T S1 )1 • Loose, gray, fine sandy SILT; wet • { 1 5•..............,„ ..,.., •..••• , ..1•••a,............J...•.4 Ji• �� ' • . • . I�� N trace clay at l.7 feet 0.) : : : : . : + .x._ .._.. __._ _•_.• _.._ —... ,..,...... ...... ....... 19.5 \. . . • . Very stiff to hard gray SILT, :moist 2, .'` to wet, trace fine sand and clay . ,,0 • H some clay below 25 feet 1-1 _ 25 1:•••••,,••!N.4•41,01: '1,..1 H..111.....uN>............'•..,.•• • , , j . 1 1 I. y L " ..... 30".:-..........,.....:........:—•:.. . . 4„•••.„.,...„.......„„. tii 1 * ,0"O.D,SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PU�1-1 C IMPERVIOUS SEAL M WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT I II 3,0"o,D,THIN WALL SAMPLE ATTERBERG LIMITS ' I � I �J WATER LEVEL FOR DATE SHOWN M GRAS SAMPLE w-L UIO LIMIT * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED 1AS N�aeflup WA7EkCONTENT 1 OBSERVATION WELL TIP �� • PLA9�'IC LIMIT i SOIL DESCRIPTIONS PTdONS AND INTEpiAC~$AF INTERPRETIVE ACTUAL CHANCES MAY BE GRADUAL 2. LEVEL IS FOR DATE MAY WITH I r-TIME O FYEAR I Applied o� inoir�e y Inc.. d of �Jr[n �- rIOURE Geoteohnlcal Eh Inner g ing i Ged o &H dro a�lo Tigard Center A 5 i Tigard,'Oregon JOB DRAWN oar..�.�..`�.""_. . • NUMBER N, APPROVED DATE RE'SISED 1 405.0 i KPW sI�t�;a/s� . , ' ° • / . STANDARD .T a- w 1 SOIL DESCRIPTION -. z r,x w F.. PENETRATION RESISTANCE z w d n w E-- (140 LB,WEIGHT,30"DROP) .I-•w c3 0-u. 2 0 r- a-u_ A N-VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT , 09 SURFACE ELEVATION o? ccn o 0 25 50 : . Very stiff to hard, gray, clayey 1 '• 1 f [._ ^\LT; moist x36.5 (r' Bottom of Boring, completed 8/31/92 • : : •. : : : • : : : : 1 ,. Notes: 40 1...:..;.:.. 1. Groundwater level estimated from • • . .. • ` • . . : : . . • • sample • moisture conditions. • . . • • • • . . . • • • • • . • • 1 f • • • . • . 1 LAB DENSITY DATA 45 • . . . • . . Sample Depth 2rw d wc : : : : : S s No. (ft.) (pcf) (pcf) (%) 1 . • • • • . • • . . . • ._. S-1a 2.7-3.2 129.3 106.0 22.0 , . S-lb 2.1-2.5 112.3 98.4 14.1 50 I ' S-3a 4.8-5,4 122.8 92.2 33.2 . , • • . . . S-3b 4.1-4.7 121.7 90.8 34.1 . . . 1 • i • ; • • • • 1. • . . • . . • . • • • • 1 . 1 • • 551 • . • • • • • • . • • 1 • . . 1 • 60 ••11.1, ' M 'i7 I. 65'"'"'""" .nom • 1 • . • . • L • , • 1 i • . • . 41 I 1 ' ' L . . „ L. 0 25 50 • 2.0"O.D.SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED l�Yl�'..RJI OuSSEAL w WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT II 3.0"0•D.THIN WALL SAMPLE AT-rERBERG LIMITS WATER LEVEL FOR DATE SHOWN ® GRAB SAMPLE I 0 �-LIQUID LIMIT * L NATURAL WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED PLASTIC LIMIT 1 SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE'AND AcTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2,WATER LEVEL C FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR �M Applied Geotechnology Inc. rau IF RE Lag � ��I ing 8-5 I I Geoteohrtcel Erf ineerin Geology&Hydrogeology 1 Tigard Center A d a . . . , Tigard, Oregon ' cont. JOB NUMBER DRAWN APPROVED DATE �EI ISED I DATE I 1405.01 I KPW 9/15/92 I k • + w 0000. " I 0000 ` I - 1 0000. �. AI SOIL DESCRIPTION =w w o ATANDARD z �- PENETRATION RESISTANCE E.' =f x w (140 LB.WEIGHT,30"DROP , w i—w w <0 a_u_ 2 0 emu.. A,N•VALUE IN BLOWS/FOOT 69 SURFACE ELEVATION 177± feet nz v) CD o? 0 25 I i 50 Medium dense, brown, fine, sandy —, 0 . : 'p a ; 1 , , SILT; damp, trace clay �, : c,,, : 4040._. ___ •.4000_. ___ _._, 3.5 L;, 1 1Med;.um dense, light brown SILT with co � . : : ' : , , • . . some Fine sand and clay; moist to J', rn 5 ,................ ♦.•..1{11•.,,.Y wet �, . : : �: : ' .HHH L 10 I 0000 0000 0000 ♦� . . � I , f It Y 1 1' I I 1 1 Y } .. , . 1. . 1 .• • :I 1 . . • Y 1 . I 1 . • Y • . .15.0 1 5 . I ,. ,.., ,Y•.:. Medium dense to dense, gray SILT with : : : some .fine sand• wet, trace clay v, . 00 00 { , I I , 1 , . . • ,„ �,�. . • 20.1:.1. ,�,..,.H....LY 0000 , 1 . . . 1 . . �.) . . • . 1 1 . f I r , . . , • • 1 . . • . . _ 0040_ _00.40.. 4_400. .4000 __ 0040. �. 4000... 23.0 . . • . . ♦ �,. Stiff, gray, clayey SILT; moist to ; : : . : ` : . • . . . . wet . . . . I . , . • . . • �--+ 2 5••.,...•.♦.....•.•..'.,..•...,....1.♦: 1.,,I,..1.,♦IH ♦1.1,.....1... ri I , , . i . . P. . . . 1 . . ,, :001 1 • • . . . Y'. ■ 19.,r. . . . . . . . . . , N.._. : : : : : 4 : : - becomes hard at 301 �, ,, Y . , 1. , . . 's.,. N 'I r „ 4 • I 1 • . 35 : : : , , : : : I : ' : . L. ..... -____..� _.�.�� 0 25 50 12,0"O.D.SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED IMPERVIOUS SEAL •WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT r 3.0"CC;D,THIN WALL SAMPLE ATTE {I3EIIG LIMITS I---0---1 WATER LEVEL FOR DATE SHOWN ® 'GRAB SAMPLE �—Lb0UIDLIMIT i * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED LPLASTIAL WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP C LIMIT i i SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2.WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR ,0000 ,0000 0000-�...' ., ... 00,,00• ,. q ... Geat Applied G In�erin I Rir ' eChi�iCal Erl �� � �qr'�r�..._ �$ � ���Chrla�leti Inc, �� �� - FIGU Geology&Hydrbgeoiogy Tigard enter -6 I Tigard, Oregon O JOB NUMBER W �DRAWN °/-15/9 RE',$!a I DATE do APPROVED do5.)1 KPW 0000 ,:,0000 ..:......:....... ..,.