HomeMy WebLinkAboutMLP2008-00006 N�TICE OF TYPE II DECISION ,�
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2008-00006 °
WHITE OAK PARTITION
120 DAYS =10 8 2008
SECTION I. APPLICATION SLTMMARY
FILE NAME: WHITE OAIk PARTITION
CASE NO: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2008-00006
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into
cwo lors of 8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant proposes to remove the
existing single-farrvly home and build two new single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2
will be a flag lot. The subject property is adjacent to the White Oak Village Planned
Development (PD) site and owned by the same developer. While the applicant proposes to
construct public improvements as part of the White Oak Village PD,the proposed partition is
separate from the PD project.
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER: White Oak Village,LLC REP: SR Design,LLC
7955 SW Hall Boulevard Attn: Jeff Caines,AIQ'
Beaverton, OR 97008 8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232
Beaverton,OR 97008
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R 4.5 (PD): Low Densiry Residential District with Planned Development overlay. The R 4.5
zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without
accessory�residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Dupleaes and attached
single-family uniu are pernutted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also
pemutted conditionally.
LOCATION: 11030 SW 74th Avenue;Washington CountyTax Map 1S136DB,Tax Lot 2300.
PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 8,780 Square Feet.
PROYOSED PARCEL 2: 8,500 Square Feet.
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 1835C 18390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715,
18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
SECTION II. DECISION
Nouce is hereby�iven that the City of Ti�ard Community Development Director's desi�nee has APPROVED the
above request subject to cenain conditions. The findin�s and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in
Section V.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLP2008•00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 1 OF 19
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT:
The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans
that address the following requirements to the CURRENT PL.ANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary
Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EX'I 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
1. Prior to final plat approval, if joint access is proposed, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded
reciprocal access and maintenance easement for Lots 1 and 2.
2. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit a revised development plan showing street trees per
TDC 18.745.040 and include a note on their development plan that slight variations u1 placement may be
required due to driveways,utilities, etc.,but every attempt will be made to keep the same net number of
street trees that are shown on the development plan.
3. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit a revised development plan showing required
buffering and screening south and east of the site consistent with Table 18.7452, Buffer Combinations for
Landscaping and Screening.
4. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall transfer accurately the fencing and tree protecrion specificarions
in the arborist repart to the site plans. The tree protecrion plan needs to address tree protecrion standards and
methods for after construction. Specifically, they need to address acceptable landscaping practices and materials
around preserved trees. This addirional informauon can be provided on the site plans as well. The revised tree
protection plan must include a signature of approval from the project arborist.
The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans
that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM
MCMILLAN 503-b39-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
5. � Public Faciliry Improvement (I'FI) permit is required for this project to cover the public sidewallcs and any
other work in tlze public right-of-way. S� (6) sets of detailed public unprovement plans shall be submitted for
review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addirion to any drawings required by the
Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public unprovements. Public Facility
improvement (PFn permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improveinent Design Standards,which
are available at Ciry Hall and the Ciry's web page (www.tigard-or.gov).
6. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the
individual or corporate entiry who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the ftnancial
assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the enrity is a corporarion, limited parrnership,
LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the enrity is incorporated and provide t11e name of the corporate
contact person. Failure to provide accurate informarion to the Engineering Deparnnent will delay processing
o£project documents.
7. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer.
The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construcrion phase.
8. The City Engineer may deterinine the necessity for,and require submittal and approval of, a construcrion access
and parking plan for the home building phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary, the applicant
shall provide the plan prior to issuance of building pernuts.
9. Prior to final plat approval, t11e applicant shall pay the addressing fee. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart,
Engineerin�.
NO"11(;I.C)I�lliRl'sCl'OR'ti(�I�:CltilON �II,V2(H18-(NHNIG/WI II'1'I�:O,\K P:1R"I'I"CION 1'�\G1�.2Ol�19
10. The applicant shall subinit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facilit�
Improvement perinit, indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 74
Avenue/Street "A" as a pan of this project:
A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk with planter strip;
B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements;
G streetlight layout by applicant's engineer,to be approved by City Engineer; and
D. driveway apron (if applicable).
11. The ap�licant's PFI pern7it plans shall be revised to provide separate storm sewer laterals, with separate
connections to the public storm sewer sy�stem.
12. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection
prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Impro��ement pernut.
13. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) pemzit drawings.
The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevenuon and Sediment Control Design and Pluzning Manual,
Febniary 2003 edition."
14. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the Cit�s global
positiorung system (GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22) as recorded in Washington County survey records.
These mornunents shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as requu-ed for the subdivision
plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground
measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be
established by.
• GPS tie netaorked to the Cat�s GPS survey.
• By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
15. Final Plat Application Submission Reqtnrements:
A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to
practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative.
B. Attach a check in the amount of the current final plat review fee (C�ntact Plaruung/Engineering PemZit
Technicians,at(503 639-4171,e�t. 2421).
G The final plat and ata or narrative shall be drawn to the minimi�rn standards set forth by the Oregon
Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington County, and by the City of T'igard.
D. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from
the Engineering Department indicating that the Ciry has reviewed the final plat and submitted
comments to the applicant's surveyor.
E. After the Ciry and COUnry have reviewed the final plat, submit one paper copy of the final plat for City
Engineer signature (for partitions), or City Engineer and Community Development Director signatures
(for subdiv�sions).
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BLJILDING PERMITS:
e app icant s prepare a cover etter an su mit it, a ong wi any suppomng ocuments an or p ans
that address the tollowing re�quirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: C�ary
Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EXT 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
16. Prior to building pernzits, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing a screen along the
northern property line of Lot 1 in accordance with Section 18.745.050.
17. Prior to building pemuts,the applicant shall demonstrate the building height f or Lot 2 is consistent with Section
18.730.020.G
NOTICE OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-D0006/WHITE OAK PARTTTTON PAGE 3 OF 19
18. Prior to demolition and buildin pern7its,the applicant shall position fencing as directed by the project arborist
in his report dated May 28j 20�8 to rotect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall protect all trees and
major vegetation to be retauied with �ive or six (5': 6') foot high chain link fences. Fences are to be mounted
on two ulch diameter galvazuzed iron posts, driven uito the ground to a depth of at least 2-feet at no more than
10-foot spacing. The applicant shall ensure all proposed tree protection fencing is installed and inspected bythe
Caty Forester and allow access by the City Arbonst for the purpose of morutorin and inspection of the tree
protecuon to verify that the tree protection measures are per�ornung adequately. �ailure to follow the plan, or
inaultaui tree protection fencing u1 the designated locations shall be grounds for unmediate suspension of work
on the site unt�l remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. Fencuig shall remain in place
through the duration of home building. After approval from the City Forester, the tree protection measures
may be removed.
19. If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal
detailing the construcuon techniques to be empIoyed and the likely unpacts to the trees. The proposaI shall be
reviewed and approved by the Caty Arborist bef ore proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone.
The City Arbonst may require changes prior to approval. The project arbonst shall be on site while work is
occLU-rulg within the tree protection zone and submit a si.uruY�ary�report cert�fying that the work occurred per
the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and/or stabihty of the trees. Tlvs note shall be included
on the Tree Protection Plan.
20. The applicant shall have an on-going responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written
reports to the Cary Arborist, at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist monitors the construction
activities from irutial tree protecuon zone (TPZ) fenculg installation through the building construcuon phase.
The reports shall evaluate the condition and location of the tree protection fencing, deternune �f any changes
occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. If the amount of TT'Z was
reduced then the Project Arbonst shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the
overall, �ong-term health and stabiliry of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted to the.City Arbonst at the
scheduled uztervaLs, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protecuon Plan are not beuig followed by the
contractor or a sub-contractor, the Caty can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the
City Arborist and the Project Arbonst.
21. Prior to issuance of building pern�its, the applicant or builder shall submit site plan drawing s indicating the
locations of trees that were preserved on the lot during site development. In addition, the pl-�ns shall include
accurate locations of tree canopydnpluies and protection fencuig, and a sig nature of a�pproval from the project
ar o�i-ist regarding the placement and construction techruques to be employ�ed in building the structures. All
proposed protection fencuig shall be installed and inspected pnor to commencuig constn.icuon. The fencin
shaIl remaul in place through the duration of all of the builduig construction phases, until the Certificate o�
Occupancy has been approved.
The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, alon with an_ysu ortin documents and/or plans
that address the }ollowing requirements to the ENG�EERING �EP�TMENT, ATTN: -KIM
MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the
required info�nation is found:
22. Prior to issuance of building pernzits,the applicant shall pro��ide the Engineering Department with a paper copy
of the recorded final plat.
23. Prior to issuance of building pernuts the public improvements in SW 74`}' Avenue must be completed by
SUB2006-00010. If not completed, the applicant will be required to complete the improvements prior to
issuance of building pemzits.
24. The applicant shall either place the existin� overhead utility lines along SW 74�' Avenue underground as a part
of this pro�ect,or theyshall paythe fee ui-heu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated bythe frontage of
the site that is parallel to the utility lines and w111 be $70.00 per lineal f oot. If the f ee option is chosen, the
amount will be$3,850.00 and it shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits.
25. During issuance of the building pernut for Parcels 1 and 2,the applicant shall pay the sta.ndard water quality and
water quantityfees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest approved byC,'WS).
NOTTCE OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTTTION PAGE 4 OF 19
�I
PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED:
The aprlicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, alo with any supporting documents and/or plans
that address the following requirements to the CURRE�T PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary
Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EXT 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
26. 1'rior to tuial inspecrion for Lots 1 and 2, the applicant shall submit a final Yeport by the Project Arborist
certifying the health of protected trees and tl�at the street trees were properly planted per the approved street
tree plan. Tree protecrion measures may be removed and final inspecnon authonzed upon review and approval
by the City Arborist.
27. Prior to final inspection for Lots 1 and 2, the a�plicant shall submit a letter to tlie Ci�y from Tualatin Valley Fire
& Rescue (TVF&R) demonstrating t11at the e�usting fire hydrant is capable of providulg the necessary fire flow
demand.
28. Prior to final inspecrion for Paxcel #2, the applicant/owner shall record a deed restricrions for both Parcels #1
and #2 to tlie effect that any e�sting tree greater than 6" diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is
hazardous according to a cernfied arborist. The deed restricrion may be removed or will be considered invalid
if a tree preserved in accordance witll this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree.
THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS OF THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION NOTED UNDER THE PROCESS AND APPEAL SECTION
OF THIS DECISION.
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Pro�erty Histor�
The subject properry is located withiri the City of Tigard. The property is designated Low-Density Residential with
Planned Development (PD) overlay on the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map. The subject property was originally
developed with a single-family dwelling in 1952. In 2006 the subject properry was included in the White Oak Village
Planned Development (PD) (SLTB2006-00010, PDR2006-00001, ZON2007-00001) to provide access from SW 74`''
Avenue. While the applicant will construct public improvements on the subject paxcel as part of the White Oak Village
PD, the proposed parrition is separate from the PD project. Because of the small size of the parcel (.40 acres) and lack
af any sigruficant natural resources, staff deternzined that the standards for planned development review are not
applicable to the subject site and will not be required for this application.
Site Information and Pro osal Descri rions
The site is located w-ithin a large bloc with a perimeter of approxirnately 6,200 lineal feet, bounded by Highway 99W
and Pfaffle on the south,SW 78�'Avenue on the west, SW Spruce Street on the nortli, and SW 71"Avenue on the east.
The site is located at the ternvnus of SW 74�'Avenue south of Spruce Street. The subject site is bordered by developed
land zoned R-12 (I'D) to the west,R-4.5 to the north,and GG to tlie east and south.
The applicant is requesting approval to parrition one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into two lots of 8,780 square
feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant proposes to remove the existing single-family home and build two new
single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot.
SECTION IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
The Ciry mailed norice to properry owners within 500 feet of the subject site providing them an opportunity to
comment. One written comment was received from Jun Milne regarcling the access linking the White Oak Village
development with Hwy 99 w hich runs along properry belonging to Mr. Milne at 11643 SW Pacific Hwy.
NO'l'1CI?OI�lliKl?(`1'OR'S llI�:CTtiION �f].P21X18-lHNll)C/WI IT'1'I(C)�AK V;V2777'i(lN 1'A(�I?5O1�19
RESPONSE: Mr. Milne raises issues regarding contractor impacts to his buildin� along an access way between the
White Oak Village and Hwy99. The access is designed as a pedestnan and bicycle access with surface
stormwater conveyance for the approved White Oak Village planned development. The proposed
application for a muior land partiuon LS not adjacent to Mr. Milne's property and is not related to his
concems. Al Dickman, Cit��Engineering Department, has relayed Mr. Milne's concerns to Len Dalton,
owner of the White Oak Village project for resolution of the issue.
SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIE W CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Planned Developments (18.350.020.C.5�
In the case of an existing planned development o��erlay zone,once construction of the detailed plan has been completed,
subsequent applications conforming to the detailed plan shall be reviewed under the provisions required in the chapter
wl�icl� apply to the particular land use application.
The decision for White Oak Village Subdivision (SUB2006-00010, PDR2006-00001, ZON2007-00001) approved a PD
overlay on three parcels. The subject parcel was required for an extension of SW 74`''Avenue for access to the proposed
development on the other two parcels. The subject parcel contained an e�sting residence that was retained and situated
such that the access improvements could be made without any conflicts. The access improvements on the subject lot
for the benefit of White Oak Village have been completed. Therefore, this application for a minor land partition is
subject to the Land Partitions Chapter(18.420) and the applicable specific development standards in Title 18.
Land Pattitions (18.420�
The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations;
The proposed partition complies or can be made to comply with all statutory and ordinance requirements and
regulations as demonstrated by the analysis contained within this administrative decision and through the imposition of
conditions of development approval. Provided all necessary conditions are satisfied as part of the development and
building process,this criterion�s met.
There are adequate public facilities available to serve the proposal;
Public facilities are discussed in detail later in this decision under Chapter 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement
Standards). Based on the analysis provided herein, Staff finds that adequate public facilities are available to serve the
proposal. Therefore,this cntenon�s met.
All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards;and
The public facilities and proposed improvements are discussed and conditioned later in this decision under Chapter
18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards). Improvements will be reviewed as part of the pernzit process and
during construction, at wluch tune the appropnate review authority will ensure that Ciry and applicable agency
standards are met. Based on the analysis in this dec�sion,Staff finds that this crnenon is met.
All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below:
The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable zoning
distric�
The m�n�mum lot width required for the R 4.5 zoning district is 50 feet. Parcel # 1 is 90 feet in width; parcel #2 is 85
feet wide. Therefore,this cntenon has been met.
The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning distric� In the case of a flag lot, the accessway may
not be included in the lot area.
The minunum lot area requirement in the R 4.5 zoning district is 7,500 square feet for detached
single-familyunits. The proposed partiuon creates two (2) lou that are 8,780 square feet (Lot 1) and 8,500 square feet
(Lot 2). The access for Lot 2 �s through an easement over Lot 1. The easement�s 1,200 square feet in area,wluch leaves
a 7,580 square feet not including the access,consistent with this standard.
NOTIC�OF DIRECI'OR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-D0006/WHITE OAK PARTITTON PAGE 6 OF 19
1
;:���� ^
Each lot created tlu-ough the pattition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least 15 feet or have a
legally recorded minimum 15-foot wide access easement
The pro�osed partition plat (Sheet 2 of 3) illustrates that the proposed parcels meet this standard as Lot 1 has 60 feet
and Lot has 20 feet of}rontage on SW 74�'Avenue.
Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning distric�
Setbacks for the R 4.5 zoning district are as follows: front = 20 feet; side = 5 feet; side on a corner = 15 feet; and rear
=15 feet. The applicant has proposed to remove the existing dwelling.The app licant shows building envelop es for Lots
1 and 2 cons�stent anth the setbacks required in the R 4.5 zonulg distnct. Setback standards for proposed Lots 1 and 2
will be reviewed at the time of building pernut submittal. Therefore,this cnterion is met.