� 00,00., 0000. All,a 0000 • STANDARD I OIL DESCRIPTION 1z RETN i -1 D w H 140 LDR., SURFACE ELEVATION oz w (5? Cl."'" 0 25 -500 �Har�d, gray, clayey SILT, moist ► 35 : ' • � . :�, • _____/-- 36.5N . . , . : . r ; • Bottom of Boring, completed 8/31/92 Notes: 40 1, Piezometer installed. : : . : : ' r. u LAB DENSITY DATA ; 45 Sample Depth w 1('d we No. "(ft.) (pOf) (paf) (%) • . + , . . . . • • ! • • . S-la 1.4-2.0 118.8 96.9 22.6 ; S-lb 0.71.3 109.1 92.2 18.3 4 , , S-1c 0.0-0.6 109.4 94.9 15.3 ('•� S-3a 4.8-5.4 124'.8 96;0 30.0 SO•,.•..............•..............:•r...............,.........+,r........,;., S-3b 4.1-4.7 123.0 92.3 33.3 : : : : : : : ` : : S-12a 29,530.1 118.0 83.7 41.0 • . . . . . . S-12b 28.8-29.4 118,6 85.9 38,0 ' ` ' i ' ' • ' ' ' . S-12c 28.1-28.7 124.6 88,8 40.3 . . . . • • . . . . . , 1 l' 1 . . . . • 4 14 . . . . • • 4 t 4 4 4 * 60,.............: +..:,.r+•.•+•.,1.•...•..,,+•+f......•.,+..•....•..+.++ • • • . 1 65 +' SAMPLE P SAMPLER PUSHED� `2.Ors 0,D,SPLIT SPOON S IMPERVIOUS SEAL 0 WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT I a 8,0"0,D.THIN WALL SAMPLE ATTERBERG LIMITS - ---1 WATER LEVEL FOR DATE SHOWN LI Y GRAB SAMPLE UOUID LIMIT �T NATURAL WATER CONTENT OBSERVATION WELL TIP * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED PLASTIC OMIT t,SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL 2,WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR Applied Gectechlneto RE _. GCateahniaai Et1glrleerl .� �� � " Log � t1��"� ' Goology&Hydrogeology Tigard Center A.6 2 Tigard, Oregon CCStIt B .UMBER DRAWN APPROVED DATE RE1.ISE dont. KPW 011S/g2 . I . • r 1 Surface Elevation 230± feet Medium dense to dense, light brown, fine, s-1 0s sandy SILT; damp to dry, common roots, (17) 1 trace brick fragments. (MAN-MADE FILL) a >4.5 S-2 Dense, gray-brown SILT; damp, trace fine (24) , 2 sand, trace clay, trace rootlets. • 2.5 . - — — — — _- — — — ,_._.- — .— . 2.5 [ , Stiff to very stiff, light brown mottled I 3 rust SILT with trace to some clay; damp Z s-3 •,3;s to moist, trace fine sand. (32) ; . . 1., S-4 • 3.75 l' 4 2 (30) 5 - color changes to brown at 5.0' a . common black (organic?) fragments at Rr 5-5 6.4' 184. (30) 7 ._,.r ___ _-_,_ — — _...... _ 7.0 Dense, brown SILT with some fine sandy wet. Firm S-6 • . 1,.. = 8 (31)ial 5.., I 1 (32) � 2.25 a S-8 75 • 1. � 10 (30) 1 .,, L11° (31) color changes to brown, mottled dark s_io FA w . 12 brown and rust �120 (30) • ±' Bottom of Test Pit, completed 9/8/92 Notes: \ [... 1, Water at 1148 seeping into pit at approximately 2 gal ./hr. LEGEND w El S- GRAB SAMPLE LOCATION AND NUMBER • POCKET PENETROMETER kkADING IN TSB US-. SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE LOCATION AND NUMBER -Nr- EtELD DENSITY TEST IN PCF 1 ) WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT X POCKET TORVANE SHEAR READING IN KG/SQ.CM. t TP� 1 �� �,pP9>?s�d Caro#eChntais�gy Inc, �g of Test �i FIGURE Geotechnical End neetln �.� and Center Geology&Nydroeology ,. p. Tigard, Oregon .o JOB NUMBER" . DRAWN APPROVED VF.p DATE REVISED SATE .,.,.. �. 1405,01 KPW i0/18/92 , t 7 , ,� • , ".affilliIIIINIIIIIIININ/RIIIIIIIIIMIMMEIMAY __ Surface Elevation 221± feet Medium dense to dense, brown mottled . black, fine, sandy SILT; damp to dry, trace , 1• clay, abundant roots up to 2" diameter, s-1 • 1.25 trace gravel and glass fragments. (MAN-MADE (23) , FILL) s-2 2 .._ _.. .._ _,.-_ .__. ..__ ,.._.. �. ._.,-_. _.. 2.4 (16) • a.7 5 Very stiff, light brown mottled rust and gray SILT; damp, trace fine sand and clay, S-3 - 3 common roots up to %i" diameter al (21) , ' . : i,, ,-- - 4 Ei S-4 • >4.5 5 N -5 • 4.25 6 (30) • 2.25 S-7 1 7 (29). u,a z S-B •. z (31) .8 i [.,,,, 15.i , s becomes moist at•9.0' El 120 . °1 [ la I 8) . 11 . S-11 (28) . G �, ,s-12 ' 12 ,-. — 12,0 (28) Bottom of Test Pit, completed 9/8/92 Notes: !.. No free water observed ., . ., 1 •, I . I POCkET EROMETER'�READINc IN Tsr LEGEND 5�� GRAB SA�IPLE LOCATION AND NUMBER � ��� � PEN T S s4ELBY TUgE SAMPLE LOCATION AND NUMBER "tr FIELD DENSITY TEST. IN PcF I i n:( ) WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT ,A1 Poc kGT T RIANr SHEAR R READING IN kGjSQ«G ..... EIOURE ... Applied Geote chno9 a y Inc. Log of Test e at Pit TP-2 Genteohhical Eh lbee1ittg Geology�Hydrog�olo�Y Tigard Center A 8� Tigard; Qr e. on JOB NUMBER DRAWN A PPRO VED r" --- BATE p EN15EO DATE 1405.01 KPW i . • \ , f, I Surface Elevation 213± feet , S-1 •,>4.5 (. Dense, brown SILT with some gravel ; dry, 0.5 (a) trace clay.' (MAN-MADE FILL) . S-2 Stiff, light gray-brown mottled rust and M (19) speckled light gray SILT; damp, trace clay, 2 occasional rootlets »2.0 • 4.0 • -_.. ..-- --- ---- _ -,-_. -- -, - — — 5-3 Very stiff,, light brown mottled rust SILT; (24) .. • 3.5 3 damp, trace clay ; - Color changes to brown mottled gray at 4 z. 5 3 0' -4 . 3„0 (`'7) , .,, [,, 5 • 3.5 6 rzi (27) 1— 7 - grades to SILT with trace to some fine 8) ,, , • L sand at 7.0' L.,... s CM - becomes moist at 8.5' Eu s-7 9 . [1 _ _ ...... _ ..,_ _ .. .., _ .___. __ _,__ - 9.7 m 5-9. q 10 Medium dense to dense, sandy SILT; moist 6.1 (29) to wet. ._ Igg SL9 , 11 (34) , . - ►/ 5-10, 12 Bottom of Test Pit, completed 9/8/92 i�o (34) ; Notes: 1. No free water observed. r ,• LEGEND M S- GRAB SAMPLE LOCATION AND NUMBER 0 POCKET PENETRoIETER READING IN Tsi. i). I :IS- SH EL BY TUB C sAMpLE LOCATION AND NUMBER " 7- PI'ELD DENSITY TEST IN PCP • ( ) WATER X POCKET READING IN KGJ5Q.CM, HGUkc CONTENT IN PERCCNT... . ... 1� TORVANE SHEAR Appl$ed Geotecchnollogy'Inc, Log of Test Pit TF-3 G bIngy&Hyditigeoloigy 'Tigard Centc:r on. Tigard, Oregon • JOB biR KPW APPROVED �olis/' 9 • � DATE i .,':i, /'/ ,. ' t . r , Surface Elevation 196± feet Dense, brown-gray SILT; dry to damp; trace s-1 • >4.5 fine sand, clay, and roots to r" diameter. (17) I • >4.5 • _.. ......... _. _. .._. ....-. _ .-- 1.5 S-2. • 3.0 pm Medium dense, brown SILT; damp, trace fine toi (22) 2.5 � 2 sand. . . • 4.0 3.0° 41 S 3 (26) • 4,0 Medium dense to dense, light brown mottled o 3.s light gray and rust SILT with some fine n s-� (32) • '3.0 W 4 sand; damp, trace clay' S-5 6 (32) , L ti 7 , 1+1, w S-6 Z (28) 8 - becomes moist at 8.0' LU ca rem S-7 3, -(28) , 10 El (29) w i - becomes wet at 11.4' ��� 11.5 (2F) i2' Bottom of Test Pit, completed 9/8/92 Notes: 1. Water level at 11' after 4 hours. . LEGEND . ®s- GRAB SAMPLE LOCATION AND NUMBER 0 POCKET PENETROMETER READING IN 1`Sf Ils- SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE LOcATiON AND NUMBER °V FIELD DENSITY TEST IN PCP' ( WATER CONTENT E'N T IN PERCENT NT...�,.u...r.....�, X POCKET TORVANE E Sa..E R READING IN KG/ Q.0. . .. Applied.G®oto chn o logy inc. Log of g Test st P it T P- F URE Ue�t ec nca 1=r Ih eer I n Geology Hydtogeology Tag aCd Center 1 A 1 Tigard, Oregon 0 JOB UM B AR DR AWN A P ATE REVISED b DATE 1405.01 1d05.0i kPV 1 o 1151�� . 2 Surface �- r ace Elevation 188 feet ' :: ' 1- ' ' ' ' Loose to medium dense, brown SILT, dry ,to (� ) damp, trace gravel and roots t,o ' diameter. (MAN-MADE FILL) __ .... _ _f- .o • 1:25 Stiff,' light brown-gray mottled rust,SILT; im S-2 , 2 damp, trace clay, occasional rootlets' Ka (v) • 2.5 --- • ,..,. 3 �3 •• 3.0' ' S (34) rust ht brovan and _4.0 a-4 . >4.5 Very stiff, rust mottle 9 black SILT with trace to some fine sand and 4.5 (30) • X4.5 I ; 5 \ clay; damp , . , 4 . — .._ .,.._ -___ .-.v — _ _ _i .0 . • Very stiff,ff, light i ght brown-gay streaked rust, s-5 6 fine, sandy SILT; moist, trace clay (36) • RRRau 1--- 7 1' - becomes wet at 7.6' � 35 " • 2 ( ) \ • 8 NT S-/ 9 Z..1..7(34) , , - color changes to gray at 9.8' m, 8-8 . I ,10 ,....._....io.o ., a (34) , ! • I f', Bottom of Test Pit, completed 9/3/92 „ Notes: 1. Water l9vel at 9.0' after 3 hours. • • . t •• • I , y , / ..,, t. L , LEGEND � � , + 1 ' AND NUMBER EAO,ING IN TSF MS- GRAB SAMPLE LOCATION �, � POCKET P�NE'r�c�ETEa R , .r S- SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE LOCH F LOCATION AND NUMBER �"' F�ELb DENSITY TEST IN PC WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT X POCKET TORVANE SHEAR READING I C Applied Geetethhola 9 y kic Log of Test Pit TP-0 1 IGUI1E : i . Geotech nica{y ngiree�n�' OeolGgy&N dro eolG� Tigard Center r � . ' , JOB N 11v1 8E R DRAWN APPROVED DATE REVISED DAVE ' 1406,0i KPW ' 18/16/§,2 , I . • • I . • ., . . • ' r ' Surface Elevation 176± feet Medium dense, brown SILT; dry to damp, is-1 .. (16)trace clay. 16 • Medium dense, gray mottled rust SILT with s-2 S-3 , , 1 some fine sand; damp, rtace clay X (4) (25) ' 2 - 8''' PVC drain running at approximately 10 gal ./min. at 1.6' with 3" minus GRAVEL S-4 , fill around pipe N (29) • • 4 5 - grades to fine, sandy SILT at 5.0' 6 s=s. w 7 - color changes to brown streaked gray at 7.4 . . = s , . a_ Er S-6 c - -- 8.a (33� Bottom of Test Pit, completed 9/8/92 ` .g • s Notes: 1. No free water observed (water from drain only) . ‘ •' "- [„, . 1 . ,, , [ , ' 1 . . \. I i r f' i . 1 4 LEGEND ® - CRAM SAMPLE LOCATION AND NUMBER li POCKET PENETROM R READING IN TSB' PENETROMETER S- SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE LOCATION AND NUMBER -V.-- FIELD DENSITY TEST IN PCP s • L WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT POCKET TORVANE SHEAR READING I SQ.CM, . , Applied Geotecheuiz>igy laic Log of Y Geotechnicel Engineering " 1 "1 Geology&Hydrogeoingy Tigard Center 'A 12 Tigard, Oregon : DRAWN APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE JOB NUMBER PROVED E -14135 01 KPW 10%16/92 ;• • Surface Elevation' 170± feet . Very stiff, brown-gray speckled white and s-� g • >4.5 �: ... (16) _�,. streaked rust ORGANIC SILT; damp, trace 1 clay, abundant rootlets. I • >4.5 ' - few rootlets, color changes to gray-brown speckles white at J..8 •• >4:5 .'a >4:5 S-2 ' (21) • >4.5 3 — 3.0., 0 3.0 , S-3 Stiff, gray-brown SILT with trace to some (27) ' . 3.0' s clay; damp to moist. 4 3.75 . ■ ' - color changes to light brown, trace fine 5-4 �I • • 5 sand (31) 6 S-5 6.5 g (33) f \ 7. Bottom of Test Pit, completed 9/8/92 . a Notes: , :H . z 1. No free water observed. ., Q Lu fl 1 I, Y + -',:' [ w • , 4. , ......_ . . . ,. . : I. / LEGEND. Os- GRAS SAMPLE LOCAtIbN AND NUMBER to POCKET PENETROMETER READING IN TSF NUMBER —Cr- FIELD DENSITY S- SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE LOCATION AND TEST IN pGF I i 7U8„,, .