When the partitioned lot is a flag lot,the developer may determine the location of the front yard, provided that
no side yard is less than 10 fee� Sttuctures sliall generally be located so as to maximize separation from
existing structures.
A flag lot is proposed for Lot 2. The building envelope is shown on the Prelimuiary Layout (Sheet C2) which identifies
the north as the front wnh a 10-foot side yard to the west and a 23-foot side yard to the east, cons�stent with this
standard.
A screen shall be provided along the propeity line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an accessway is
located within ten feet of an abutting lot m accordance with Sections 18.745.050. Screening may also be
required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed
development
The proposed paved drive for Lot 2 would be located within 10 feet of the adjacent property to the north. The
applicant proposes a fence or other screening but does not show it on the Prelulunary La}�ut. Tlus standard requires a
screen along the propetry line of a lot of record where the access drive is within 10 feet. Thereforer as a condition of
appro��al the appl�cant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing a screen along the property line ui accordance with
Secuon 18J45.050.
The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway would have a
detrimental effect on fire-fighting capabilities.
The fire district ('I'VF&R) has reviewed the proposal and has not required an additional fire hydrant. However,TVF&R
did state that the ex�sting fire hydrant shown on the submitted drawulgs must be capable of providing the required fire
flow demand. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a letter to the Caty from TVF&R
demonstrating that the ex�sting fire hyrlrant is capable of provid-ing the necessary fire flow demand.
Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement which will ensure
access and maintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partition map.
The applicant states that access to proposed Lot 1 has not yet been deternzined but ma�y include a joint access with the
access proposed for L.ot 2. There}ore, if joLnt access u proposed, the applicant shall subinit a copy of a recorded
reciprocal access and maintenance easement.
Any access way shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705, Access,Egress and Circulation.
This standard is addressed under Chapter 18J05 (Access,Egress and Circulation) later in this decision.
Where landfill and/or develo ment is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred year floodplain, the city
shall require consideration o�the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within
the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a
pedestrian/b�cycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway
plan.
The subject lot has an elevation between 250 feet on the west to 255 feet on the east. The nearest floodplaui is located
approxirnately3,400 feet northwest at an elevation 170 feet. Therefore,this standard does not apply.
'�IOTI(�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PAR`ITTTON PAGE 7 OF 19
An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in accordance with
Chapter 18.370,Variances and Adjustrnents. The applications for the partition and variance(s)/adjustment(s)
will be processed concurrently.
The applicant has not applied for a variance. Therefore,this standard does not apply.
FINDING: The proposed minor land partition meets,or can meet,all of the relevant standards of the land partition
section as uidicated in the above f indings and required in the f ollowing conditions of approval.
GONDITTONS:
. If joint access is proposed,the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded reciprocal access and
iY�auitenance easement for Lots 1 and 2.
. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing a screen �long the north property
line of proposed Lot 1 in accordance with Section 18.745.050.
. The applicant shall submit a letter to the Ciryfrom TVF&R demonstrating that the existing fire
hydrant is capable of providing the necessary fu-e flow demand.
Residential Zoning Districts (18.510�
Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2 below:
TABLE 18.510.2 - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES
STANDARD R-4.5 Paccel 1 I'a�e12
Minimum Lot Size
- Detached unit 7,500 sq.ft 8,780 sq.ft. 8,500 sq.ft.
- Duplexes 10,000 sq.ft� (7,580 sq.ft.
-Attached unit w/o access
Average Minimum Lot Width
- Detached unit lots 50 ft. 90 ft. 85 ft.
- Duplex lots 90 ft.
- Attached unit lots
Maa:imum Lot Covera e - NA NA
Minimum Setbacks
- Front yard 20 ft. 20 ft. 20
- Side facing smeet on comer&through tots L5 f� NA NA
- Side yard S ft. 5/5 ft. 10/23 ft.
- Rear ya�i 15 ft 15 ft. 15 ft.
- Side or rear yacri abutting more restrictive zoning district -- NA NA
- Distance between property line and front of garage 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 fc.
- Side Ya�Setbacks for Fla Lots TDC 18.420.050 A 4 e 10 fL NA 10/23 ft.
Maximum Hei ht 35 ft. TBD 35 TBD 35
Minimum Landsca e Re uirement - NA NA
FINDING: Prop os�ed Lots 1 and 2 can meet the development stanciards for the R 4.5 zone based on the
Prelunuiary Layout (Sheet C2). The development will be subject to review and approval at the time
of building pernut appl�cation.
Access,Egress and Circulation(18.705�:
Continuing obligation of property owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in
this tide are cont�nuing requirements for the use of any structure or patrel of real propetty in the City.
The standards of this chapter will be a continuing obligation on the owners of these parcels.
Section 18.705.030.H.1 states tliat an access report shall be submitted with all new develop ment proposals
which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stackin�g needs, sight distance
and deceleration standarrls as set by ODOT, Washington County,the City and AASHTO.
NOTI(�OF DIRECI'OR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/UG�I-IITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 8 OF 19
r ,��
:�,.'�
t�
The access for this two lot partition is at the eye-brow corner of SW 74th Avenue and "A" Street (under construction
with the White Oak Subdivision). The applicant's engineer, SR Design, submicted a prelinunary sight distance
certification, dated May 29, 2008. The streets are both classified as local streets with speed limits ot 25 mph, which
requires a muvmum of 250 feet sight distance in each direction from the access points.
The engineer states sight distance from the access points to the north on 74th Avenue was measured to be in excess of
250 feet. The sigh�t d�tance to the west in the direction of Street "A" was not deternvned since the street is not fully
constructed at this time. The access points, however, are directly opposite Street "A", posing no sight distance
impediments.
Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of
collector or aiterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where gueues of traffic
coiTUnonly foml on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a coIIector or arterial
street intersection shall beL50 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat
of the roposed driveway. The setback may be greater dependin upon the influence area, as detemiined
from �ty Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by�e applicant's traffic engineer. In a case
where a pro�ect has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any o�ption for shared
access w�th the adjacent pamel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway sfiall be placed as
far from the intersect�on as possible.
74th Avenue is classified as a local street. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall
be 200 feet The minimum s acin�of drivewa�ys and streets alon an artenal shall be 600 fee� The minimum
spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet g
No streets are proposed. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
Joint Access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize joindy the same
access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or�pa�els of land satisfies
the combined reyuirements as desi nated in this tide, provided: Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented
in the fomi of deeds, easements,�eases or contracts to establish the �oint use; and copies of the deeds,
easecnents,leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City.
The applicant states that access to proposed Lot 1 has not yet been deternuned but rna�y include a joint access with the
access proposed for Lot 2. There}ore, if joint access i� pro_posed, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded
reciprocal access and maintenance easement.A cond�tion has been imposed to this effect.
Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall
connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at
the required standards on a cont�nuous basis.
The applicant proposes direct access to SW 74`�Avenue,a public street. Therefore,this standard is met.
Minimtun access reyuirements for residential use. Private residential access drives shall be provided and
maintained in acco�iance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code.
Each parcel will have a standard driveway with direct access to SW 74`'' Avenue on flat land. Comments received from
Tualatu-i Valley Fire and Rescue state that there are no conflicts with the proposed access. Therefore, chis standard is
met.
Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with app roved provisions for the turning around
of fire apparatus by one of the following: a) A circular, paved surface Fiaving a minimum turn radius measured
from center point to outside edge of 35 feet; b) A hanunerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the
hainmerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet; c) The ma�umum cross
slope of a required tumaround is 5%.
The access drive is shown as 60 feet,consistent with this stacidard.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTORS DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 9 OF 19
To provide for increased traffic movement on congested streets and to eliminate turning movement
problems, the Director may restrict the location of driveways on streets and require the location of
dnveways be placed on adjacent streets, upon the finding that the proposed access would cause or
increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles• or
cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a clear and present danger to the pu�lic
health, safety, and general welfare.
SW 74th Avenue is a local street serving a low and medium density�residential neighborhood. There is no reason to
restrict the location of the proposed additional driveway.Therefore,this standard does not apply.
FINDING: The standards of the Access Management chapter(18J05) have been satisfied.
DensitXComputations (18.715�
A. Definition of net development area. Net developinent area, in acres, shall be deternuned by
subtractin� the following land area(s) from the gross acres, which is all of the land included in the
legal descnption of the property to be developed:
1. All sensitive land areas
2. All land dedicated to the public for park purposes;
3. All land dedicated for public rights-of-way.
4. All land proposed forpnvate streets;and
5. A lot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an e�sting dwelling
is to remain on die site.
B. Calculating maximum number of residential units. To calculate thc maximum number of residential
units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of square
feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning distric�
G Calculating minimum number of residential units. As re quired by Section 18.510.040, the minimum
number ot residential units per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the maximum number of
units determined in Subsect�on B above by 80% (0.8).
The subject .40-acre parcel totals 17,280 square feet. There are no sensitive land areas or private streets within the
subject proposal. Since publ�c right-of-way dedication and un rovements occurred with the adjacent White Oak
Villa e development, the net developable area is 17,280 square �eet. As the ininirnum lot size for the R-4.5 zone is
7,50�square feet, the rnaxunum number of lots is 2 (17,28D/7,500 square feet =23 lots). The m;n;mum number of
lots is one (2 x .80 = 1.6). Pursuant to 18.730.050.E the lot area for a flag lot shall be provided entirely within the
building site area exclusive of any access way. The area for Lot 1 as proposed �s 8,780 square feet cons�stent wrth
this standard. The proposed partition creates two (2) separate lots ul conformance with the densityrequirements.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the Density Computation Standards have been met.
Buildin� Heights And Flag Lots (18.730.020.C�
Li�nitat�ons on the placemen o residential structures on flag lots apply when a flag lot is created after
April 15, 1985 by an approved partition. The maximum height for an attached or detached single-family,
du.plex, or mult�ple-family residential structure on a fla lot or a lot having sole access from an accessway,
pnvate drive or easement is 1-1/2 stories or 25 feet, w�ichever is less, except that the maximum height
may be 2-1/2 stories or 35 feet, whichever is less, provided:
a. The proposed dwelling otherwise complies with the applicable dimensional requirements of the zoning
distnct;
b. A 10 feet side yard will be preserved;
c. A residential structure on any abutting lot either is located 50 feet or more from the nearest point of the
and�ect dwelling, or the residential structure exceeds 1-1/2 stories or 25 feet in height on any abutting lot;
NOTIC�OF DIREGTOFt'S DEQSION MLP2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 10 OF 19
`;;�
.
�;;:
d. Windows 15 feet or more above grade shall not face dwelling unit windows or patios on any abutting lot
unless the proposal includes an agreement to plant trees capable of mitigating direct views, or that such
trees exist and will be preserved.
3. Where an agreement is made to plant trees capable of mitigatin� direct views, the agreement shall be
deemed a condition of approval under the provisions of Section 18.3 0.030 D.
4. The tree planting agreement shall be a condition of Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review for three
or more attached umts or a multiple-family residential structure, or, at the time of issuance o� building
permits, for single detached units, one duplex or two attached residential units.
FINDING: The applicant has shown in the Preliininary Layout (Sheet C2) that 10-foot side yards will be
preserved. It appears that dwellings on adjacent properaes maynot be more than 50 feet from
the building envelope. Therefore, the flag lot height limitation may apply to the proposed flag
Lot 2. The setbacks must be confirmed at the time of bwlding permn review. To ensure th�s
standard is met, the applicant shall demonstrate the building lieight is cor�sistent with the
Section 18J30.020.G
CONDITT ON:
• Prior to building pernuts,the applicant shall demonstrate the building height for Parcel
#2 is consistent with the Section 18.730.020.0
Landsca�in�and Screenin� (18.745�
Existing vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as possible: 1) The developer shall provide methods
for the protection of existin� vegetation to remain during the construction process; and 2) the plants to be
saved shall be noted on the I�andscap e plans (e. ., areas not to be disturbed can be fenced, as in snow fencing
which can be placed around the individual trees�.
The applicant's Preluninary Layout (Sheet C2) shows tree protection fencing for existing on-site trees and trees on
adjacent parcels,consistent with th�s standard.
Street Trees
Section 18.745.040.A: All development projects frontin� on a pu�blic street, private street or a private driveway
more than 100 feet in length approved after the adopt�on of this tide shall be required to plant street trees in
accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040C
This requirement has not been met. No street trees are shown on the 74`t'Avenue/A Street frontage. There appears to
be sufficient room for one street tree in the�plantin strip between the two water meters. The applicant states that street
trees may be planted with the White Qak ViIlage(P�),but no street trees were included in those plans.
The applicant shall include a note on their development plan that slight variations in placement may be required due to
driveu�a}�s, ut�ties, etc., but every attempt will be made to keep the same net number of street trees that are shown on
the Street Tree plan.
Bufferin and Screening Requirements
Section �8.745.050: But�er Matrix. The Buffer Matrices contained in Tables 18J45.1 and 18J45.2 shall be used
in calculating widths of buffering/screening and required improvements to be installed between proposed
uses and abutting uses or zoning districts;
Th�roposed land partiti�n�ccurs on a parcel zoned R 4.5. The adjacent zone to the east and south is GG.Accorciin�
to 1�able 18J45.1 Buffer Matr-ix, when an ex�sting/abutting use is a GG zone or a parking lot, a Level C buffer �s
required. The Pre�urunary Layout (Sheet C2) does not show any buffering or screenuzg,. Therefore, the applicant shall
subirut a rev�sed plan cons�stent vcrnh Table 18J45.2,Buffer Combinauons for Landscaping and Screenuig.
FINDING: The landscape and Screening standards have not all been met. However with conditions of
approval requinng street trees and buffering of adjacent uses,these standarc�s can be met.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLPZ008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITTON PAGE 11 OF 19
CONDITTONS:
. The applicant shall submit a revi�ed develo�ment plan showing street trees per TDC
18J45.040 and include a note on their development plan that slight vanations in
placement may be required due to driveways, ut�hues, etc., but every attempt will be
made to keep the same net number of street trees that are shown on the Street Tree
plan.
. The applicant shall submit a revised de�.elopment pl�an showin required buffering and
screerung south and east of the site cons�stent withTI'able 18.74�2,Buffer
Tree Removal(18.790�
A tree plan or the plant�ng, retnoval and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided
for an lot, atrel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development ap lication for a subdivision
pactition, sitpe develo pment review, planned develo pment or conditionaI use is tiled. Protection is preferrec�
over removal wherever possible.
As required,the applicant has provided a tree plan conducted by Phil H�ickey,a certif ied arborist which meets all the
required elements except a protecuon program defuung standards and methods that will be usec�bythe.a plicant to
protect trees during and after construction. All existing trees w�ll be retained;therefore no mitigation�be required.
The fencing and tree protection specifications in the arborist report need be transferred accuratelyto the site plans. The
tree protection plan needs to address tree protecuon standards and methods for after construction. SpecificaIly,they
need to address acceptable landscaping practices and materials around preserved trees. This additional inforn�ation can
be provided on the site plans as a�ell. Finally,the revised tree protection plan needs to include a signature of approval
from the project arborist.
Section 18.790.040 states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may thereafter be
removed only for the reasons set out�n a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of
a� pproval for a conditional use, and shall notbe subject to removal under any other section of this chapter.
The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit
affected by this section to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous
according to a certified a�orist The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree
preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a haza�ious tree. The form of
tlus deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director.
A condition of approval will ensure that this standard is met.
FINDING: Based on the anal}�sis above, the Tree Removal Standards have not all been met. In order to
meet these standards,the applicant shall satisfythe following conditions of approval:
CONDITTONS:
. The applicant shall transfer accurately the fencing and tree protection specifications in
the arborist report to the site plans. The tree protection plan needs to address tree
protection standards and methods for after construction. Spec�fically, they need to
address acc�eptable landscaping practices and materials around preserved trees. Tlvs
additional ic�ornlation can be provided on the site plans as well. The revised tree
protection plan must include a signature of approval from the project arborist.