( ) WATER CO1NTENTIN PERCENT X PICKET T0RVA,NE SHEAR READING..LNYG/SQ CM.�.... �P �) ,•, A filed 4��a+����h�l�ah° sires. I�� ��Test Pit `���� �i�up� � r Geotechrilca!Enyir�eering .8r �' _. ”, Geology&Hydro geology I T9 Ord Cahn' r" -r Tad nrPt�on la's NUk6ER gFIAWN AP P.ROVEq DATE REVISED DATE "` i06,o1 kPw ia/i6/sz 1 I' i, .,. IwwlN �.FA/ww.lwrwwwr 1 Y 4 . f ,. I I ,l Ir e • . Surface Elevation 192± feet • Very stiff, brown SILT; dry, trace clay, O.4 to >4.5 s 'I ■ common roots, trace gravel . (TOPSOIL ZONE), (a� 1 L._. _ — — -- -- — _— _ _ _ • >4.5 . o. Very stiff to hard, brown SILT; dry to S-2 • >4.5 s' damp, trace to some clay � (11) - rootlets sparse to 3.0' • >4,5 0 -.4 5 • E S-'I� (20) • . • >4.5 !. • /• 1 4 • >4>4,5 } 7 S-4 5 - color changes to yellow-brown, damp at L, (32) 5.0 [ . 6 S-51 � w 7 -- (32)moist at 7.0' (32) I' i 11111 i L ! 11 6 Medium dense to dense, light brown, fine, N t3Q) ,, i cl sandy SILT; moist to wet. I, 8 - color changes to gray at 8.2' �.[ .. - intermittent beds (approx. 2" thick) of + dense, gray, fine SAND with some silt; fir, wet, trace mica (38) 10 �'(36) - 11 - increasing fine SAND at 11.0' I - rust streaks at 11,5' 1 12 • S-a i, 12.5 (2 9) , _ i 13 Bottom of Test Pit, completed 9/8/92 I Notes 1 1 1.1. No free water observed. j , 4 b M E LOCATION AND NUMBER • POCKET PENETROMETER° LEGEND S- GRAB SAP�, T a ER REAPING° ,,N TsF '' Is- SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE LOCATIOn AND NUMBER `"""" FIELD DENSITY TEST IN P:F f! ( ) WATER CONTENT IN PERCENT X POCKET TORVANE SHEAR READING IN KG/SQ CM Applied Geotechnology+Inc. Log of Test Pit T )-8 i6URE 1 Geotechnicel Engineering ... Tigard Center Geology&Hydtogeology �" —r w Tigard, Oregon JOB NUMBER DRAWN APPROVED .. . ...I DATE REVISED DATE.. I • 1405:01 !<PW 10/15/92 f • I , I r r rilli"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIM . A.0 . G Applied Geotechnology Inc. I w 0 k, APPENDIX B 1 • LABORATORY TESTING\ TIGARD CENTER ' ' ••.; TIGARD, OREGON . Classification, Water Contents and Unit Weights. All jar samples were visually classified to refine, when necessary, the field soil classification. In addition, natural moisture contents were taken on all samples in accordance '. ,,,. with ASTM D2216. The moisture contents are expressed as 'a percentage of free water lost by evaporation compared to the dry weight of soil. These are ' e presented graphically on the Logs of Borings (Figures A-1 through A-6) and numerically on the Test Pit Logs (Figures A-7 through A-15). ,,, i All thin-walled, steel tube samples were extruded, classified, tested for relative strength with a manually operated Torvane and/or Pocket Penetrometer . ,`°. device, and tested for natural moisture and unit weight. Consolidation or strength test specimens were removed, as required, and undisturbed specimens w:, Were saved in waxed containers for additional testing should the need arise. I, Consolidation Testing. Consolidation tests were performed on representative r samples of the soils in areas of deep fill for purposes of estimating • . settlement. Consolidation testing results in a plot of strain response versus' the logarithm of applied normal stress. The test is performed by adding increasing stress increments to a 1-inch-thick specimen and allowing sufficient time for primary consolidation strains to occur. The final plot . " represents the total strain under each load increment and is used to estimate settlement of soils under structural loads. Final logarithmic plot of stress versus strain for the consolidation test is presented on Figures B-1 and B-2. Atterberg Limits,. Atterberg Limits (ASTM D423 for the liquid limit and ASTM W D424 for the plastic limit) were performed on selected samples to evaluate the relative plasticity and to assist in the classification of the fine-grained p soil: The result is plotted on the Plasticity Chart on Figure B-3. esepeaction Testing. A compaction test was performed on a selected bulk Sample for determination of the moisture-density relationship of the on-site soils: The test was performed in accordance with ASTIR D--698 (AASHTO T99, Standard Proctor) . The results obtained may be compared to field dry densities for ,, • evaluating relative compaction of compacted fill and native materials. Test �a results are presented in Figure B-4. . . M1 Direct Shear Testing,. A direct shear test was conducted on a relatively ' • undisturbed sample were performed 1'1 r with ASTM D3080 on-Site Each stest y s e 1 men was trimmed onto a 2.5-inch 4 u ,. accordance P diameter 2 ring, Saturated, then consolidated under a normal to ads of 1/4,1/2, and 1 ton p er square foot (tsf) prior to she aring } at a rate of 0.0045 '° fit- in min: Test results are P resented graphically on Figure B-5. �. Resilient Modulus Testing: Resilient modulus testing was performed in general AASHTO T 274 pro Repeated. j late aCCordarice. with AA•S � procedures. � pulse loading', to simulate pea traffic to was , . for a 0.1 second duration ding �� repeated traff acting; applied � "a n at a loading` • frequency of 0.5 Hertz. The samples were conditioned, to remove end effects, by applying 200 load repetitions at confining p .. e o t a c pressure of 6.0 psi and B 1- ti n . i I i i • r .,r,a,,.