. The applicant shall position fencing as directed by the �project arborist in his report
dated N1ay 28, 2008 to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall protect all
trees and major vegetauon to be retained with five or six (5' - b') fooc high chain link
fences. Fences are to be mounted on two inch diameter galvanized iron posts, dnven
into the ground to a depth of at least 2-feet at no more than 10-foot spacing. The
applicant shall� position fencing as directed bythe project arborist to rotect the trees to
be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Arborist �or the purpose of
monitoring and inspecuon of the tree protecuon to venfy that the tree protection
measures are perfomiing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintaui tree
protection fencing ui the designated locauons shall be grounds for irnmediate
suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be
processed.
NOTIC�OF DIRECI'OR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/VG'HITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 12 OF 19
,. �
,.
. If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall
prepare a proposal detailing the construction techruques to be emp loyed and the likely
uiipac.ts to the trees. Tiie proposal shall be reviewed and approved b the Caty Arbonst
betore proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. �e City Arborist
may requu-e changes prior to approval. The project arbonst shall be or_site while work
�s occurnng within the tree protecuon zone and subrrut a sLUru7�ry report certifying that
the work occw�t-ed per the proposal and will not significandy impact the health and/or
stability of the trees. T1us note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan.
. Prior to issuance of building pern�its, the applicant or builder shall submit site plan
drawings indicating the locauons of trees that were preserved on the lot during site
development. In addition, the plans shall include accurate locations of tree canopy
driplines and protection fencing, and a signature of approval from the pro'ect arbonst
regardu-ig the placement and construcuon techrug ues to be employed ui �uilding the
structures. AIl proposed protection fencuz shall be installed and inspected pnor to
commencing construction. The fencing sh� rernain in place through the durauon of
all of the building construcuon phases, until the Certi{icate of Occupancy has been
approved.
. Prior to final inspection for each lot, the applicant shall submit a final repott by the
Project Arborist certify�ng the health of protected trees and that the street trees were
properly planted per the approved street tree plan. Tree protection measures may be
removed and fmal inspection authorized upon review and approval by the City
Arborist.
. The applicant shall have an on-going responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist
has submitted wntten reports to the C,�ry Arborist1 at least once every two weeks, as the
Project Arborist morutors the construcuon activities from initial tree protection zone
(TPZ) fenculg installation through the building construction hases. The repons shall
evaluate the condition and location of the tree rotection �encing, deterrrune �f any
changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part o�the Tree Protection Plan has been
violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced, then the Project Arborist shall certify that
the construction activities did not adversely unpact the overall, long-term health and
stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not subrrutted to the Ciry Arborist at the
scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protecuon Plan are not
being followed by the contractor or a sub-contractor, the Caty can stop work on the
project unt�l an u�specuon can be done by the City Arborist and the Pro�ect Arbonst.
. Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Ckcupancy, the applicant/owner shall record
deed restrictions to the effect that any e�sting tree greater than 6" diameter may be
removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous accorduig to a ceitified arborist. The deed
restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in
accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree.
V'isual Clearance Areas (18J95�
This Chapter mquires t a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to
intersecting nght-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area
shall contain no vehicIe hed e pl�antin fence, wall structure, or temporary or pernianent obstniction
exceeding three (3) feet in heig�t �I'he coc�e provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall
be visualry clear between three (3) and eight(8) feet in height Trees may be placed within this area provided
that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed. A visual clearance area is the triangular area fomied by
measurin from the corner, 30-feet along the right-of-way and along the driveway and connecting these two
points wi�a straight line.
FINDING: The applicant's Prel'unulary Layout (Sheet C2) shows the vision clearance area for the access for the
proposed Lot 2,cons�stent wnh this standard.
Impact Study_(18.390)
Section 18.360.090 states, "The Director shall make a finding with res�ect to each of the following criteria
when approving, approving with conditions ordenying an application: '
N(�'IIC:E OF DIREC,TOR'S DECISIUN MLd'2008-00006/WHI'IF.OAK 1'AK'I1"IT(�N 1'AC1E 13 Uf�19
Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of
developinent on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the
study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the
development on the public at large, public facilities systems,and affected private property users.
In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the
applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of way dedication, or�rovide
evrdence that suppocts that the real ropeity dedicat�on is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts
of the develo ment. Section 18.390.�40 states that when a condition of ap roval requires tlie transfer to the
public of an interest in real property,the approval authority shall adopt findn gs whicFi support the conclusion
that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed
development will have on the public.
The applicant has submitted an impact study. SW 74th Avenue.is cun-ently partially improved and will be fully
improved per SDR2006-00010. The applicant will be extending sarutary sewer and storm dr�au�age c�nnecuons to the
two parcels to account for the additional impervious area being added to the site and to mitigate for the loss of the
present septic drain field. Sewer is already available and has sufficient capacity to serve the development. Other
unpacts to public facilities are offset bythe collection of Systems Development Charges (SDC's) collected at the time of
building perniit issuance. Therefore, this standard can be satisfied through meeting the conditions of approval in this
decision.
The TTF will be paid at the time of building pemiits and is a mitigation measure required for new development. Based
on Washin on(:oun figures TIF's are ex�pected to recapture 20 percent of the traffic impact of new development on
the Collector and Arterial Street system �I.he TTF for the proposed development is $3,020 (1 new dwelluig unit x
$3,020/per dwelling unit).
Based on the estimate that TTF fees cover 20% of the impact on major street improvements cityvvide, a fee that would
cover 100% of this pro'ect's traffic imp act is $15,100 ($3,020 =0.20). The difference between the TIF paid and the full
impact is considered t�e uruniti ated impact on the street system The iuinutig ated impact of this project on the
transportation system is $12,080�$15,100 - $3,020). The apphcant is not required to dedicate any property and u not
anticipated to uzcur any mitigated costs. Therefore,the requu-ed unprovements meet the rough proportionaliry test.
PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS
Street And Utility Im rovements Standards (Section 18.8101:
Chapter 18.810 provi�es construction standards �or the implementation of public and private facilities and
utilit�es such as streets,sewers,and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below:
Streets:
Improvements:
Sect�on 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in
accordance with the TDC standards.
Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing
street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E rec�uires a Neighborhood Route (without
bike lanes) to have a 54 toot right-of-way width and 32-foot paved sect�on. Other improvements required may
include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and
street trees.
This site lies ad'acent to SW 74th Avenue and "A" Street, which is classified as a local street on the City of Tigard
Transportation �lan Map. The right-of-way for the eye-brow corner was dedicated with the land use for SUB 2006-
00010,Wlute Oak Subdivision.
SW 74th Avenue (eye-brow corner) is currendy not improved. However, SUB2006-00010 has been conditioned to
complete these unprovements. The public street unp rovements as required by SUB2006-00010 must be complete prior
to issuance of building pernuts in order to mitigate the impact from this development.
NOTICE OF DIREGTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAIC PARTITION PAGE 14 OF 19
Future Street Plan and E�ension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed
which shows the pattern of existin and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land
division. This section also states �at where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future
division of ad'oining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a
barricade sha� be constructed at the end of the street These street stubs to adjoining properties are not
considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the
adjoining �roperty is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property
owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included
in the street constn.iction cos� Tem orary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be
constructed for stub streets in excess o�150 teet in length.
Due to e�usting development and access control on H�ighway 99 there are no opporcunities to provide future streets or
extensions of streets.
Grades and Cun�es: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on
collector streets, or 12% on any other street(except diat local or residential access streets may have seg ments
with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet}. Centeriine radii of curves shalI be as
determined by the City Engineer.
The grade along the 74�'Avenue frontage does not exceed 12%,therefore this criterion is met.
Block Desig ns - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with
due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for
convement access, circulation, control and safety of street traftic and recognition of limitations and
opportunities of topography.
Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800
feet measured along the right-of-way line except
• Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wedands or other bodies of water or, pre-
existing development or,
• For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,liinited access highways, major collectors or railroads.
• For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access.
No new streets are being created with this partition.Theref ore,this standard is not applicable.
Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or ri ht-of
ways shall be provided when full street connection is not.possible. Spacing between connections shal�be no
more than 330 feet, exce�t where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing
development pattems, or stnct adherence to other standarcls in the code.
Similarly,since no streets are being proposed, and no connections are required,this standard is not applicable.
Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average
lot width, unless the pamel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district
Proposed Lots 1 and 2 are less than 1.5 times the mulun lot size and are exempt from this standard.
Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of fronta�e on public or private
streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.OSO.A.4.c ap lies, wluch requires a parrel to
either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a mimmum 15-foot wide reco�ed access easement� In cases
where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 feet�
The�roposed development is a minor land partition.Proposed Lot 1 has 60 feet of frontage on SW 74�' Avenue;Lot 2
has 0 feet of frontage on SW 74th Avenue.�herefore,tivs criterion is met.
Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standa�s and be
located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial stneets
shall have sidewalks on at least one side.
NOTTC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION :vILP2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 15 OF 19
The public sidewalk is required as a condition of SUB2006-00010. The�applicant has a�reed to bond for the sidewalk
along this project frontage while the homes are under construcuon. The applicant shall provide for this bonding
through the Cat�s PFI pernut process.
Sanitary Sewets:
Sewe� Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new
develo ment and to connect developments to existin mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in
Design and Construction Standards}or Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water
Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the
comprehensive plan.
Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional
development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan.
There is an existing S inch sanitary sewer line in SW 74th Avenue. The applicant's plans show separate laterals for each
lot.
Storm Drainage:
General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm
water and flood water runoff.
Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culveit or other drainage facility
shall be lar�e enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside
or outside the developmen� The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility based on the
pro� visions of Design and Construction Standards for Samtary and Surface Water Management�as adopted by
�:lean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments).
There are no upstream drainage wa�s that impact this development.
Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer
that the additional runoff result�'ng from the development will overioad an e�rist�ng drainage facility, the
Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for
improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff
caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Constructi�n Standards for Sanitary and
Surface Water Management(as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revis�ons or
amendments).
In 1997, C1ean Water Services (CVU�) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek
Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a
stormwater detention/effective imp ervious area reduction prog ram resultin in no net increase ui storm peak flows up
to the 25-year event. The City a�11 require that all new developments res�tin in an uicrease of impervious surfaces
provide onsite detenuon facilities,unless the develo�pment is located adjacent to�anno Creek For those developments
adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff wiIl be pemiitted to d�scharge without detention.
The G�X/S standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land partitions. It would
be impractical to require an on-site water quantity faciliry to accommodate detention of the storm water from Lots 1
and 2. Rather, the G�X/5 standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a faciliry if deemed
appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this appl�cation.
The ap licant's plans show the two private laterals combining into one prior to connecting to the public storm line.
T�us �not be allowed. The PFI Perrrut plans shall be revised to provide separate laterals with separate connections to
the public storm sea�er main.
Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways:
Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments ad'oinin proposed bikeways identified on
the Cit}�s adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions �or the�ture eactension of such bikeways
through the dedication of easements or nght-of-way.
SW 74`}'Avenue is not classified as a bicycle facility.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 16 OF 19
Utilities:
Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, conununication,
lighting and cable television sennces and related facilities shall be placed undet�ro� und, except for surface
mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above
ground, temporaiy utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000
volts or above, and:
. The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the
unde round services;
. The �ty reserves the ri�ht to approve location of all surface mounted facilities;
. All underground utilit�es, including sanitary sewe� and storm drains installed in streets by the
developer, shall be constructed�pnor to the surfacing of the streets; and
. Slubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when
service connections are made.
Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-
lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where et:isting
utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the
cost and technical difficulty of under-groundin� the ut�lities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in
conjunction with the development The detemunat�on shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common,
but not the only such situat�on is a short frontage development for which under- rounding would result in
the placement ot�additional poles, ratherthan the removal of above-ground utilities�acilities. An applicant for
a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public
right-of-way from the applicant's propetty shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding.
There are existing overhead utilirylines along the frontage of SW 74th Avenue. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is egual
to $70.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contair�s the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 55 luieal f-eet;
therefore the fee would be $3,850.00.
ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY
IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS:
Storm Water Qualit�:
The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water
Services (CWS) Desi�n and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which
require the construct�on of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65
per�cent of the phosphon.is contained in 100 perrent of the stonn water runoff generated from newly created
�mpervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and
method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year.
The C'W5 standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land partitions. It would
be impractical to require an on-site water qualiry facility to accommodate treatment of the storm water from Parcels 1
and 2. Rather, the C�X/S standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed
appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this application.
Grading and Erosion Control:
CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and
other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development,
construction, grading, excavatin�, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS
regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to
issuance of City pemiits.
The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan with the PFI pemut application.
Address Assignments:
The Ciryof Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the Ciryof Tigard. An addressing fee in the
amount of$50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the Cityprior to final plat approval.
NOTICE OF DIRECTORS DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE ll UF 19
Survey Rec�uirements
The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates [NAD 83 (91)] on two monuments with a tie to the
Cit�s global positioning systern (GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line
and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat
shall contain the scale factor to conven ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid
north. These coordinates can be established by.
. GPS tie networked to the Cit}�s GPS survey.
. By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network The applicant's engineer shall provide
the City with an electronic file with points for each stnicture (marilioles, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other
water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coorduiates, referenced to NAD
83 (91).
SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
City of Tigard Building Department has reviewed the proposal and has not objections to it.
City of Tigard Public Works Department was notified of the proposed partition but did not comment.
City of Ti ard A�fiorist has reviewed the proposal and the applicant's tree removal plan,conducted by a certified
arborist,P� I�ickey. The report does not contaui all four of the required components, and, �s therefore,unacceptable.
The City Arborist comments have been included in the findings for the Landscaping and Screening and Tree Removal
Chapters,above.
SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS
Verizon Wireless reviewed the proposal and stated that "Verizon has current facilities that will be impacted. The
developer will need to request a disconnect for the building that is to be removed. A 5 foot easement on the west
property luie is indicated but none on the adjacent Lot 27 and Tract D. C,�u7-ently, Verizon has a pole in that area is the
ciryvacauon the previous easement that allowed placement of that pole. Can it be move to the 5 foot easement?"
RESPONSE: The plans show a 6-foot PL1E on the west property line which continues on to the adjacent Tract D and
from there along the frontage of Lot 27. Pursuant to Section 18.810.120.0 the Gty requires
undergrounding of utihues. Funu-e service to the subject lots will require underground service ui the
public utiliry easement as shown on the plan.
Clean Water Services has reviewed the roposal and issued a Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment, File No.
08001251 on May 28 2008. CWS reques�ted clarification on the storm connection planned for the proposed lots and
the definition of tlag iots as it relates to the proposed access easement over proposed Lot 1 for the benefit of proposed
Lot 2.
RESPONSE: The C,'WS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land
partitions. It would be impracucal to require an on-site water quanuty facility to accommodate
detention of the storm water from Lots 1 and 2. Rather the C�X/S standards prov�de that applicants
should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemec�appropriate. Staff recommends payment of
the fee in-lieu on this application.
The ap licant's plans show the two private laterals combining into one prior to connecting to the public storm line.
Tlvs � not be allowed. The City has conditioned the apphcant to revue the PFI Perniit plans to provide separate
laterals with separate connections to the pubhc storm sewer maul.
TDC 18.120.030.90.c allows flag lots to ga.in access through an easement across the frontage lot,as proposed.
Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed the proposal and has not objections to it.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE I8 OF 19
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue submitted a comment letter dated June 23, 2008 endorsing the subject proposal
predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval:
1) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS- REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minunum available fire flow for
single f amily dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If
the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger,the required fire flow shall be deterinined according to IFC
Append'u�B. (IFC B 105.1)
The fire hydrant shown on the submitted drawings must be capable of supplying the required fire flow
demand.