-.,,,.....r.....:a.::,•r......:........,..._ I .„-r,..k..r.,.,w,<:,:, _....___,�_...,.._._M,_•,I�.�.. ..,,a_..w ....F,__.,r.,,,_.•r,. . ... r • Applied Geatechrookigy loc, deviator stress levels of 1, 2, 4, 8 and 10 psi. Dynamic axial deformAtion of the sample was measured after applying 200 load repetitions at confining pressures of 0, 3 and 6 psi at the above stated deviator stress levels. The deviator stress is calculated for each load pulse by dividing the load. (displayed on the strip chart from the load cell output) by the cross -.- sectional area of the sample. The resilient modulus (MT) is defined as the ratio of the repeated axial deviator stress (ad) to the recoverable axial strain (E.) as shown below. mr Ed a • I I I The cross -- sectional area is assumed to remain constant. Since damaging stresses are generally avoided during 'a dynamic triaxial test, this assumption �^ is reasonable. Specimen axial strain is calculated from the Linear Variable Differential Transformer output signals. The elastic strain, ER is determined by dividing the axial displacement by, the gauge length (4 inches) . The resilient modulus results, at representative st bgrade stress levels, are summarized in Table 1 below. The graphical plots of Mr vs. ad are presented in Figures B-6 and B-7. Sieve Anal.yses The percent fines (silt and clay fraction) content of samples B-5, S-5A And S-4, 5-4 were determined by washing the samples over a #200 sieve and comparing the dry weight of the sample with the dry weight of the retained material. The results of the sieve analyses showed 80.9 and 81.2 f - percent fines, respectively. • Soil Ex ansion Testing. A representative sample of the near-surface on-site soil was obtained for evaluating the expansion potential of the soil after observing that some expansion occurred during saturation in the c•snsolidation testing. A 2.5 inch diameter, 1-inch thick sample was remolded to t_ moisture approximately t obtained from our compaction sample was seated h maximum paction test. The sam optimum p p with 1/16 tsf load and saturated. The sample thickness change was monitored • to determine the maximum expansion in percent of height, A second sample, similarly prepared, was continuously monitored and weights added as required to maintain a constant sample height. The maximum normal load required to prevent expansion results showed that the near- was then recorded. The test rewu surface soils, compacted to the densities Specified herein, are essentially y' r ti.a7.l. es p� non expansive» h � I r -"'B` 2- • ■ • . . r STRESS IN TSF T � , 0.1 10 10.0 .0625 .125 .25 0,5 2.0 to 8.0 76.0 ■ It • • I + , � I d N , r • . r� J • , t I r 1 ,w. 4A:.., Y ' � � w•»� �a .:J 1 .x .�,aM fM+o t Ye, ,.N.m...,r. ,a• � ., �_, t 1 • • . Cw7 Y,l i 1'"° : a i i k ,} 4 • 4 1i, t •, . ., I • i : 1 , \_., ��.. i {. , , ,, L "•t••'•'{ .,.t.'..,. "' p..» .,r-..i,..w+M,•r...,n. d «ar....r.«.�wr,N.. t ' r t i. y - • / ! ., r f ~�.`'..� ` ., r[1 A t G i i' , r , I -... . , { ; L"w1 . u 1r' .rwi-, ,t H.4r i i ,p,.' .,,,,,,-,...„..„.........._,,...L...,, . ,.A.,»' ..,„,...t .,. ,,.+- , ,n } ,„,.y , , . `, f 1 r i 4 y ya e« k uuY .r.1•W,+M rw .. k , A ,v wu.ga a-vM'.nwwu.,.e.re W11,:- .w ,♦ r,i ,J f,rtmws , •' . .- .{. ' .0 em ,. 19 .a,i ,.,,., • , r f iN n i4 . 4 a. , X , r .r .Y .wp. • .,t r 'r r , • 11 IT i .. tl IA ' •? '+ a .. i,urH "1 i'' 0 ' '' .M. , r' u N. y y , ' I '' .i„ :=� ". ,a,x 4 .N �„r.l i. „. ,iY. Ar.r;. •4: . , .¢�,.� i' I.a._� ..,... i , . • • ii r, ttt 111 ' , * P CENT SWELL WITH ADGtT'ION 0!=WATE , NUMEER WA P Ot�NTENT IN _ ' ` CLA 8ORINU ITIAL UNIT NUMBER M DEPTH IN FEET EP CENT IN POP- SSIFICATIC)N NATURAL FINAL WET DRY . L Sµ5 S-3 5.2 29.7 25.5' 121,3 5315 Brawn SILT , l • _. . . . . , 7,,,,,,-.E A pplied esat h Flo gy Inc.', G otechni G I EnC 1 IIL8 ril g Geology&Hydre)oeolojy 'Consolidation Test I Tigard Center Tigard, Oregon 6 DRAWN APPROVED DATE CAE JOB NUMBER 1 SEC) DATE ....�.:.. i , r , 1d5q� KP4N N. M , h =;1 I 1 a u,. 1 . .,. r. • • • • I. jrrjryryt .. �wnea. • STRESS IN TSF ,. I �.• • Q.1 1.Q 10 0 ' . 0625 ,�j.25 .25 0.5 : 2.0 4,0 8.0 16.0 �� • y I 1 . • Y f, ■ • M 1 ,,� GI� ., f , :i. .., `, 'y fi 1� a• � , .. -, I , „w.r� �'. ,.,.•,. ��T1� : � �t,,.4 i,,•,, .�5 '.».r..� w ,„ A •F }( '...+.J.+4♦.+�4YMa.y r,- a.�w+ .•145nw n.,r..- a M I "Pw , •rv•-.wr 4V! d � r ■ r .IJ 1 t' I; ' • N•,1.4««4 rl♦ a , rv,'., „_.., s,r ».a•.«.>. y . n ne + k „, ...., ., y •� g. .. M,.,. ... . ,. 1 ,v r r ry ., , ._w • • ■ I W,WawY. r..M •.�. ,u«pu-hw..r•„b.n rn .•.r,u•s n .. }i,a.sr..,, ,u+,At1♦aYw +»o r. ,,,-�.,. i4�•.�1Y..��.w wA a ., �:�I �. I �. , .Ui.....�.. rwg1 rw,r.waa n.«�.r».,,A.r«c,+.Fw ••+:.�,,,�.� ', x 4r I' Y.M„ W,.... ,+f� A.N,w...'j j...�w• r�.vx.i; ,� w, . « - N� .vrn . .