SECTION VIII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION
Notice: Notice was mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owner of record within the required distance
X Affected government agencies
Final Decision•
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JULY 31,2008 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 15, 2008 LJNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
�eal:
The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are othervvise
adversely affected or aggrieved b T the decision as provided in Secuon 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in
accordance with Section 18390.O�O.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which pr�vides that a written
appeal together with the re�quired fee shall be filed with the Director witlun ten (10) business days of the date the Notice
o} Dec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forn�s are available from the Plannuig Drv�sion of Tigard Ciry
Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,�igard,Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant,the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the
specific issues ident�fied in the written comments subirutted by the parties during the comment period. Additional
evidence concernuig �ssues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subriutted by any party dunn.g the appeal
hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted f rom tune to tune by the appelIate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 14, 2008.
estions:
I y�u ave any questions,please call the Cit}�of Tigard Pla�uung Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,
Tigard,Oregon at (503) 639-4171.
/
�
a �� ul 31 2008
PREPARED BY: ary Pa enstecher �DATE
Assoa e Planner
i:\cwpin\gary\minor land parcirion\m1p2008-OD006(white oalc�\mlp?008-00006 decision.doc
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MI.P2008-00006/WHITE OAK PAR7ITION PAGE 19 OF 19
. , __:=-�--Y;— _ � �_i UAK _�_ —�-- -.-- r--r---r- —�__-_ _sT_ _ 1_ i- � � I �---' - �
-- '--;�--i T`-� ' I i ' � � ; , � � i ' � j ;
� �EO�RAN� � ,� �,NMA ��� S,S,E.,
� ' � � ! i , , � ! ;--r-- �-- _ _ . _ ___ �----� i i � VICINITY MAP
! --�' � � � I�i i I � j =^ ; � , -----�- -----� � � �'.
r - ° ! ; i I^'-;---�-__�-- --1�----�— �— -- —1 r__ - �-- ��-' <!
, � �—; � �:-- ��-,�� F- � � r � I w; —i � a�
�-..__" .__ � I I I� �_� j'� I � I� ' � I I � I I I '�Q i � ' I I I_.. >fli ____�_����
-- _ .� ___�._� I -I-�_� I _---_ I __._! I I�i I � p�
, --r � PINE -- - - - --��--1--�-��; MLPZOOO 00006
—r �, i �--,-- � sT _
i , — - ' ————————
� i � , � ——
�— ——————————
i � �
I � � I I
—T�__'
I�_ � � � i� � �
i ; � ! ; L-� � I � —J � ! ' ' � ' '�
�---� �---!-�--�- � J� � -! �� �� � _ WI�TE OAK
�
i � �I � _ � � � � ' �;- - - � ��� ;I PARTITION
� I�1�( � i `?-, � �---��I � ' ��.
�� I ' �
J -1_ J �I
� � �P ST __ �
; � I
/
- o � � ° o ° �I �I '.
ST � g o � Q r-- )/ � I i .
�_�� w g o o �-- / J
Q � o � � � � g f I LEGEND:
, ° ° � � ° �-- '�' j sUBJECT
---' ' -- �j SITE
! � , i, �
____� I
w ,, - - —,,
> / ,.�:��.�
Q j � �j � i-i
I � ,�-
���'�y'( � �
ff-KFk j `�• � i
y�yh , � I
_ I
e
.
I �/ I i a. :,: '_ �� I � I
� I ��.it�1L��• I I
. ..,:I. , I
_ � , e'�- � � .,. _ �
� � .. `-W �
i II
� I' - --- - - � - - ----- -
�. 7igar0 Area Map
� I I •
�I
N �I
5T � 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet ��
I ' ��__-`__. I
� '�� 1..=388 feet �
i I I I
QPG�F�G I ;�� ;,`,;.,
\
� �
�
--� Inform2tion on I�is map is for general location only antl
� i� ���-- - should be verified wiln the Development ServKes�rvis�on.
13125 SW Hall BIvO
� Tigard,OR 97223 �
� \ � —__ � —I� I � I _I (503)639-4171
http�.1/www.ci.tgard.or.us
—.--_._.__��--__— _ -__ _- __-_ -____ __ - .__._ l. ..'..—_-_.--- --_ _ '__ .---_- -___-.-__�--_ _
Community Development Plot date:Jun 11,2008;C:\magiclMAGIC03.APR
i � , I � 5
� � � � � �
o � W I � ��
o � � W�
� � Q EXISTING CENTERLINE �t� ` o
'' I o C J �@ �^ �
I � I � o ``�_ ����� �
I � � I I ^ � � �a �
� I � �
EXISTING CENTERLINE
su�e r-ro
- � - - - - � BARRICADE SET 2' OFF P/L � �y'�
� ,a 3 0 ,o P
� I ��\�
15' WIDE DRIVEWAY ��,
/ � �� � Q�
SS �AT
— —X X �, X — — � �� ---
� 1 �.
54' R/W i 3 � � `� "� X x x -X_' _'�-
- -----� - - S
5' 8Q'S2"25" 352.�9" I � Q' TFtEE PROP. TREE� I
� 20' ACCESS � 20' PROTECiION k �
'9" �-SD LA� � PROTECTION �� W
_ Sp gp -, -- / UTIL ESMi. I FENCING FENCING } Z �
_ »A„ STREET 3 /� / �j-- ----r � — — — � g � �o s
o k
\�� SS LAT / `NSION CLEARANCE �48, � I � ¢ Y ^< y
/� LINE I -_-'I Z O o
- - \�� � / '` �` �
�!� � - JE, / WABER�� I � I I j � � €
� �Q�i �o, I � 3
� � �
� / � � � o
I \� -�_ � ,�' SD LAT � '� I
� �� T,RACT D � I � LOT 2 �� � o
� WATER M�TER/ � LOT � � � � 8,500 SF t �� � � o0
{ j-- —� - - - - — � � 8.780 SF t I 23' 3 r
4 � � I TL 11030 r I I � a
�. I �10�� ' I o �c ,,,�
LOT Z7 5'� TREE UN TSIB�E �O I �"� POSSIBLE � I ,�`�,
N � � BUILDABLE I ( o �
I PROTECTION I � _ FOOTPRINT I
I FENCING �,p, I —� I �
— — — — (TYP) �
� TREE TO �
I � — — � t5 BE REMOVE� k
6'
— �GT 1 N =
v, � X X 1/�� � X `� y/' =g �
�
I r� a��;2'2�" w >>>2 0� g� �
— — — — — — II o.a e/os/oe
I IXLLNfD J GEC�f
ENOHEER
I CXEP(ED i
SNEET niLE
N �J LAYWT
I —_� L O T L I SNEET m1uBER—
I �� -"
NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION „
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2008-00006 =
WHITE OAK PARTITION
120 D YS =10 8 2008
SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY
FILE NAME: WHITE OAK PARTITION
CASE NO: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2008-00006
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into
two lots of 8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant proposes to remove the
existing single-family home and build two new single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2
will be a flag lot. The subject property is adjacent to the White Oak Village Planned
Development (PD) site and owned by the same developer. While the applicant proposes to
construct public improvements as part of the White Oak Village PD,the proposed partition is
separate from the PD project.
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER White Oak Village, LLC REP: SR Design,LLC
7955 SW Hall Boulevard Attn: Jeff Caines,AIQ'
Beaverton, OR 97008 8196 SW Hall Boulevard,Suite 232
Beaverton,OR 97008
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R 4.5 (PD): Low Densiry Residential District with Planned Development overlay. The R
4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or
without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and
attached single-fami.ly units are pernzitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are
also pernzitted conditionally.
LOCATION: 11030 SW 74th Avenue; Washington CountyTax Map 1S136DB, Tax Lot 2300.
PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 8,780 Square Feet.
PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 8,500 Square Feet.
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Commuruty Development Code Chapters 18350 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715,
18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
SECTION II. DECISION
Notice is hereby given that the City of T'igard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the
above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at
City Hall.
THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS
FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION.
All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted f ile are available f or inspection at no cost or copies can be
obtained for twenty-five cents (25fi) per page,or the current rate charged for copies at the tune of the request.
SECT'ION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION
Notice:
Notice mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owner of record within the required distance
X Affected government agencies
Final Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JULY 31, 2008 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 15, 2008 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
pAD e_al":
The llirector's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise
adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as�provided in Secuon 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in
accordance with Section 18390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code wl�uch provides that a
written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten �10) business days of the
date the Notice of Dec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forn�s are ava able from the Planning
Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the
specific issues ident�fied in the wntten commenu subrrutted by the parties during the comment period. Additional
evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party dunng the appeal
hearing,subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted f rom tune to tune by the appellate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 14, 2008.
Fo�estions:
er information please contact the Planning�Division Staff Planner, Ga Pa enstecher at (503) 639-4171,
Tigard Ciry Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223 or by ema to a ti ard-or. ov.
�_. - -5i- _r =_I ...... . _ . ..
���r�:v����l�nt:1P �
C i I i�l —_-----
,,,,E ST �j \ILP_'UUS-UOOUG
\\�IITE(.)_-1Ii
r_�RTtTtc:>u
p T ^
���n� �� �`!i
LEGEND
� SUBJECT
S71'S
f �f
❑ f
i � , I,
r
! ��.
N
T •��
� �.�....
i.amumN n s . -_.Vr�VC�M�
1 � C � �
� � � � ��o�
� I � ������
' � '� � � ('iei� �
�
� `� 'r ;(�� t
�.,,��,�..� i I —
N ..,�x,:��Pn � ��.+
- -----�-- +
' �:��..f +
_�_ _— _ / P�
� ss ut Q
— ��n � _
5 RL�]]3" .l3]19' ` f �50 l�l / �0'KQ55/ �/IIOhCIqI M RfOIECiqM � �
�/ _y _L'— / R E4/i. � RwOxG ��_� [ � � �
'A"srReEr n--- --- -� , 3 €��
1 ii/ur�� r� r
MSIOM QEMWQ
i �--� �, ��^'� � ' �—�� I � �� ��t
�
:-. � � I
�
/ � _—' mw
7RAC7 D -- I I LOT 2 I . ��8
� ��a��rtn// LOT 7 I � I e,sao v: � 8
— 41l0 A f
—�____ � I � I I o � t)' 3
r n nwo s. o' I �
COT77 s��— n�ioncna ��( '� � � e°05an.�ac� I i8
I L _��^^�� i
----- �"°"a` � -s� I
— — � ' ,s mec ro �
LOT 7 ����
� N ees�zs•w�sz '�
————— i �
�-- i .....
i _� torz i I �..�
i C2
NOrTICE TOMOKTGAG�E,LIENHOLDER,VENDORORSELLER
Tf-IE TIG.ARD DEVELOPMENT QODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE T�IIS NOTI�E, IT SHALL BE PROMP'IZY
FOK�ARDED TO Tf-� PURQ�ISER
NOTICE OF PENDING ,,
LAND USE APPLICATION :
MINOR LAND PARTITION , , �
DATE OF NOTICE: June 11, 2008
FILE NO.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2008-00006
FILE TITLE: WHITE OAK PARTITION
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER White Oak Village,LLC REP.: SR Design,LLC
7955 SW Hall Blvd Attn: Jeff Caines,AIQ'
Beaverton,OR 97008 8196 SW Hall Blvd,Suite 232
Beavenon,OR 97008
REQLJEST: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into two lots of
8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant proposes to remove the existing single-family home
and bu�ld two new single-familY detached homes. Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot. The sub�ect property is
adjacent to the White Oak Village Planned Development (PD) site and owned by the same developer.
White the applicant proposes to construct public improvemenu as part of the White Oak Village PD, the
proposed par[ition is separate from the PD project.
LOC.ATION: 11030 SW 74�Avenue;Washington County Tax Map 1S 136DB,Tax Lot 2300.
ZONE: R-4.5: Low Density Residential. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family
homes wlth or without accessory residenual units at a rniiuinum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and
attaclied suigle-fanuly uniu are pemutted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pen�utted
conditionally.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Cotrununiry Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18J15, 18J45, 18J65, 18J90,
18.795 and 18.810.
YOUR RIGHT T�PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS:
Prior to the Ciry making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written
commenu on the application to the Ciry. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON JiJNE 25, 2008.
All comments should be directed to Emi1�-Eng, Assistant Planner(�c2712� in the Planning Division at the Cityof Tigard, 13125 SW
Hall Roulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the Ciry of Tigard by telephone at 503-639-4171 or by e-mail to
emil��tigard-or.gov.
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE
DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION-
MAKING PROCESS
THE QTY OF TTGARD APPREQATES REC�IVII�TG CONIlv1ENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMIv1ENT'S WILL
BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WIT�-IIN TT� NOTTC� OF DEQSION. A DEQSION ON Tf-IIS ISSUE IS
TENTATTVELY SCf-�EDULED FOR�ULY 22, 2008. IF YOU PROVIDE COMNIENTS,YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF
THE FULL DEQSION ONC� IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMI��NTS WILL BECOME A PART OF T�-�E
PERNL�NENT PL,BLIC RECORD AND SHALL CO:�I'TAIN THE FOLLOWING IN'FORMATTON:
• Address the specific "Applicable heview Criteria" described in the section aoove or any other criteria believed to be
applicable to this proposal;
• Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the Ciry to provide a response;
• Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with
sufficient specificity on that issue.
FAILURE OF ANY PARTY TO ADDRESS THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA WITH SLTFFIQENT SPEQFIQTY
MAY PREQ.UDE SUBSEQUENT APPEALS TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS OR QRCUIT COURT ON
THAT ISSUE. SPEQFIC FINDINGS DIREGTED AT 7'HE RELEVANT APPROVAL C�ITERIA ARE WHAT
CONST'ITUTE RELEVANT EVIDENCE.
AFTER TfIE 14-DAY COMNIENT PEWOD CLOSES, 'I'I� DIREGTOR SHALL ISSUE A TrPE II ADMIIVISTRATIVE DEQSION. TrIE
DIRECTOR'S DEQSION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITf-�N 500
FEET OF TF-IE SUBJECI'SITE,AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBNIITTED WRITTEN GOMN�NI'S OR WHO IS OTf�RWISE ENTITLED TO
NOTIC�. T�� DIRECTOR'S DEQSION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF Tf-IE RELEVANI'APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON Tf-IE C�tiT'ERIA
AND THE FACTS CONTAINED Vi/ITHIN THE RECORD,THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE,APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY'I�
REQUESTED PERNIIT OR ACITON.
SLTMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS:
• The application is accepted by the C�ry
• Notice is sent to propeny owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written
coiiunent period.
• The application is reviewed by Ciry Staff and affected agencies.
• City Staff issues a written decision.
• Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record
of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent propeny tax assessment roll; any Ciry-recognized
neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an
intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise
entitled to such notice.
INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FORREVIEW:
The application, aritten comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained
within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Depanment. If}�u want to
inspect the file,please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the plannuig technicians. Copies of these items may
be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be
directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written
Comments."
---- 5.
, , ... . ....
s _ VICINITl h1AP
k x f
PWE Sr a , \ILP?(IpS-DlIUOG
\C�IITE O_�I�
P_�RTI'I"I(JN
� PR T w
���m� �� ` �+
� � � �
LEGEND
� SUBJECT
SIfE
, vl
Q
� . , I.
�
t
-�L
♦
N
T /� ..,
/ \
Q�F� �.��....
/ � �-�.....�. ...
�_-_-___�_'___ `-_.�i:��f'��
RE QUE ST F OR COMME NT S ��
-
-
DATE: Tune 11,?008 . . �
TO: Mark Vandomelen,Plans Examination Su�ervisor
FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division
STAFF CONTAGT: Emil�Eng,Assistant Planner(x2712�
Phone: (503) 639-4171 FaY: (503) 624-3681 Err��il: emil tigard-or.gov
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2008-00006
- WHITE OAK PARTITION -
REQLJEST: e applicant is requestin� gapprova to partition one 17,280-square oot (0.40-acre) ot into two lots o
8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant�proposes to remove the e�sting single-family home and build two
new single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot. The subject property�s adjacent to the White Oak
Villa�e Planned Development (PD) site and owned by the same developer. White the applicant proposes to construct
public improvements as part of the White Oak Village PD, the proposed partition is separate from the PD project.