� +n k....w ' f , N r * I PERCENT NT SW�IL WITH'ADDITION OF WATER I r SAMPLE DEPTH IN WATER CONTENT INITIAL.UNIT WEIGHT ' NUMBER N P`cET IN PERCENT IN PCF 1 SSIF I r BORING NUMBER GLA ICAT bN k'. NATURAL FINAL WET DRY B-6 S-3 ' 5,2 84,2 31,1 118,8 871 Brawn, flne,'satidy SILT I 'iied c�it��hn®io ilf�c: 1 G,M� � I 1 test ;1 bpp ��' � Consolidation Geoteohinidal ntgineetirig 1 , , Geology 6 HydrogeolOgy' Tig_Ard Center ' l'Igard, Oregtan `� � JOB 8 h11 e DRAWN ._.." t��r. RE ISlwe �,; r I 1406,01 1bVVi0/1.01§2 } • r " , • ,, 1 CH 1 , W Cn 40 3�I Q' Bb ^:,,, , 1a M 1 r AIVAIWAWAII o 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 LIQUID LIMIT 1 B-.ITP-, SAMPLE U,S.C. `WATER CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT PLASTICI,Y 1 __. NUMBER NUMBER IN PERCENT IN PERCENT IN PERCENT INDEX • -5 S-3 31.7 45+2 27.5 17.7 B-6 S-3 30.2 50.9 29,2 21.7 • , . L • L. Oectechn(cal Engineering Tigard Geology Hydrngaology g rifer Tigard, Oregtsn 1 'i. JOB NU MtiE H '... DRAWN APPROVED, ,.'. DATE...,. RE Vt5EC1 DATE -14t)5,61 p� /02 • X 1 • ,. ❑ ASTM D698-78(Standard Proctors v • PI ASTM D1557-78(Modified Proctor) ' • 1 d AASHTO T99-86(Standard Proctor) ; . ❑ AASHTO 1180-86(PMT)defied Proctor) , 115 ' IN METHOD A 4-INCH MOLD . MATERIAL PASSING NO. I AT SSING N .4 SIEVE A I ti a _� ❑ METHOD B 6-INCH MOLD • ;.,, , MATERIAL PASSING NO,4 SIEVE . .u.I ' , 110 ' ' ❑ METHOD C-4-INCH MOLD 1 • MATERIAL PASSING 3/4-INCH SIEVE 0 'METHOD 0.6-INCH MOLD . .1.• �, MATERIAL PASSING 3/4-INCH SIEVE O ❑ OTHER METHOD IL. 105 , G ,, %� 'SOIL CLASSIFICATION: °9 gown SILT with some fine sand f L. ; • c,c r SOURCE • 95 p o OPTIMUM WATER CONTENT '16.8° r IMAXIMUM,DRIP DENSITY: 111,7 f � 9® P cx. vn µ ° 85 ,,, I :r ., ,. , ..,1 ' ' ..4..l. : [ I cu {{ 80 H. • �� ,. • r, . r . 75 �! I. 70 I { �+ G� ,-- 1 111 1 `le 20 25 i ' ,'80 85 40 il 45 5o . ' Water Content Percent • ail 1 .. ' PtGUR E ' , • p ,iied terot c noi a 5 Itd.1 ' Coo ipaction Test { GeotP cheiloal E n0ineerlrig Geology Y d rb a olb gy Tigard Center 4 4 • 11grd fregbh., ,, L , ,1,,,, 1: 1 l''' '' ' '''' ' •,'JOB NUMBER DRAWN 1 APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE , 46561 of ..«._ . �9 9 i • 2 1 � KPW 1 , . - „. 1 • d • • , „... ,. , , ,d .,. .. _ ♦. F,.,.,.,.•w. w .,.t. q i ''.,.. .,'�i.a., p .4,r«.. ,, a r -r„« ,1 1 r,.-4,.{ 4 ♦ .....�.x« a r r j F•,,a..,'"?' 1 I µ i_•�w 1 .i l q1 4 ;, ,. , r TMe F " , . ,. 1 • } . . a —, P ., •a . ' . r, ' !. 4. ." • a , S P, , ; } • { ,1 _L ' ■1 e, . s 7 , . t , , q,, , , K w! .,j . x. la.: } . l', , .4„,• ....4„.,..t.'i • to + „,A s.,k, .. «x�„. w f.,, , .,.....«,..•r, ».«~.....,k.«»I_..,...,.... .,f..,. .d «,,.+. ,+t i<.-, ° z.._,.4...}_.•e,�+ .1.-1.,,1, .�y 7 t P .t., «,. .»w_.¢,,,«, ' .' '44-4--.7-4H.---;--1-4-- .,max» ' ''''''-`1 ', 7 3 '.w, x I i r a._..+,,..r.� } , ^}--r`, ,xt«,. ., w� } «.1,.,}„_ ...�.,..{.._.iy,.:....1.,,J.,.�,+`.�� w..{ 1 ..., _ lY r 7{11w1 . w i$' 41 + t d y L44tE74 {,.t_ .-a,,. .-.-,a.--,-w,«,.l«... I ., `�� M�w.-J..x - « _,,...o .•� r ,.t r-r•>+..«w.l+w,{_',«L«,..•d..»....1»,w...,.,1«,wi«».-11.,...i,, ,.,«.i„«..,. :....1-,,,,, ,.«' ,,•w , . 4. i T _ +„« I »' ..y i»,, r h � �.w.. J. � } � 1 wa«1 « .wwa pxa..»,. �w�«, w 0.8 ---. . , .w - ~ J ,., y. '_ �. ► y p w �« 3 ` ,.,i...4 i ,r„,,.+. �w.,.P.,.,j.,a,;., 4"`-,i»4 1-.,,...�',.wx:,--; 4 Ir..,.,.,Hww1«.,.t-.,�w..j....c,,.« «»"^�-`•j«w ', - I_»{..�, }�.» — °h P .-4 �..».,., ` •{.._.�,,.—ry ...,.,Y_.a_..__...�..n.r. ..7 Ha.-w.t w w.....w-»�I�..L,.,.! } .. ...{ L wt.. } 1 �. .....k...r x.-..1 ""+ ��I t I . +1...«L.«.1.....P..,....,w. t # p p t y_4, 1. y „«^ W ,,P r-,n __:N.,1, `.LH,.F{ `}_ ! l».� �Y - - -' d. ---�.,»i_ 1 »! .«.»,L, .. f , . +I.,,._ „.,, .y.... ~, l., - ,44..,...},44JiT u. t+.,...}. „1....1.,-,--, ,t..-;•—•_-t--L—r-,' �: .},-.r.«,.,.,� 1. ._.,..1, :.a,. e ' .ire ,....L. }. ..r 4..1„.y...« .,S.w.,..,41.41444 �._{...p._»! '.44.., 4 . ' «,� ,._..t,.,.,,. .4.,..i...44..1 .....«4 _1» ,w.,,..�..—.,....w» '. :� µ,� f F 6 P »� 1 r. ..r '. , ..i....,�,.1�.�.. .� _ 1 wq._. ..,t �..1.-L._' ; �.... 1 �I.......-«•,» P.y_.»�r,_._ _.� '�.,... w.P...,. ., ,w_.,.. w(,,,.»._.,.' » ....,,s...,..1....l.w4....i.,_44..4..1....,...,�.w....,1,.4.4,. „.,- CO _.T._.�..,,,. »"T 3-...�.,».l,.w.,�--�.w ,w'w,,,r«,-.,,+r« r ,.,r»,w..wi w.._,,.»w•j,• J..,.�,»+.�.,«,.«,J....»r« xl,.j•,w,tw+t.,.,......-o-..,.w .»b, .n..,�.,.,.w ,...,..,.�....,....4... ! 4444 , "� CO _,.7»,.. -,.....j.,•i•.-4.-«' ; ` ” t.», r $4444..-.i,.«w.,.4,..,a,... .r.'x a,,,.«.' j,',..,s,-w-,,.«� ..i-n.�,.....1..,,....1..w,i.r,M,.a,J».,44:44.}-.«.�wlw«i..>..■a,..«^ 1..,,.«..w—;.....:«.«..`y.,Y ...._.:,..,.�,w.-«,f ... ' cc r_j { S .« 777 ., . r-i„w• } �”y.T _ ,, ii .c.« P i.,M �w_ �1 �. , , ,l«,.,`.,.. 4. '4....L.4. _i«..,., .,',-4.,..,:_{{ ..T...M`w»«,.1..... .i .a.. ,�..,.LyL,»..,{,{.,r.l{{.:, i 7 Y_ 1- ++ . > P k.,., '.«,..«a,P ....,..»,...,.. w ,. C 1 4 1p I.,.7 . ,„. 9 �iw.{..«,{. ,,.....,....u.t. ^`.•w.•,.• `.«tw..+.«.. «�. �.w....aw.,, r...».»,... -•4:444.. ,� ,,.'k t '_ i... 1 .7".1.".3""'.'"7"''C'''' g , ..j,.4.�,,,.p..,f..4J.p SI«N.«k.« J «k ! P 1.,,«C f* - �"'.,".`,«.,.w .,'.�'_I f 1 P ,..,,f,i Y»tw _ -.x ,«.,....�..Z...� P-�. '" ..«.l.a.x_,d..,1,..,L }„ . «„}.«. u.i....Fk..�. .�,...,..+{,-,1•»,.' ,7, tl....�.w.�..,.,t,». .7..«,P.�..,F�.,.,.y..,,»}w.t,..-i•...7„ «« I«.w..,.�,^,-'1'''...,.� ,. �q _,, M} ..w M 44x4 .,.,u,, .Mr ..t _ « .,..�;.,� . . 1 DoPERrr E FLL4: , 1.-4 . }....«�..,,tf A r'., f41: 1r y.r.rv..�..L ...- 1.,...