LOCATION: 11030 SW 74�' Avenue; Washington Counry Tax Map 1S136DB, T� Lot 2300. ZONE: R 4.5: Low
Densit�Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without
accessory residential units at a inuiunum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are
pernzitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pemutted conditionally. APPLIC.ABLE REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18J15, 18.745, 18J65, 18.790,
18.795 and 18.810.
Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Ap licant's Materials for your review. From infornlation supplied by
various departments and ag�encies and from other�ornlation available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a dec�sion wll be rendered on the pro osal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: �UNE 25, 2008. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate letter to return your comments. I u are una6�e to res ond b the above date, please phone the staff contact
noted above with your co�unents and co umyour comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions,
contact the Tigard Plannuig Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,T"igard,OR 97223.
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 or email.
_ Written comments provided below:
I Name&Number of Peison Coinmenting: ��✓ } 7��
l � /
l/
RE QUE ST FOR C�MME NTS ��
.
DATE: June 11,2008 . . �
TO: PE R ATTACHE D
FROM: C:ity of Tigard I'lanning Division
STAFF CONTACI': EmilyEn�,Assistant Planner(x2712)
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 624-3681 Email:emil ti�ard-or.gov
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2008-00006
- WHITE OAK PARTITION -
REQLTEST: The app �cant is requesting approval to partition one 17,280-square oot 0.40-acre ot into two lots o
8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant�proposes to remove the existing single-familyhome and build two
new single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot. The subject property�s adjacent to the White Oak
Villa�e Planned Development (PD) srte and owned by the same developer. White the applicant proposes to construct
pubLc improvements as part of the White Oak Village PD, the proposed partition is separate from the PD project.
LOCATION: 11030 SW 74`�' Avenue; Washington County Tax Map 1S136DB, T� Lot 2300. ZONE: R 4.5: Low
Densitv Residential. The R 4.5 zonin district is designed to accommodate detached single-famil homes with or without
accessory residential units at a minimum lot size ot 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-farriily units are
pernlitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are aLso pernutted conditionally. APPLIC.ABLE REVIEW
CRITERIA: Commuruty Development Code Chaptexs 18390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790,
18.795 and 18.810.
Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Ap licant's Materials for your review. From inforniation supplied by
various departments and ag�encies and from other�orn�ation available to our staff, a repon and recommendation will be
prepared and a dec�sion will be rendered on the pro osal in the near future. If you w�.ch to comment on this application,
WE NEEI� YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: E 25, 2008. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separ�ate etter to return y�our comments. I u are unable to res ond b the above date, please phone the staff contact
noted above with your comments and co u-myour comments m writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions,
contact the Tigard Plaiuung Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, OR 97223.
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 or email.
_ Written comments provided below:
Name&Number of Person Commenting:
� - �'TY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR '"�MMENTS
NOTIFICA. LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DE �PMENT APPLICATIONS
FILE NOS.: �- c� l�v�"� FILE NAME: 1M �`-�--h � ��
CITY OFFICES
LONG RANGE PLANNINGlRon Bunch,Planning Mgr. �CURRENT PLANNING/Todd PragerlArborist-Planner POLICE DEPT.IJim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer
�BUILDING DIVISION/Mark Vandomelen,Plans Ex.Supervisor�ENGINEERING DEPT./Kim McMillan,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineer _HEARINGS OFFICER(+2 sets)
CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder PUBLIC WORKSIBrian Rager,Assistant Public Works Director PLANNING COMMISSIONIGRETCHEN(+�Z sets)
COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs. PUBLIC WORKS/Steve Martin,Parks Supervisor �(FILE/REFERENCE(+y sets)
_CODE ENFORCEMENTIChristine Darnell,Code Compliance Specialist(DCA)
SPECIQLDISTRICTS
TUAL.HILLS PARK 8�REC.DIST.�R�TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE� �TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT� �CLEAN WATER SERVICES♦
Planning Manager North Division Administrative Office Development Services Department
15707 SW Walker Road John K.Oalby,Deputy Fire Marshall PO Box 745 David Schweitzer/SWM Program
Beaverton,OR 97006 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton,OR 97075 2550 5W Hillsboro Highway
Beaverton,OR 97005-1152 Hillsboro,OR 97123
LOCAI AND STATE IURIS�ICTIONS
CITY OF BEAVERTON � CITY OF TUALATIN� OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS
_ Pianning Manager Planning Manager Devin Simmons,Habitat Biologist Melinda Wood�w�un Fo�R����aei
_ Steven Sparks,oe�s��5 Ma�ase� 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue North Willamette Watershed District 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100
PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road Salem,OR 97301-1279
Beaverton,OR 97076 Portland,OR 97231
_ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM.
METRO-LAND USE 8 PLANNING +It OR.DEPT.OF GEO.8 MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE
CITY OF DURHAM iR 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon 5treet,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380
City Manager Portland.OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232
17160 SW Upper Boones Fry.Rd. Joanna Mensher,DataResourceCenter(ZCa.I US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG.
Durham.OR 97224 Paulette Allen,GrowlhManagernentCoortlinata OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.B DVLP. Kathryn Harris lMaasacws�ane�o��Yi
Mel Huie,GreenspacesCoordinator(C7A20A) M2f8 UII02(Comp PlanAmenAmentsBMeasure37) Routing CENWP-OP-G
CITY OF KING CITY � _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,RegionalPlarmer(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946
City Manager _ C.D.Manager,c�o�hMa���ts��s 5alem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946
15300 SW 116th Avenue
King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY�
OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY lPO�+�enines in o,ieaJ OR.DEPT OF AVIATION�MO�o�i.raw...� Dept.of Land Use&Transp.
Bonneville Power Administration TOm Highlarld,P�annin9 155 N.First Avenue
_CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO�M Routing TTRC—Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13
Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro.OR 97124
PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 Naomi Vogel-Beattie tce�e�ai avPs
Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Planning Division�zco,�MSia
_ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEG1) ODOT,REGION 1 � Brent Curtis�caA�
CITY OF PORTLAND tNOUryro�weua�dsa�dPO�e���a�e����onme��aumPa��s� Development Review Coordinator poria Mateja�zca�MS�a
Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section�va�a��o�s� _ScCartographer�cPazcA�MS,.
1900 SW 4'"Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,s�rve��,��A,MS,S
Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037
OR.PARKS 8 REC.DEPT.
WA.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY ODOT,REGION 1-DISTRICT 2A� _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION STATE HISTORIC
DaveAustin�wcccn�°e„°�Me�o,w..a..,,� SamHunaidi,ASSis�am�istnctManager (NOtifyilODOTRlR-Hwy.CrossinpisOnlyACCSSStoLand) PRESERVATIONOFFICE
PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road Dave Lanning,S�CrossingSa�eySpecialist (NOU1yilPropertyHasHDOveday)
Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland.OR 97221 555-13'"Street,NE,Suite 3 725 Sumner Street NE,Suite C
SaIPm.OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301
UTILITY PROYIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES
PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(eurtington Northem/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor)
Bruce Carswell,President 8 General Manager
1200 Howard Drive SE
Albany,OR 97322-3336
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMCAST CABLE CORP. XTRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT.
Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer�n�,�e.ano�s o��v� Gerald Backhaus�5�«Mao��A�ea�,��a��� Qf Prqect Is Wrthln Y.Mlle of a Transit Roule)
5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner
Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street
Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland.OR 97232
�,PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC �NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY '�VERIZON �WEST COMMUNICATIONS
Mike Hieb Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. John Cousineau,OSP Network Lynn Smith,Eng.ROW Mgr.
9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue 4155 SW Cedar Hills Blvd. 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110
Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97005 Portland,OR 97219
TIGARDITUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 COMCAST CABLE CORP. �COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC.
Teri Brady,Administrative Offices Jennifer Garland,Demographics Alex Silantiev ,S�M�o�«A,ea��a�.�, Brian Every��eo����o��,
6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg. 12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue
Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverlon,OR 97006-5152 BeaveRon,OR 97008 Tigard,OR 97223-4203
+IE INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPL�ANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL
CITY PROJECTS (Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h1pattylmasters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED: 3-Apr-OB)
(Also update�.i:lcurpin\setup\labels\annexations\annexation_utili�ies and franchises.doc,mailing labels 8 auto text when updati�g this documei
MEMORANDUM
TO: Emily Eng
FROM: Todd Prager, City Arborist
RE: White Oak Partition
DATE: June 11, 2008
As you requested I have provided comments on the "White Oak Partition" project. If you
have any questions or concerns regarding my comments please contact me anytime.
18.370.020 Adiustments
C. Specia!ad�ustments.
6. Adjustments to landscaping requirements (Chapter 18.745).
a. Adjustment to use of existing trees as sfreet trees. By means of a Type
I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, fhe Direcfor shall
approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for the use of
existing trees to meet the street tree requirements in Section
18.745.030 providing there has been no cutting and filling around the
tree during construction which may lead to its /oss, un/ess the
following can be demonstrated:
(1) The ground within the drip-line is altered merely for drainage
purposes; and
(2) It can be shown that the cut or fill will not damage the roots and will
not cause the tree to die.
b. Adjustmeni for street tree requirements. By means of a Type I
procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, the Director shall
approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for the
adjustments to the street tree requirements in Section 18.745.030,
based on the following approval criteria:
(1) If the location of a proposed tree would cause potential problems
with existing utility lines;
(2) If the tree would cause visual c/earance problems; or
(3) If there is not adequate space in which to plant street trees.
✓
No street tree adjustments are being requested.
18.745.030 Genera/Provisions
C, Installation Requirements. The installation of all landscaping shall be as
follows:
1. All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting
procedures.
The accepted planting procedures are the guidelines described in the Tigard Tree
Manual. These guidelines follow those set forth by the International Society of
Arboriculture (ISA) tree planting guidelines as well as the standards set forth in the
American Institute of Architects' Architectural Graphic Standards, 10th edition. In the
Architectural Graphic Standards there are guidelines for selecting and planting trees
based on the soil volume and size at maturitv. Additionally, there are directions for soil
amendments and modifications.
2. The p/ant material shall be of high grade, and shall meet the size and
grading standards of the American Standards for Nurberg Stock
(ANSI Z-60, 1-1986, and any other future revisions); and
3. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of
this title.
D. Certificate of Occupancy. Certificates of occupancy shall not be issued unless
the landscaping requirements have been met or other arrangements have
been made and approved by the City such as the posting of a bond.
18.745.040, Street Trees
B. Street tree planting list. Certain trees can severe/y damage utilities, streets
and sidewalks or can cause personal injury. Approval of any planting list shall
be subject to review by the Director.
This requirement has not been met. There appears to be sufficient room for one street
tree in the planting strip between the two water meters.
It is acceptable for them to include a note on their street tree plan that slight variations in
placement may be required due to driveways, utilities, etc., but every attempt will be
made to keep the same net number of street trees that are shown on the plans.
18.745.050, BufferinQ and Screeninq
This requirement appears to have been met or is not applicable to this project.
18.790.030, Tree P/an Requirement
A. Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of
trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or
combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a
subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or
conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever
possib/e.
As required, the applicant has provided a tree plan conducted by Phil Hickey, a certified
arborist. However, the tree plan does not contain all of the required elements (see B4
below).
B. P/an reQUirements. The tree plan shall include the following:
1. ldentification of the location, size and species of all existing trees
including trees designated as significant by the city;
This requirement has been met.
2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree
removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the
replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the
following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other
development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots:
a. Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper
requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section
18.790.060D of no net loss of trees;
b. Retention of from 25% to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in
caliper requires that fwo-thirds of the trees to be removed be
mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
c. Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in
caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be
mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
d. Retention of 75% orgreater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper
requires no mitigation.
This requirement has been met.
100% of the 14 viable trees on site will be retained. Therefore, no mitigation will be
required.
3. ldentification of all trees which are proposed to be removed;
This requirement has been met.
4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used
by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction.
This requirement has not been met.
The fencing and tree protection specifications in the arborist report need be transferred
accurately to the site plans.
The tree protection plan needs to address tree protection standards and methods for
after construction. Specifically, they need to address acceptable landscaping practices
and materials around preserved trees. This additional information can be provided on
the site plans as well.
Finally, the revised tree protection plan needs to include a signature of approval from
the project arborist.
18.790.040 Incentives for Tree Retention
B. Subsequent remova/of a tree. Any tree preserved or retained in
accordance with this section may thereafter be removed only for the
reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030, or as
a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be subject to
removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall
record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development
permit afifected by this section to the effect that such tree may be removed
only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The
deed restriction may be removed or wil!be considered invalid if a tree
preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed
as a hazardous tree. The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to
approval by the Director.
A condition of approval will ensure that this standard is met.
18.790.050 Permit Applicability
A. Removal permit repuired. Tree removal permits shal!be required only for
the removal of any tree which is located on or in a sensitive land area as
defined by Chapter 18.775. The permit for remova!of a tree shal!be
processed as a Type !procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, using
the following approva! criteria:
1. Removal of the tree must not have a measurable negative impact on
erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters or water quality as evidenced
by an erosion control plan which precludes:
a. Deposits of mud, dirt, sediment or similar material exceeding 1/2 cubic
foot in volume on public or private streets, adjacent property, or into the
storm and surface water system, either by direct deposit, dropping,
discharge or as a result of the action of erosion;
b. Evidence of concentrated flows of wafer over bare soi/s; turbid or
sediment-laden flows; or evidence of on-site erosion such as rivulets on
bare soil s/opes where the flow of water is not filtered or captured on site
using the techniques of Chapter 5 of the Washington County Unified
Sewerage Agency Environmental Protection and Erosion Control rules.
2. Within stream or wetland corridors, as defined as 50 feet from the
boundary of the stream or wetland, tree removal must maintain no less
than a 75% canopy cover or no /ess than the existing canopy cover if the
existing canopy cover is less fhan 75%.
B. Effective date of permit. A tree remova/permit shall be effective for one and
one-half years from the date of approval.
C. Extension. Upon written request by the applicant prior to the expiration of
the existing permit, a tree removal permit shall 6e exfended for a period of
up to one year if the Director finds that the applicant is in compliance with
all prior conditions of permit approval and that no material facts stated in
the original application have changed.
D. Removal permit not required. A tree removal permit shall not be required
for the removal of a tree which:
1. Obstructs visual clearance as defined in Chapter 18.795 of the title;
2. Is a hazardous tree;
3. /s a nuisance affecting public safety as defined in Chapter 7.40 of the
Municipal Code;
4. Is used for Christmas tree production, or land registered with the
Washington County Assessor's office as tax-deferred tree farm or small
woodlands, but does not stand on sensitive lands.
E. Prohibition of commercial forestry. Commercial forestry as defined by
Section 18.790.020 A.2., excluding D.4. above, is not permitted.
Because no trees are proposed for removal, this requirement is not applicable to this
project.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Street Trees
This requirement has not been met. There appears to be sufficient room for one street
tree in the planting strip between the two water meters.
It is acceptable for them to include a note on their street tree plan that slight variations in
placement may be required due to driveways, utilities, etc., but every attempt will be
made to keep the same net number of street trees that are shown on the plans.
Tree Mitigation
This requirement has been met.
100% of the 14 viable trees on site will be retained. Therefore, no mitigation will be
required.
Tree Protection
This requirement has not been met.
The fencing and tree protection specifications in the arborist report need be transferred
accurately to the site plans.
The tree protection plan needs to address tree protection standards and methods for
after construction. Specifically, they need to address acceptable landscaping practices
and materials around preserved trees. This additional information can be provided on
the site plans as well.
The revised tree protection plan needs to include a signature of approval from the
project arborist.
The applicant shall position fencing as directed by the project arborist in his report dated
May 28, 2008 to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by
the City Arborist for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to
verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the
plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for
immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil
citations can be processed.
If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall
prepare a proposal detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely
impacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist
before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arborist may
require changes prior to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is
occurring within the tree protection zone and submit a summary report certifying that the
work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and/or
stability of the trees. This note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit site plan drawings
indicating the locations of trees that were preserved on the lot during site
development. In addition, the plans shall include accurate locations of tree
canopy driplines and protection fencing, and a signature of approval from the
project arborist regarding the placement and construction techniques to be
employed in building the structures. All proposed protection fencing shall be
installed and inspected prior to commencing construction. The fencing shall
remain in place through the duration of all of the building construction phases,
until the Certificate of Occupancy has been approved. Prior to final inspection for
each lot, the applicant shall submit a final report by the Project Arborist certifying
the health of protected trees and that the street trees were properly planted per
the approved street tree plan. Tree protection measures may be removed and
final inspection authorized upon review and approval by the City Arborist.
The applicant shall have an on-going responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist
has submitted written reports to the City Arborist, at least once every two weeks, as the
Project Arborist monitors the construction activities from initial tree protection zone
(TPZ) fencing installation through the building construction phases. The reports shall
evaluate the condition and location of the tree protection fencing, determine if any
changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been
violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced, then the Project Arborist shall certify that
the construction activities did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and
stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the
scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan are not
being followed by the contractor or a sub-contractor, the City can stop work on the
project until an inspection can be done by the City Arborist and the Project Arborist.
Prior to final inspection for each lot, the applicant shall submit a final report by the
Project Arborist certifying the health of protected trees and that the street trees were
properly planted per the approved street tree plan. Tree protection measures may be
removed and final inspection authorized upon review and approval by the City Arborist.
Deed Restriction
Prior to issuance of any Certificates of �ccupancy, the applicant/owner shall record
deed restrictions to the effect that any existing tree greater than 6" diameter may be
removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed
restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in
accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree.
� ` •
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
DATE: 6/13/08
TO: Emily Eng, Assistant Planner
FROM: Kim McMillan, Development Review Engineer��yvl
RE: MLP2008-00006 White Oak
Access Manaqement (Section 18.705.030.H)
Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with
all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and
streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and
deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and
AASHTO.
The access for this two lot partition is at the eye-brow corner of SW 74�h Avenue
and "A" Street (under construction with the White Oak Subdivision). The
applicanYs engineer, SR Design, submitted a preliminary sight distance
certification, dated May 29, 2008. The streets are both classified as local streets
with speed fimits of 25 mph, which requires a minimum of 250 feet sight distance
in each direction from the access points.
The engineer states sight distance from the access points to the north on 74tn
Avenue was measured to be in excess of 250 feet. The sight distance to the
west in the direction of Street "A" was not determined since the street is not fully
constructed at this time. The access points, however, are directly opposite Street
"A", posing no sight distance impediments.
Street And Utilitv Improvements Standards (Section 18.810):
Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of
public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and
drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below:
Streets:
Improvements:
Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets
adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 1
�
. , ` •
Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width
planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved
in accordance with the TDC.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a
local street to have a 54 foot right-of-way width and 32-foot paved section.
Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and
bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street
trees.
This site lies adjacent to SW 74th Avenue and "A" Street, which is classified as a
local street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The right-of-way for
the eye-brow corner was dedicated with the land use for SUB 2006-00010, White
Oak Subdivision.
SW 74th Avenue (eye-brow corner) is currently not improved. However,
SUB2006-00010 has been conditioned to complete these improvements. The
public street improvements as required by SUB2006-00010
must be complete prior to issuance of building permits in order to mitigate the
impact from this development.
Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states
that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and
proposed future �treets from the boundaries of the proposed fand division.
This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a
satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the
boundary lines of the tract to be develcaped and a barricade shall be
constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining
properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to
continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is
developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the
property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City
Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost.
Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be
constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length.
Due to existing development and access control on Highway 99 there are no
opportunities to provide future streets or extensions of streets.
Street Alignment and Connections:
Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of
no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where
prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing
developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other
restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 2
. . ` '
connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a
regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction.
Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local, neighborhood routes and
collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within
the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by
environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns
or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or
extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure
the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered
topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance
of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical
constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that
a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the
constraint precludes some reasonable street connection.
Due to existing development and access control on Highway 99 there are no
opportunities to provide new street connectivity with this development.
Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape
of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building
sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient
access, circulation, controf and safety of street traffic and recognition of
limitations and opportunities of topography.
Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks
formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-
way line except:
• Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or
other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or;
• For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major
collectors or railroads.
• For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides
equivalent access.
PLANNING
Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections
on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street
connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no
more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or
topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict
adherence to other standards in the code.
PLANNING
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 3
, , ` •
Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being
more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5
times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district.
PLANNING
Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of
frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land
partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a
minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access
easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling
unit, the frontage shall be at least 15 feet.
PLANNING
Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to
meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial,
collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets
shall have sidewalks on at least one side.
The public sidewalk is required as a condition of SUB2006-00010. The applicant
has agreed to bond for the sidewalk along this project frontage while the homes
are under construction. The applicant shall provide for ►his bonding thro�gh the
City's PFI permit process.
Sanitary Sewers:
Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be
installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to
existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and
Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as
adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future
revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive
plan.
Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems
shall include consideration of additional development within the area as
projected by the Comprehensive Plan.
There is an existing 8 inch sanitary sewer line in SW 74th Avenue. The
applicant's plans show separate laterals for each lot.
Storm Drainage:
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 4
. . � �
General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make
adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff.
Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a
culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate
potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or
outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary
size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction
Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by
Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or
amendments).
There are no upstream drainage ways that impact this development.
Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it
is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from
the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and
Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have
been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions
have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the
development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards
for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water
Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments).
In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Gre�k
and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of thaf
plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater
detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net
increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that
all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surFaces provide
onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno
Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff
will be permitted to discharge without detention.
The CWS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such
as residential land partitions. It would be impractical to require an on-site
detention facility to accommodate treatment of the storm water from
Parcels 1 and 2. Rather, the CWS standards provide that applicants
should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed appropriate.
Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this application.
The applicanYs plans show the two private laterals combining into one prior to
connecting to the public storm line. This will not be allowed. The PFI
Permit plans shall be revised to provide separate laterals with separate
connections to the public storm sewer main.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 5
. � •
Utilities:
Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those
required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television senrices
and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface
mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter
cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service
facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at
50,000 volts or above, and:
• The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving
utility to provide the underground services;
• The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted
facilities;
� All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains
installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the
surfacing of the streets; and
• Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing
the street improvements when service connections are made.
Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: S�ction 18.810.120.G states
that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when th�
development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities
which are not underground will serve the development and the approval
authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-
grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in
conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-
by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a
short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the
placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground
utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by
utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public
right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-
grounding.
There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW 74�" Avenue. If
the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $70.00 per lineal foot of street frontage
that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 55 lineal feet;
therefore the fee would be $ 3850.00.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 6
. . ` •
Storm Water QualitV:
The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM)
regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and
Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which
require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities
shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100
percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious
surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the
frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained
through the year.
The CWS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such
as residential land partitions. It would be impractical to require an on-site
water quality facility to accommodate treatment of the storm water from
Parcels 1 and 2. Rather, the CWS standards provide that applicants
should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed appropriate.
Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this application.
Gradinq and Erosion Control:
CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to
reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public
storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction,
grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates
erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is requsreci to submit an
erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City
permits.
The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan with the PFI permit application.
Address Assiqnments:
The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the
City of Tigard. An addressing fee in the amount of $50.00 per address shall be
assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to final plat approval.
Survey Requirements
The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates [NAD 83 (91)] on
two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic
control network (GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be
of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the
coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements
to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates
can be established by:
• GPS tie nefinrorked to the City's GPS survey.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 7
. . ` �
• By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network.
The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points
for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other
water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State
Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91).
Recommendations:
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO
APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT:
Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642)
for review and approval:
. A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to
cover the public sidewalks and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six
(6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shal! be submitted for review to
the En�ineering Department. NOTF_: these plans are in addition to any
drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets
relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit
plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards,
which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.tiqard-or.qov).
. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address
and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be
designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance
for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a
corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which
the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact
person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering
Department will delay processing of project documents.
. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan
for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking
and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase.
. The City Engineer may determine the necessity for, and require submittal
and approval of, a construction access and parking plan for the home
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 8
� �
building phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary, the
applicant shall provide the plan prior to issuance of building permits.
. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall pay the addressing fee.
(STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering).
. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department
as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, indicating that they will
construct the following frontage improvements along SW 74t" Avenue/Street
"A" as a part of this project:
A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk with planter strip;
B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements;
C. streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City
Engineer; and
D. driveway apron (if applicable).
. The applicant's PFI permit plans shall be revised to provide separate storm
sewer laterals, with separate connections to the public storm sewer system.
. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for
the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility
Improvement permit.
. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Fa�ility
Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The pla�n shall confnrm to the "Erc��ion
Prevention and Sediment Control Uesign and Planning Manuaf, February
2003 edition."
. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on finro
monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic
control network (GC 22) as recorded in Washington County survey records.
These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same
precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the
coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground
measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north.
These coordinates can be established by:
• GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey.
• By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements:
A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared
by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or
narrative.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 9
� �
B. Attach a check in the amount of the current final plat review fee
(Contact Planning/Engineering Permit Technicians, at (503) 639-4171, ext.
2421).
C. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum
standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),
Washington County, and by the City of Tigard.
D. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat
until they receive notice from the Engineering Department indicating that the
City has reviewed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's
surveyor.
E. After the City and County have reviewed the final plat, submit one
paper copy of the final plat for City Engineer signature (for partitions), or City
Engineer and Community Development Director signatures (for
subdivisions).
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642)
for review and approval:
. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the
Engineering Department with a paper copy of the recorded final plat.
. Prior to issuance of building permits the public improvements in SW 74tn
Avenue must be completed by SUB2006-00010. If not completed, the
applicant will be required to complete the improvements prior to issuance of
building permits.
. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW
74�h Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee
in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the
site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 70.00 per lineal foot. If the
fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 3850.00 and it shall be paid prior
to issuance of building permits.
. During issuance of the building permit for Parcels 1 and 2, the applicant shall
pay the standard water quality and water quantity fees per lot (fee amounts
will be the latest approved by CWS).
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 10
, , � �
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2008-00006 White Oak PAGE 11
�_
�i�
���
CleanWater Services
Our cnininilnicnt i� cic,ir.
June 16, 2008
JUN 2 3 2008
Emily Eng
Planning Division
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, Oregon 97223
RE: MLP2008-OQ006 Wr.ite Oalc P�rtition
Clean Water Services (CWS) has reviewed the submitted utility/site plan set for the Maxim
Partition Tax/Map 1 S 1 36DB-02300 for compliance with the most current CWS Design and
Construction Standards, R&O 07-20. A Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment
(SAPSSA), File No. 08-001251, was issued on May 28, 2008, for 11030 SW 74`}' Av. Tigard,
OR for partition of a single tax lot into two parcels for construction of single family residences.
The following are concerns to be addressed prior to issuance of a MLP Stormwater Connection
Permit Authorization:
General Notes:
■ Page 7 of the narrative states that the storm runoff is anticipated to weep into SW 74`h, yet
sheet C2 of the utility/site plan indicates SD laterals to both tax lots. This requires
clarification of how the lots are to be serviced. If weep holes, R&O 07-20 chapter 5.09.3 (g)
standards shall be followed.
• Page 14 of the narrative states that the proposed partition is a flag lot not including the pole
or the access easement in the lot area. However Washington County Development standards
define a flag lot as:
430-45.5 Single flag lots shall meet the following:
A. The minimum continuous width of the access strip shall be fifteen (15) feet;
B. The access strip shall be part of the flag lot(the driveway shall not be provided
through an easement on the frontage lot); and
C. Access shall be provided by a paved driveway which meets the private street standards
of Sections 409-3, 409-4.4, and 409-4.5.
If the lot is not a flag lot as defined above, R&O 07-20 chapter 5.09.3 standards shall be
followed for laterals across a single adjoining property.
2550 SW Hillsboro Highway • Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 /
Phone: (503) 681-3600 • Fax:(503)681-3603 •www.CleanWaterServices.org �
.
\�/
. ��.�
CleanWater Services
Our cc�iuniifincni i, c����ii.
Please clarify the preceding points and confirm if the lot is indeed a flag lot or will be following
chapter 5.09.3 standards. CWS will authorize a MLP Storm Water Connection Permit following
notit7cation by the City ofthe above. Feel free to call me at 503 681-4474 should any questions
arise.
Sincere ,
David Schweitzer, EIT
Development Services
2550 SW Hillsboro Highway• Hillsboro, Oregon 97123
Phone: (503) 681-3600• Fax: (503) 681-3603 •www.CleanWaterServices.org
_ �
�
A .
Tualatin Valley
Fire & Rescue
June 23, 2008
Emily Eng, Assistant Planner
City of Tigard Planning Division
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: (MLP) 2008-00006 White Oak Partition
Dear Emily,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed site plan surrounding the above named development
project. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions
of approval:
1) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS -REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family
dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the
structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC
Appendix B. (IFC 6105.1)
The fire hydrant shown on the submitted drawings must be capable of supplying the required fire flow
demand.
We trust this letter will be helpful with the final design of this proposal insofar as fire apparatus access and
firefighting water supplies are concerned. If there is anything about this letter you do not understand, disagree
with, or wish to discuss further, please call me.
Sincerely,
John K . Dalby
John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshal II
Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, North Division
14480 SW Jenkins Road
Beaverton, OR 97005-1152
(503) 356-4723
North Di►�ision Of'fice ,�
14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton,OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-64�-221d wwH.tvfr.com
Emily Eng �
From: Dalby, John K. [John.Dalby@tvfr.com]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 9:10 AM
To: Emily Eng
Cc: Jeff Caines
Subject: White Oak Partition (T)
Attachments: White Oak Partition (T).doc
1
Emily Eng
From: john.cousineau@verizon.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:21 PM
To: Emily Eng
Subject: White Oak MLP 2008-00006
Verizon has current facilities that will be impacted.The developer will need to request a disconnect from the building that is to be
removed. A 5'easement on the west property line is indicated but none on the adjacent LOT 27 and Tract D. Currently Verizon has a
pole in that area is the city vacating the previous easement that allowed placement of that pole. Can it be moved to the 5'easement?
. Thank you for allowing this input and your time. I hope this helps.
John R. Cousineau
Network Engineer
OSP Network Engineering and Planning
Verizon Communications
Office-503.643.0371
Fax-503.643.0977
john.cousineaun.verizon.com
1 /
Y
06/23/2008 12:42 FA% 5035910986 TVWD Engineerin8 f�001/001
RE QUE ST FOR COMME NTS q
-
DATE.: june 11,2008 , , �
TO Tualatin Valley WaterDistrict Administrative OfEices
FROM: Gty of Tigard Planning Division �j'�yt� ; �'(,,�� l�� J �c
STAFF CONI'ACT: Emil En Assistant Planner � �� ���--'�
Phone: (503} 639-4171 Fax: (503) 624-3681 Email:emil}�tigard-or.gov
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 20Q8-00006
- WHITE 4AK PARTITION -
REQLTEST: e applicant is re questing approv to partition one 17,280-square oot {0.40-acre ot into two ots o
8,780 square feet and 8,SOG square feet. The applicant�proposes to remove the existing single-family home and build two
new single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot. The subject property�s adjacent to the White Oak
Villa�e Planned Development (PD} site and owned by the same developer. White the applicant proposes to construct
publ�c unprovements as part of the White Oak Village PD, the proposed partition is separate from the PD project.