�..,.4,x.,+,...,t.«„�.r, w' in, .+..t r t P ' 91 7 #.,.r , ,, i ,. r 4 i� .w w,,i•'''..t.' i,4 .—, ,.tom s _ -, , 4„1,x... 0,25 . 1192 30.0 O.M1.. r.....1 ' , 1 9., 1 ., i 7 ,,,...1 y ._ ,, .. � ,1 9 w. 4 { 1 �' 7 , C Q,1.70 ,r, f...a , qp,. ,,.a.,,...w:f,,..;w,l. ..} +„�....�,«..„„..}Jw.,4..., .�.,,.i 7 .. .. pw, ,.ka. ,1 ..,._..� .},.M»r ,, }.1 w.,., ..,...twa'.. 4444. Inwe f..la ...t,.. ..,1.,, s�,...,}„ , � �'` "1 : ww-tl r' ;. '' wk. •4,,4,,,;�1--1,-, �.� 0.50 119.5 92.0 29.8 „ �1, -'l y^ .w ..,{. .i,,..y F 1•+ r..; t .iu..q ,� ,r . 1-,,« .«,H« } i f..«.4 1,.�,.�...«.t.. w.,.j'.,-„.,..:..wY.n..l..._.,J.i+,k....y.s , i ,, V.N V �M/' r„4444 4,..}., .e r. L.1« b w....»_ t {...-f w} {, d j ,�rr� P I4,.,, -«„i»•,«i.. f,•-,•.* .r.--�w.y. :«.. �w.' ' 119 32.E 28.6 !, 0,0 ' t xJ u w, .», , 444.,.}„ 4_44,«x,«, �... . .. .}..t,.,.�.• -+ .. .�.,. ..,.,»+...,i.. 4}4,, Q,0 , fl, 4,4 • 0t6 0, 1.0 ,� NOR ,L STRESS, (fin, TSF , 1 J LEGEND 4444 4444 1 Effective angle of Resistance • C' = Effective Cohesion ih t fJ Nar�mal force on test sp�camer� � ill tf 7 Wet Unit Weights in ocf W -,' ,Dry Unit ��� p ' , .. Vet; Natural W�ater Gor�,�ent Befot � To�sts� i�� percent Or = Effective Angle of' Residual Shearing' Resistance i '1 '. : ,... 4444.. 4444.. 4444._4444., ....,..,,., i .,. ,. �..� ,,....... 4444., . ' • F. • .., . • _ • 1 • • . . t y ,+ r•w• ., .,, , : T7TI`"1.♦. 9-•+1+---»•*tw- -.-�..+.....,f.+-,+- 'ir..+..u�.w... .,.�.,, , ' '''''''''1''''''' A`- ". I, }j„w�k t �.,,. i•...ji...h .a.«Ir,w.j.«w.„ 4.. 7 -.y....�...,«--��.�'� ;i ,,.,.!w„t , r - w ♦ .y. p.�1 1_.+-_�...,.1«r ♦ .......r..♦ ,„�, { } } µ • ,; I t y . x .tr"-",» . A . w " i 1 �' p {!1 .a.l.»»,t a 4 '� 1.,...�, a,..� w...1x»x. a. Ir wa 1.,,,' y,....,. a - '.r ♦.. a a r I- .r«-♦- ..♦ .. 1 • •p...,,�,,,,,,t,r a..1 i..».�,,..,«.'f`.•' ,..�.wp•' + px ... ,y ,"s „ „.- ,.. ., » t.'t a,wxw1. n M . , h , �. rM r ♦. ♦�r„♦ s. . M1 a .. t C •..♦ M .�M„, M w ti,..w•ww•.x � F .1 -.,.�.,. `"'"'i, .� .;»,y v 1 ...».�t'Hf,..«♦ ...••,t}„-I; .f.,,r..,1...,...,.,i.,,,-�.. ��,..,.,1,,,,,.,»y„r t' ..�,-,.,,-... 'M<pw,. b a r' yi..x s�ry a ..+�{,,•.w ra.r........, M1 .w.-�i' �.x., r ° '° r t.. ♦r I . - .� + wr 0.8 , -, i•. «t. . �K,.x.k-..rt.� t�r ay..y .9•�, �. °•I ",..r 1 "'„ .,•e w.$•�-��. < ” .- .�, (.J.'..�...l,rx..,,.�.r<..a..., ,_.,,...•.} , n '--», �' ` !-.♦r!«. ,.. +» ....yew >-1 n!».............:.7,.w-, „•, ,...e».. ! N' r *ir Mt V E :- - '--1.-!.w„r«„+, a'4.---', f' +, '.-"4,'" L,..I w. _j W aM.} y �.f,.-a 4,w. .+o i W n � j t . , , { ♦ d-.,1}_,V.�,LL-x ' .♦M-,w, {_ w e w.x« ir—�-w,u•+w 42r p� . r r.. ,1-4 r•+ ,4e+__r:rt,,.r{ ` T r ♦ r t., , . ,1 w , r.�_i .1-j 1 1 �v l rw_-•i. -I -'»«- � -4-4--`--i--4.--� ,1 r . I T 3 1 � «1. y + { �� w 0 4}.- 1 f uW ..i_,: � , 1 ,[i i »x.w r +w« „n�.-..{ � a y I -r...J„ , •---,-,.,h,,.,, , ' r • MM . tiw xt , „1t-t- _ . 1 ,,.,F 1-. . -•�,' - 1w� M * _ x ..a— y -r•, --4,—.._ r 'L. y - } .. ., r..... ;4;44....4.4.4«;„,a ,w,:j---44,v 0.6 �.+iw«..- «r.r!• w i1 iw 4 - • {.. * „ r { i v+. ± rt „ ..{.''F'`'''''''''''-'1'''t �,..,i„,,., „»M--q •, , -.,�,,..p r , ♦•, -.,. ¢,.., ,,.... . , T"• "I „�..».w..� «•.. 1•"'f-i'�' ,...+._.1rs” a,.,...... --t- �, � � � ...., F.q ,f....a.....+w ' I ...,.r,,4 r,...t...,H1--/—,,,;,x i„r- r r• 1• r p l .....• ``"';..,.i_ rl.—i--4,-i--1-1-4''''4''''';'' r M p«„ d { E - 1,, , ,i ,r. ,.�.....ix_»„« },. ♦.«« y k II r 4-t l {...y.- MI ! . ! 4 ' , .....•..i. I »...,,.. x..�,.•, 'k,...:_! ....f, i `""°,}„-.:..� �.. w,r 9 .,h• ! - {///�� , ! .,{,. r.l.nwl.r•.+ W+- --,..,...�.._.1.. ,..r� ,�.,.tn ♦ ♦.ar, ,�i K 9 M 'Y�,..r+«N I i, ?. ."•�� i., 1 ,�,.wr..,•„xr�.....,....Yw„ ..,.r,.+•I.yc,-•.h. ...d1 r. ..i.m...,...rl+ 4 .�.o- ,..a ,1 h!' PROPROPERTIES : �w� ER I , w� ,.-„r x.,»wa}}. ` 1�,� «j. , '.t , 'a, ......w„ , {.w1 E w,4w .W { 1 �„ ' w „*;-»,a,u•A./ r N#�r7i t. + ! ,y t ? 4 ,,I 1 ..•!. h . w _ ,_, - «« k J -i-...r.,' r- r -- u..#. . . t. ,'w.-- .ww.7 ,wi, -i , .�. " M1w1 5. �� lJ ., iy .} 44 d..« 1� , 1 ,,91.0 �� I.,,L. f'•"M1 .....w. wx ,,.. }-.q,.1.-+..+, l L....♦ «��'.�...». a.=:.i.-p., ,w.!-�.a.,. r..;.w� ,.,.♦,.,i ..x �«„' ..,w M„r-• ,.,�a,'.t... d,,,r•,4«-«1,«-i ..,, ,-.r,,, .i..s.,f.,.,,. 4.•{�,..,.:.,,j. .. . ... ., .,,... 25 }6f . , , ..q0 ! . , r,I�..,w.,,' _ ..�-w.,.ar�,-.. L ' Q4wn.7 °�.,.*-. . +- ' . r 92.0 24 8 I, �•- ..n .,» 4=.,N. ,..q/ w,'t... .. K t .�..,r.rc �, . p .+ �. .. ..Y ! „ , I' ,9 2,6 28,E V 0100 o.o2 0.O4 0.0 0.0 0, 0 0.1 SHEAR DISPLACEMENT, INCHES • •, RAIN CURVES . L II TI I ' ` ` , ��� 5�� at 4+0• light brown �I T ii th so fine sarrand trace clad:► I, I . r uRE`I C T H T Appiled Geotechnoeogy me: w . Geotechlical E,ng(neerfng i �et d Center ealogy HydrogeclbyY t Tigard ' g DATE REVISED D DATE APPROVED :....,... ... I D Igip DRAWN ° ” P1 -1�4d54 b 92 „ _... 1 11 9 ^f'% • ■ • ■ �, WH1H i' ij 1f ' 'C � ; ;Co'nfini'ngiet ■ • �—"1TTTTT1 r i., i i I I 1 ✓' i V i 1 , t .: 1 : . I ( 1 ' i = I i a ,p.s1 , , 1 , i ii �./ .„ ; , HE. ; i, .1 I ..1..[.1 , 1 S .i.,,,. 1. ...'.«. !i.:1 ,.....,-_,.. I. 1 ..s. .. _.,._,. ' _:�;.. ,._- 1 , . , , . . ` 1 1 1 1' 1 ' ; t:. 1- l'' 1 .', 1 1 " 1 . 1 1 ; .,...L 1 4 i, 1 L, 1 , i ._,,,_ _ i1LHIHLwl w R..._- ._ , . tfal � f • 1 3 Q .,� rte.. 1 . 