LOCATION: 1103^u SW 74`�' Avenue; Washington Counry Tax Map 1S136DB, T� Lot 230^u. ZONE: R 4.5: Low
Density Residential. The R 4.� wning district is des�gned to accommodate detached su' �gle-family homes with or without
accessory residential uiuts at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are
pernziaed conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pernzitted conditionally. APPLIC.ABLE RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Communiry Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790,
18 J95 and 18.810.
Attached are the Site Plan, Vcinity Map and Ap licant's Materials for yaur review. From inforrnation supplied by
various departments and ag�encies and from other�omiation available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision wi11 be rendered on the pro osal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: �UNE 25 2008. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate letter to retum your comments. I u are una e to res ond b the above date, please phone the staff contact
noted above with y�ur comments and co um���}�ur comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions,
contact the Tigard Plaiuung Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223.
PLE E CHECKTHE FOLLOWINGITEMS THAT APPLY:
_ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
_ Please contact of our office.
_ Please refer to the enclosed letter or email.
_ Written comments provided below:
Name&Number of Person Commenting. �
V
2ecE..,. .�d b/Z� _ �t
J. C. MILNE
REGISTERED ENGINEER
REGISTERED IN OREGON
1312 SW i6TH AVENUE, SUITE 1OI FORMERLY REGISTERED IN:
PORTLAND, OREGON 9720 1-25 1 6
ARIZONA MICHIGAN
PHONE: (5031 243-3560 COLORADO MISSOURI
CONNECTICUT NEVADA
FAX: I.riO31 243 3578 DELAWARE NEW HAMPSHIRE
I=LORIDA NEW JERSEV
GUAM NEW MEXICO
June 18� �oOV ��,AH�I OM QYORK
ILLINOIS PEfVNSYLVANIA
INDIANA TENNESSEE
KANSAS UTAH
Emily Eng Assistant Planner KENTUCKY WASMINGTON
� I.O'JI�IANA WISCONSIN
Planning Division "�'"E
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd. �
Portlantl, Oregon 97223
Dear Emily, Re: Access Road from 99E to New White Oak Village Subdivision
on west sitle Milne property at 11643 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard, OR
I am the property owner of 11643 SW Pacific Hwy, the adjacent property to the White Oak
Village Planned Development. For your convenience, we are enclosing the marked up plan with
indication of the location of our property.
We woultl like some clarifications on the"Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot" as said in the Notice
of Pending Land Use Application—Minor Land Partition dated June 11 2008 of which is
enclosed. I am concernetl where this flagpole of the flag lot will be.
It would be appreciated if this could be marked on the drawing enclosetl, which was received
with your notice and return to me.
Warm regartls,
Sincerely,
. ;
�
i
Ji ilne
JCM/LN
Encl.:
a. Drawing "Vicinity Map—White Oak Partition"
b. Copy of Notice of Pending Land Use Application—Minor Land Partition dated June 11 2008
City of TigarC�, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigar� R 97223
��
.
�
June 20, 2008 �
��'�
°,.,
Jim Milne
J.C. Milne Registered Engineer
1312 S W 16th Avenue, Suite 101
Portland, OR 97201-2516
RE: MLP2008-00006, White Oak Partition
Dear Jim:
Concerning the proposed flag lot at 1 l 030 SW 74th Avenue, I've included a site plan to
show you where the location is proposed. The "flag pole"will be an access easement on
proposed Lot 1.
Thank you for including a stamped envelope. Please let me know if you have any other
questions. Also, this project will be re-assigned to Gary Pagenstecher(503-718-2434) as
of June 27tn
Sincerely,
��`-�-� -
Emily Eng �
Assistant Planner
Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772
. .
✓
J. C. MILNE
REG1�7�REL CtViL ENGtN�ER
FORMERLY FORMERLY
REGISTEREO IN: 1372 SW igTN AY�NIj� REGI3TERED fN:
s•dRTLAlJD,OREGON 9720S�2g�6
ApIYONA IORNO PM1ON�;(503)243.9560 M[tHIGAN OHIO
COLOR4O0 ILLINdIS I'AX:(S93)243-357B MISSOl1Rl pE�N6YLVANIA
CqNN�GTICUT INOIANA NEVA4A YENN�95F�
OE4AWARE KANSAS MEW HAMPSHIRE UTAM
F4.ORIDA KENTUCiav R�G157[RfiD�N OREOON NEW�FRSEY wn3MINGTON
GUn.M �OUiSIANA NEW MEXICO wiSCONSIN
HAwail MA�NE NEW YQRK
June 23,2408
Emily Eng,Assistant Planner
Planning 17ivision
City afi i'igard
13125 SW H�II Blvd,
Por#iand, Oregon 97223
Fax:503-718-274$
Dear Emily, Re: MIP 200$-00006 White Oak P�rtition
Your carrespondence da#ed June 20�conceming flag lat at i 1030 SW 74 is very clear and appreciated.
The reason we are wnting to you is to put on record by the date in yaur notice 5:00 PM,J�ane 25 20Q8 that
#he developer is the same developer doing work on A�cess Ftoad from 99 E to new UVhite p�k Vi�lage
- Subdivision.
Enclosed are two letters we sent to AI pickman,one dated June 13 and June 1�to explain clearly our
concem at developer's conVac#or nat restar+ng the wafl to its original condition after gr�ding work ofi the
Access Road from 99E to New White Oak Viflage Subdivisian. 'Fhe developer's contractor disturbed the
appearanee of the battom 3'-0 of our wall.
YVe have not seen any action on this request on repainting bottom exposed concrete and 3 block high strip
ofi wall ofi Milne building on T�x Lot#1800 exterior of west.
W�have alsa requested a drawing of the cross s�ction through the Access Road#o Pacific Hvuy to explain
the finish suriace to the Access Road so that we can understand better wh�t is the finish surface of the
Access Road but have not received it.
Be(ow are items that we wish to have done which ar�listed in the June 13 2008 letter to AI Dickman copy
attaehed in which we agreed to have th�sump removed originally cafled for an plans.
1. Milne Real Properties#a be held harmfess in event af problems from wafer from Mifne property flowing
into the Access Road.
2. Finish of the narrow strip space adjacent to the AccESS Road between the praperties to be the sam�
surface material�s that which is on the adjacent Access Road.
3.We would like the new AGCess Road to be available to accept up to 3 p�destrian exits in the west waq o�
Milne building on Tax Lot#1800. This is in case building regulation's called for Emergency Exits in the
future in the existing building or in one tl�at may be built in fhe future.
TQOC� �N'IIJ� '� S�I�Xt 8L5� Ei�Z �45 X�d TZ�LT 800c'/CZ/9Q
� Y
4.Owner of White�Ilage Development to repaint up to 3'0 to 4'-0 to uniforrn line on a joint line of wall
including rows of block and exposed concrete footing if any, below.
5.We also appreciate receiving a drawing showing the cross section of the proposed Access Road so we
can see what is planned for Access Road surface.
We are sending this in writing so that you have our concems in wntlng on the recob before the dead line
that you put your transmittal t�us conceming the work on White Oak Village Subdivision described in
T'gard Planning letter that is by June 25 2008 by 5:00 PM.
We are sending a copy of this letter to Dick Bewersdorff who is the Planning Manager and E IGm McMillan
who is the Engineering Manager of City of Tigard.
Warm regards,
Sincerely,
��yl�i
Jim Milne
JCMILN
Encl..
a.Copy of letter to AI Dickman dated,lune 13 2008
b.Copy af Ietter to A1 Dickman dated June 17 2008
CC: Didc Bewersdorff, Planning Manager(F:503-598-1960)
E wm McMillan, Engineering Manager(F: 503-59&1960)
Z00� �N'II14 '� S33�E'f 8LSC £�Z £OS %Z'3 TZ�Li 800Z/£Z!90
r __.�.
J. G. MILNE
R&Gf6TERED E14GlNEER
1312 SW I BTH AV6NUE.5U17B 101 REGISTERED IN OREdON FORM6RLY R6G�SYEREO�N�
PORTLAND,OREGON 97201•2516 �,R�zoNA MtcNIG�N
co�pqqpp MfSBOl1Rf
PHONE; (503)243-3560 CoryrygC71GUT nEV�on
FAX' (S03) 243-3$`8 nel..aw�qE NEW N4MP6MIRE
r�owiar, nqw�Ea;Ev �
GUAN PeC,w�nrxiCp
HAVlA�I ..rcw roRn
iD�MD ONIO
�u�� ��' ��� ILLINOl9 P�NN�YWANi,a
�NCIANA TSNNF,FSGE
KANSAS UTAH
KFNTUGKY WASMINGTON
LOUISI0.NA W�6CON81N
AI D'�dcman,Senor Engineer Tech. ""A'"�
Engineering qepartment
City�f Tigard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Fax: 503-624-0752
Dear AI, Re:Access Raatl from 99E to New White Oak Vif(age Subdivision
on west side Milne property at 11643 SW Pacif�c Hwy,Tigard,OR
Thank you for your phone call conceming above plans you sent to me via office of
Laura Garland af"figard Plan Department.These drawings with generaf title"WHITE
OAK ViLLAGE SUBDIVISION"are titled individually as follows:
A. SITE PLAN
B.TENTATIVE PLAN
C. COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN
D. STORM DRAfNAGE IMPROVEMENTS—STORM �RAIN LINE#2 PLAN AND
Pi�OFILE
Drawings of A"SITE PLAN"and D"STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS—ST�RM
DRAIN k.1NE#2 PLAN AIVD PROFILE"have longhand Rotes changing the plan and
since our phone call, I do now have a clear picture of why this was being done.
In general,we see no problem omitting the catch basin providing the folfowing 4 items
listed below:
1. Milne Real Properties to be held harmless�n event of problems from water from
Mi1ne property flawing into the Access Raad.
2.Technically a fence should be built on the property line but all concemed would
b�nefit by omitting this fence. This is providing steps are taken with narrow strip
between the Access Road and t�e rear wall are in a manner that prevents i#be coming
a collect+on area for weeds or garbage. This could be done by constructing the finish
of the na�row strip space between the properties to be thE same surface material as
that which is on the Access Road.
V00� 31�I'II1� '� S�It't BLSC C6� �09 X�d3 TZ�LT 800ZiCZ/90
3.We would like the new Access Road to be available to accept up to 3 pedesfian
e�ats in west wa11 of Milne buiEding on Tax Lot 9700.
4. Owner of White Ullage Development to repaint up to 4'-0 to uniform line on a joint
line of wall.
r�.
We would appreciate rece'rving a copy of drawing�,which is a cross section
through the access road to the Pacific Hwy to explain specfied surface finish. After
our review, an offlcial letter spelling aut the items in this letter should sent by AI
Diclanan#o us for approval and for incorporating into the official dacumenfs canceming
She land use.
Warm regards,
Sincerely,
��,�%�:
Jim il e
JCM/LN
i
�
;
f
l
�
I
�
i
SOO�j 3NI'IIAI '� 53A��'t SLSE C�Z COS %E'3 TZ�Li SOOZ/CZ/90
,J. C. MI�NE
REGISTERED ENGINEER
- REGISTERED IN OREGON FpRMERLY REGI6T�REP IN:
131Z SW �gTW AVENUE,SU17E 1C1
aOR7LAND.OREGON 97ZG1-2516 �aizotiw MICMIGAN
PNONE; (503y Y48-396Q CONNGITCUT nrvADAR'
FAX: �5031 2a3-3378 M DELnWnRE NEW MnMP6MIR�
June 17� ZIfVS FLORIOA Ncw,�EABF_Y
cuwM ncw Mrxico
MAWAtI NCW YORK
IpAMQ ONIO
i�Linp15 �CNNSn.vANln
A!Dicfanan, 5enior Engineer Tech. �NO,��� YCNN65r6II
I(AN6Ab UTAH
Engineering Department KEN7IJCK'/ 'NA�HIN4TON
I.OV161ANA wtLCON6IN
City pf Tigard MA{NE
1312�SW Ha11 Blvd
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Fax:503-62�-0752
pear AI, Re:Access Road from 99�to New White Oak Vill�ge Subdivision
on west side Miine property at 11643 SW Pac'rf'ic Hwy,Tigard, �R
Following our conversation this mamir�g,this is t�Eet you know that we sent Linh
Nguyen in my affice to take photographs of the walf at 11643 SW Pacific Hwy and
made a test with a book vf co{ors to get the closest color selection of the concrete
� block wall. The follvwing information will clarify aur unde�standing of wha#need#o be
� done an the painting:
A. Color of paint is Praf�and Lambert#15-1 name�y Ambertique.
B.We reques#that the concrete foundation and 3 horizontal rows of concrete block .
wal) up to the top of the�hird row of concrete block b8 repainted for the entire lengfh of
the concrete block wal! of the Milne building abng the access road from 99E to New
White OaEc Vllage Subdivision.
This wili leave the entire rear wall be at the same condition as before wprk being
started on the access road,
Enclased are pictures of the rear wall dated June 16 200$.
We are mailing you a copy of this original letter with pictures and sending this by fax to
help you speed up the process pf h�ving this matter resolved.
Warm regards,
Sincerely,
�' ' ���.
`��'�-,-y
J�m Milne
JCM/LN
� Encl.: Pictures of the rear wall at 11643 SW Pacific Hwy dated June 16,2008 �
�
. f
�
. i
I
I
i
COO�j 31�I'IIi� '� 5�4VI' 8L9C C�Z C05 Xt�"3 iZ�LT 800Z/�Z%90
City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tig� OR 9�223
��
� ;.;
.
YJ �
June 26, 2008 =�,
�� �` °:�
Jim Milne
J.C. Milne Registered Engineer
1312 SW 16`h Avenue, Suite 101
Portland, OR 97201-2516
RE: MLP2008-00006, White Oak Partition
Dear Jim:
Thank you for your letter, received June 25t". I have been directed to forward your issues
to the Engineering Manager, Kim McMillan. Your letter has been forward to her. Also,
as you know, this project will be re-assigned to Gary Pagenstecher (503-718-2434) as of
June 27`h.
Sincerely,
�� `
�mily E
Assistant Planner
✓
Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772
_ ��
'i
`i
,, AFFIDAVIT �F POSTING NOTICE
° �F A LAND USE PROPOSAL
. � .
IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY
A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED ON THE SITE.
In the Matter of the Proposed Land L'se Applications for:
Land Use File Nos.: MLP2008-00006
Land Use File Name: WHITE OAK PARTITION
I, F,mil�� F.ng, Assistant Planner for the Cit�T of Ti�ard, do affirm that I posted notice of the land use proposal affecting
the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currendy registered)
Il G 3� � � Y f�. ��
and did personally post norice of the proposed land use applicarion(s) b��means of weatherproof posting in the general
vicinity of the affected territor�-, a eopy of said notice being hereto attached and b�� reference made a part hereof,
�l1�--
on the_�da5�of �Juw r ,2008.
` ��
Signa rs o Performed Posting
h-�.lu�an.patn`ma.tec�❑f6dant nf pu,nn}:tur apphcint tn pr�>t pubhc hcnnn�.duc
��IH ITE �AK PART IT I ON
MIN�R LAND PARTITON MLP 2008-00006 .
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval to partition onc 17,280-square foot
(0.40-acre) lot into two lots of 8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant
proposes to remove the existing single-family home and build two new singlc-family
detached homes. Proposed I,ot 2 will be a flag lot. The subject property is adjacent to the
White Oak Village Planned Development (PD) site and owned byT the same develop.,�.
White the applicant proposes to construct public improvements as part of the White Oak
Village PD, the proposed partition is separate from the PD project. LOCATION: 11030
SW 74� Avenue; Washington County Tax Map 1 S136DB, Tax Lot 2300. ZONE: R-4.5:
Low Densitv Residential. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached
single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of
7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally.