4 C0 I. 1� � �.»' �. ��!. ;_.1 • ': 1,. -�: ,lw -lr- -i,. W �. � 1 ' III} .. i..1 ' -r , ( L " \ n^ r r Y. „ni r n{r ..., .., w�.r(«.«..-, .0 W+�._. u,r n.. ♦.+.«r.”. ... {"�.'' '..: "1I, 1 9 � �.,1 ��.• ...i_.�1. _' = t ..t w .„w »,._L» "1. I .,, .. . .777.1:7 11. i i .......}.....t.....9.:.../.a . i.-,J: . ` r i. � 1�a . . 1 } } 9 I z i i d ( a , ., L , Ej , . , ,, ; ;...;. ;,:„.1. .....1,... L„ '�.} r. R W �.... 1_,, ! [ ft t „ f,,,,- �- 1 1. r w . ! 1 ; t..1. .. 1. t..1, ,.a..1,,t ! , t. 1 1,, i . .. ,1i � ■ w t., e eI j _1 } .1. .".,-.�..1.J• .,1...f L.-,i.....f -.,..... -•.,. .., *. 1, I, , 1, �I i i ; .9 t 1 i t , i f,!«1 11 �_,<. f. E �'� ' ' }: � ii i 1. .,1 iC ! i. ■ , 1 ° E + 4., i..1.,�., � .,.. t»x. �. . ..I.71 . .1 ,1 I t } 1 ,, 1 i, 1 w 4,iG». ..1 r.1. ,I.. ,.. y. .•«4- .......I.�_, ►, 1 }. 1. ). , ; . j A',, j ," I. d .y , ; " 1..1. ; ,1.,. f., ..1. , 1 9.....-La 1. a' 1 ' t f C ' , .1..i.,.1...... e. �.' ... t 1 ,, [ , , , • t' f , s 1 1 's 1 I i ', 4 »1 . 1 I . ..I L , A..,..1..t ..1,7 1 ..'s Y +,.1 .I,,, . 1 I i i, (+ 1 1 r . f • I, ,I' t. I r f � 1 . f , I , 1 t . I . I, " � � � � � I I I , f , I ` I ' ;. ' H i ,, 9, , .," 1 1 i , , f 1 ( � � � ; 1 I } I1 2 t o>rVaTOR STRESS, mod; PSI • L t NOTES: (1) Sample Description: Brown SILTS trace to some clay", L L....., ' ' . . (2) Sample Number TP-6, S:, i, (3) Sample Dimensions: 8,15 ;( 4°0 . . (4) : % Water Content • A) ' Initial 20;7 B) final 20.1 • O, Dry Density of Sample 1O2, ' % of Laboratory Compaction 'Test Density 92% 6 Degree of Saturation tt 88,E �ap4 ed eo�tal t notogy'tn Re theft Mf du%rtiis 'i st He a to #1 A i Gina: C�eotec (micas Er1 rneering wAa Cebtdgy �lydeopeaMtidy �� � Tigard Center , Ell a Tigard, Oregon 6 i R'Ni ED dos.a Kl�h . • A .....1.,.�, ...aw1.«I? -n�...J.0 i..-..r�..�,...J. .. ..�.iM 4....��.u._ ..�....... . w...w.wA.. ..nn,�-..a��_ - �.. .�.de.,,• u..o-J4.1AL..>aura..x...J...-u...1,aw.._�rrrw...._ w,. _i.i. �. NN.n.W-rtw-4 • • • 1 • , I 't ; • • • I i 1 •C o n f 1 ni n j Pressures • t' , I' 1 ; 1 I i 1,{ ( 1 L I 1 d 1 0 , lI l 1 { t t1 I ( 1 ,� i l.'',�1."i, t" i'1 l,.I. ' ' ,. 11, i ' 1 o ps4 ,• 1. t.'�:..,,_.._ .L r. L L. l_ r' 1 .... . 1 = 1 ! }, i ; ' _ , ii�� i (w` _..{,.a{..a._...�-+.w�_F»rn. _... .. ..._ t »...._.. ' i 1. J I i _ t ( «,..,� �» .;,,,......1.„1...1.,.._.,.....1..1._ . . av .. .. 1 1. ,, . »j.i .. .. ,.1. i. ' : ' . ' ' ' ' i , , .' L i_: _ ! t , _. _ 1 ( 1 1 1 I . ( ; ► : It ; © 'I 2 .i i I r ' 4-1a-.. 1. �i ', 4,r.:..,.1, ,t-.(«,..; 1 , ,,1., 1 ' 1 , • , ,-, , , . : ...1 1,,i,,,,, 4 , 1 ,. ,, , , , ii,„ ••,,,.tT- ,», ,. . t � 1 i 1.,' 1 'i 1 i, t . ' ' ' ,!, 1 .{ �� � _.1...r... �I. r tI t. f. 1 , ( ,;. L..I. �._.L,...»., .}...t..l_ 1 ..,.. _, .:l.,.. ,t 1 t I 1 1 i-: • . ' ! 1 a ! CL' p.:. ._L.. .,i_., ..1.,,, .1. t t,;,.l., _... .....w.,_ . ..._._., 1,.1., .1; i,,i (' 1 1 ■ i , }, , t , , i.,, '} I' ' I i � 0 .�i, 1 .��„ t ►„ ry I 1 t ' •—�--� L .._l.-. »h.4.. .....1+,..-,:.. ra._.♦..-Lw. ., ..i -,-t..,. ,..1-..» . i.� t,.,�l I.. ,.,t wt .�' L .1'"' ,..» 1.;.i.„„_.:.., :..i.,i 1w1 � w� ( r _' ( � � . . i 1,.1_,.,..u ' lT,.. .w. � `.1 c r.j: 1t i t. �..�. © t:i .� i l T_�.- ,,,1 ; .1. . . 1 .. _.. I.... .� .. #, .1 . . 1 , i , I ( I . , t I , i 1 1 l ,l 1 4.1 1 .1.... . ! '' { 1 { i i , t l I t 1, ,; F- , i i I I ! 11 1 1 I: , ill I t : j pw ,. ... . t LI � La , i I I r r E �i . Li 1--) I `�+ ,I I�,i ',,i 1.,11..,1...1 »t l�,I 1. ..,1 1 � ,, .I . .. .. 1..I ( i..�, 1 ' • ' ,, . w 1 1 , 1. (. 1 {{..r.. i 1,f -.1,..,L, J f. «.i , « . i , C { 1 1 , , .t 1 . _ ' ■ I.W I ! . .. 4,. t i''1 • 1 f I ' ' 1 t I 1, !- .} �, } C+ 1.i:1i . = 1. t 4 1 ', I,. . 1 = i 1, ! I t t. } '.- i , L i t �1.' i I' 1 = 1 r i }-v-1�r , } 1 • 1 . 1 , ��.tH.d..i a {,. r .,..w y..,�.,, ",.. I-.. _ .I. I':I L-.�.'.i�.�, 1 ! 1'I t { 4 , 1 5..•.'; 1 1 . ! , . y 1, .�.» }1fl..i.'. f11tF-. = t ,. r, t ♦ �h 1, : _ L r .. r, 11r'« ! , I , a I . .lw .n ..... ...L 1., ,..... ta—. . . ! .�,rl,r4,.. w .. 1... }d �[��, .y. ,_ = w ,i _ . _. 1 ,..i...:.. . ! I • Y,I .�.L—.— 1 I . i,.. 1..., .»..t..,Y»w _—'_ I t __;.....1.....1,...:--,:...L.—` 1 1 I,l r11 x.. t1{r..r., „ ,. —1_ . 1,.. f..r,a t 1 : 1 , , . 1 i I i { 11 1, }i t �1 . , 1 i, I :,1».t.-,l. _1...1_+t»! -(1;t,1_.�,...., 1. .l.aa _i,.t, 1... i,..� , 1 ,' , 1 . ' ', _ . .:v ( . , ,..1., 1. . ..,.,..,Ili, ,..1 � 1.i..l , +g 1,�' = 1..fC 1, ' 1 1 I F �l }1 I,, , '1 i 9 =�I 1 • , • 1 ,. .,.. i =, i d .I. �...,,.., brl i.��...,t 1 ( ! I-•(.I { �...,.,$e jj(. �!, , ti, 9{„'! ."a , _�, ,, _ } «II=' « 1 I� . , i ,.� .»», 1 t . t 1 , , �,. ,-1. + (�1 .I. ( I ♦ I 1 i L �.. } 1 1, ;'I , r lr t, 1 _ . = a 1•,. 2 4 6 8 10 I DEVIATOR STRESS y ' Cr'd•• PSI , • ,NOTES:. (1) Sample Desc"7 pti on: Very Is�7 ff �o hard brown SILT; damp I '. trace fine:: sand: , � ' 1 . e' m Numbet : B-6 S (8) Sample Dimensions; 7.'0:x 2.8 (4) , Water Ccnteni: I A Initial = 22:6 . D Final = 2O:6 (a) Dry Density of Sample) - 96 g' % of Laboratory Compaction action Test D en 5� r natural . (6) Degree 'off Saturation = 84 I 1 A pp lied G�o t�� riY 9Y Iis Fit $ ekl$ MCC11 �U Test 9 ard Qreg an I JOE NUMBER 'BRAWN APPROVED DATI REVISED� , 1405.01 ' 'K'W 10�`h'1/Og