Some civic and institurional uses are also permitted condirionally. APPLICABLE
REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.` ),
18.705, 18.715, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Emily Eng�
Assistant Planner (x2712� at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling
503-639-4171 or by email to emil�(a���ard-or.��ov. A copy of the application and all documents
and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are available
for inspection at no cost and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost.
_ _ � � i � � .
I I I � ' � ; � ' I I I �. . . .
__� � __ �
�_ � ► � I �
AREA�N��,F�,�M �: s.�.FM
— a,___SPR�ICE _
—--- �
�_, � -- � ,� — — — — -- -- ST , OTIFIED
— �--� I __ ;°�.��„�.� �.�� ,�,,,, �„ � (5 00')
�,�n�,
o °o 0 o Lj� `—
� � ° � � m�u Yi m �� �' ----------------
°o n o ��' Q ,n�unnw ----------------
° '°'�"' � FOR: White Oak Village �,
o � � �a,�� ,�,� ��,�
0 o m _
O O O ---
o ° o �=n °"�"' RE: 1 S136DB, 2300
�,��.,,�
0 0 o tm�uim °� ________________
o � n,lw�sn n,fu�:n � mKpn� ��a.n�� i
au�Nnm m��xa:n
uanana
��~�� lfiifN�ilN �
nN Property owner information
mHwrn�
is valid for 3 months from
the date printed on this map.
itl7iM�1�M
li1iN11M�1
151i1tMIp1
IiU�NNN1
ttl/tl1�1}II
OliUtlpM 1fq�00N� �
V��
1317/MMAI
�WpMN
IiN�Ipl117 �
�mux�nn
� N
i 150{/plNl
0 100 200 300 Feet �
I
, 7"=245 feet
r
_ a
r
/
I,II\ �,� �+ InPortnation on I�is map is for yenerel location ony and
�� j !�V should be venfied Nnih the Development Services Division.
\\ / �\` 13125 SW Hall Blvd
P Tigard.OR 97223
� Q \ (W3)639-4171 .
htlpJhw�ci.tigard.or.us
Community Develo'ment Plot date:Jun 9,2008;C:\magicVNAGIC03.APR
1S136D6-01700 1S136DB-005D1
ABBOTT BRUCE&REBECCA FRANCESCHI JEROME R/GENEVIEVE R
10850 SW 74TH AVE INTER VIVOS TRUST AGREEMENT DATE MA
TIGARD, OR 97223 FRANCESCHI KENNETH A/BARBARA A
602 THIRD ST STE#9
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107
1S136CA-00100 1S136D6-00201
BRUCE LiSA& FRED MEYER STORES INC
BRUCE SCOTT BY BURKE 8 NICKEL
7510 SW SPRUCE ST STORE#375
TIGARD, OR 97223 3336 EAST 32ND ST#217
TULSA,OK 74135
1S136CA-90151 1S136AC-03400
BRUDERS EARL F� D MEYER STORES INC
10900 SW 76TH PL#15 BY B E 8 ' EL
TIGARD, OR 97223 STORE#
333 ST 32 ST#217
T SA,OK 74135
1S136D8-01400 1 136AC-03402
CARLASCIO GIL E FR MEYER STO ES INC
10915 SW 74TH AVE BY BU E& EL
TIGARD,OR 97223 STORE
333 AST 32 T#217
LSA,OK 74135
7S136CA-90341 1S136CA-90281
CATHEY CORRIN K FREEL HEATHER M&
10900 SW 76TH PL#34 JOHN50N FALONA P
TIGARD, OR 97223 3934 SW MULTNOMAH BLVD
PORTLANCI,OR 97219
1S136DB-00700 1S136CA-90241
CORBIN GROVER D TRUSTEE FROHNMAYER SUSAN V
BY TBC TAX UNIT#016600 10900 SW 76TH PL#24
PO BOX 35370 TIGARD,OR 97223
LOUISVILLE, KY 40232
1 S136AC-03801 1 S136D6-00800
CROWDER DONALD L TRUSTEE GALVAN SALVADOR R&MERCEDES
82513 CROWDER RD PO BOX 23051
SEASIDE,OR 97138 TIGARD, OR 97281
1S136AC-03900 1S136D6-OC900
DEAL�ORI MATHIS 8 J TODD GENSMAN MITCHELL EDWARD
10815 SW 74TH AVE PO BOX 1626
PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140
1S136DB-01600 1S136DB-00500
DORRELL DONAL N GGE TIGAR LLC
10885 SW 74TH ST 11619 SW PACIFIC HWY
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, UR 97223
1S136D6-01500 15136CA-90322
DORRELL DONAL V G DELMA GRAHAM RHONDA L
PO BOX 230482 10900 SW 76TH PL#32
TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-01600 1S136D6-02600
HALL DONALD W 8 GRACE L& MCDONALDS RESTAURANTS OF OREGON
HALL JOHN G&PARKER CAROL J BY MCDONALD'S CORP(36-0105)
Go AMAN WALTER S CREDIT SHELTE PO BOX 182571
PO BOX 2990 COLUMBUS, OH 43218
TUALATIN, OR 97062
1S136CA-90141 1S136D6-01800
HENNESSY JEFFREY R MICKLEY WILLIAM C&MARY R
10900 SW 76TH PL#14 10880 SW 74TH
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90231 1S136CA-01800
HOLTE SECELIA E MILNE REAL PROPERTIES INC
10900 SW 76TH PL#23 1312 SV�/16TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97201
�S136CA-90201 1S136CA-90172
JACOBSON KEVIN MISKA TRUST
10900 SW 76TH PL#20 BY MISKA EDWARDS P 8
TIGARD,OR 97223 PHYLLIS A TRS
745 THIRD ST
LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034
1S136AC-03800 1S136CA-90272
JONES KEVIN L&JANICE A MITCHELL PATRICK W
7302 SW SPRUCE ST 10900 SW 76TH PL#27
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90131 1S136CA-90071
JUNG JAMES H MOTLAGH ZENAIDA F&
10900 SW 76TH PL#13 MOTLAGH MEHDI SARY
TIGARD,OR 97223 10900 SW 76TH PL#7
TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S136D6-00200 1 S136D8-02000
KBF II LLC& NELSON ROBERT L SHIRLEY
JGF II LLC 12316 NW CORNELL RD
602 THIRD ST STE#94107 PORTLAND,OR 97229
SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94107
1S136DB-02100 1S136CA-90061
LEWIS BENJAMIN NOLAN NICKLEN JEAN C
10970 SW 74TH AVE 10900 SW 76TH PL#6
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90291 1S136D6-00190
MACY TIMOTHY&NANCY OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
35351 NE WILSONVILLE RD R/W PROPERTY MGMT UNIT
NEWBERG,OR 97132 FILE#06948-//1245
355 CAPITAL ST NE RM 411
SALEM,OR 97301
1S136D8-01900 1S136CA-90222
MAGLEY PAMELA L ORI JEFFREY F
10910 SW 74TH AVE 10900 SW 76TH PL#22
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136D8-01200 1S136DB-02602
PATELZICK JOHN J JR& STEWART PHYLLIS TRUST
PATELZICK CYNTHIA A BY US BANK TRUSTEE
10975 SW 74TH AVE REAL ESATE ASSET ADMIN
TIGARD,OR 97223 PO BOX 3168
PORTLAND,OR 97208
1 S136CA-90262 1 S136CA-90182
PICKRELL CLARENCE B JR& TEVET SHONAH
KATHRYN E REVOCABLE TRUST 10900 SW 76TH PL#18
807 CEIBA PL TIGARD,OR 97223
NEWPORT BEACH,CA 92660
1S136CA-90117 36CA-900
REESOR LOUISA TIG OODS A CONDO COMMUNITY
10900 SW 76TH P�#11 UN NERS
TIGARD,OR 97223 0
1 S 136 DB-02200 1 S 136 DB-00600
SATHER RONALD A TYSON FAMILY TRUST&
11000 SW 74TH AVE LARSON RAYMOND K/EILEEN FRANCIS
TIGARD,OR 97223 BY TBC#016600
PO BOX 35370
LOUISVILLE, KY 40232
1S736CA-90212 1S136CA-90081
SCHAEFFER CAROL VANDIJK CAROLYN L
10900 SW 76TH PL#21 10900 SW 76TH PL#8
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90191 1S136DB-01000
SCHMUKI FRANK&MARTIE FAMILY T WHITE OAK VILLAGE LLC
BY FRANCIS C/MARTHA J SCHMUKI TRS BY STEVE DALTON
10900 SW 76TH PL#19 7955 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97008
1S136CA-90051 1S136DB-02300
SHORB ANN M WHITE OAK VILLAGE LLC
10900 SW 76TH PL#5 7955 SW HALL BLVD
PORTLAND, OR 97223 BEAVERTON, OR 97008
1S136DB-01100 1 136CA-01700
SIMONSON KATHRYN A WH OAK GE LLC
11005 SW 74TH BY STE ALTON
TIGARD, OR 97223 795 W HAL LVD
AVERTON,OR 97008
1S136D6-02601 1S136CA-90161
SLAGTER RICHARD A 8 TAMERA L WINANS EMILY
5760 SW NICOL RD 4901 PARKVIEW DR#M
PORTLAND,OR 97225 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035
1S136CA-90332 1S136CA-90121
SPANGLER JEROME WISCHMEYER SARAH M
PO BOX 55394 10900 SW 76TH PL#12
PORTLAND,OR 97230 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90251
ZEIS A J 8 IRENE C
10900 SW 76TH PL#25
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136DB-01300
ZSOKA KENNETH&
NICHOLS TIFFANYE
10945 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223
Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design �roup
PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren
Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120
Tigard, OR 97223
Sue Rorman Susan Beilke
11250 SW 82�d Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Naomi Gallucci Dayle D. & Evelyn 0. Beach
11285 SW 78'h Avenue 11530 SW 72nd Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Diane Baldwin
3706 Kinsale Lane SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Brad Spring
7555 SW Spruce Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Alexander Craghead
12205 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223-6210
Gretchen Buehner
13249 SW 136th Place
Tigard, OR 97224
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
CPO 4B
16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242
Tigard, OR 97224
CPO 4M
Pat Whiting
8122 SW Spruce
Tigard, OR 97223
CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES �i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 6-Aug-07
�� J
CITY OF TIGARD
C,01�1MUNITY llFVF.1,OPMENT D�Pf1RTl�1liNT ,�
PLANNING DIVISION
13125 SW HALI. BOUL�VARD =
TIGARI�, (�Rl?GON 97223
NIIUNI�.: 5f13-(�39--11,1 1�.�\\: S(li-(,?-�-3G�1 (.Atrn: I'att�/I'l;ii�i�ing) I:�I:AII.: �� � �
REQLIEST FOR 5OO-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER MAILING LIST
Propert�� o�uncr infoimauon is ealid for 3 mc�ntlls frc�m thc datc <�f��our icc�ucst
INDICATf:ALL PROJGCT�I�P&TAX LOT NUMBERS (i.e. 1S134A13,Tax Lot 001OO) OR THE
ADDRESSGS I�OR ALL PROJ]?CT PARC�LS BI?LOW:
Site Address: 11030 SW 74th Avenue (tax map 1S1-36D6 lot 2300)
PLEASE BE AWARE THAT ONLY 1 SET OF LABELS WILL BE PROVIDED AT THIS TIME FOR
HOLDING YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. After submitting }'our land use application to the Ciry,
and the project planner has reaie�ved your applicauon for completeness, you �vill be notified by means of an
incompleteness letter to obtain cour 2 tinal sets of labels. IF YOU HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED BY PLANNING
TO OBTAIN YOUR LABELS,PLEASE INDICATE THAT YOU NEED 2 SETS OF LABELS.
The 2 t1na1 sets of labels need to be placed on envelopes (no self-adhesive envelopes please) �vith fust class letter-
rate postage on the enaelopes in the form of postage stamps (no metered envelopes and no return address) and
resubmitted to the City for the purpose of providing notice to property o�vners of the proposed land use application
and the decision. The 2 sets of envelopes must be kept separate. The person listed belo�v �uill be called to pick up
and pay for the labels when they are read�-.
N11�SE OF CONTACT PFRSON: �eff Caines p�����JE: 503-619-4323 (direct line)
:�iA�II? OI�CC�;�IPAN�': SR Design 1,���: 503-469-8553
1?\I.111,: leffc@srdllc.com
'I'his rec�ucst ma�- bc cmailcd, mailcd, ta�ed, or hand cicli�-crcd to thr Cit�� c�f 1'igard. Please allow a 2-da�• miniinum
for piocessing requesrs. Upon coinpledon of y-our request, the contact peison listeci �vill be called to pick up their
request that�vill be placed in "Will Call" by the company name (or by the contact person's last name if no company)
at the Ylanning/Engineering Counter at the Permit Center.
The cost of processing��our request inust be paid at the cime of pick up,as etact cost can not be pre-determined.
PLEASE NOTE: FOR REASONS OF ACCURACY, ONLY ORIGINAL MAILING LABELS
PROVIDED BY THE CITY VS. RE-TYPED MAILING LABELS WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Cost De�cri�tion:
S11 to generate the mailing list,plus S2 pex shect for�rinrin�;thc list onto labels (20 addresses per sheet). Then,mulripl��nc�a��t r��
�rint r�nc sct of labcls bt- thc number oE scts rcyuestccl.
-EXAMPLE - - COST FOR THIS REQUEST -
4 sheets oElabcls x$2/shee[_+K„_i�il�?>rts= SIG.UIi >hcc�(;j uf lal�cls x S_'%>hect=�x� .cts= /► +�C�
1 ,hcet,oE labcls x$2/sheet[or in[ccestcd pacncs x 2.cts= S d.1)0 :hcct(s)of labcls x S2/shect tur�nrcrested pardcs=�s °t �et�_��
GENER�TE L1ST = $1 LOU =
TOT,1L = �31.00 TOT�1L = �
�
��� ��,o
�
�si ssoa-o2soo
WHITE OAK VILLAGE LLC
7955 SW HALL BLVD
BEAVERTON,OR 97008 /
1 /� � � 1N r�� �
l
��-�7�-�
�
,.
�
�
i
k
F
F
�
�
�
. ..
Patty Lunsford
From: Jeff Caines [jeffc@srdllc.com]
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 8:32 AM
To: Patty Lunsford
Subject: 500-foot mailing labels
Attachments: 500 foot mailing labels.pdf
Patty,
Here is a PDF of the mailing label request form. I can fax it if you want. I will also be at Tigard this morning to look at a file. If they
are ready this morning, I can pick them up while I'm there.
Jeff
SR DESIGN LLC
8196 SW Hall Bivd, Suite 232� Beaverton, Oregon 97008�www.SRDLLC.com
P 503.469.1213(x104)� F 503.469.8553�leffc(a�srdllc.com
Dirt Design With The Builder In Mind�;�
Planning � Engineering � Surveying� Landscape Architecture� ESB CeRified
�
��
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING -
� ..�
I, Patricia L. Lunsfo�i bein� first duly sworn/affirni, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Administrative
Assistant for the City of;I'iga ,Washington County,�regon and that I served the followi.ng:
;aeck Appnyrvu�&,�h)&hw;.
❑X N�TTCE OF PENDING LAND USE DEQSION FOR
MLP2008-00006/W�IITE OAK PARTI7TON
D AMENDED NOTIC�
(File No./Name Relecence)
� City of T'igard Plannuig Director
A copyof the said notice being hereto attached,marked Exhibit"A",and by reference made a part hereof,was mailed to each
named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s),marked Exhibit"B",and by reference made a part hereof, on
June 11,2008,and deposited in the Unite tates Mail on- 2008,postage prepaid.
;
1
� �
(Person that Pre otice)
STATE OF OREGON
County of Washington ss.
City of Tigard
,
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the �� dayof �� ,2008.
OFFlCW.SEAL
SHIRLEY L TREAT
<C , NpTARY PUBLIC-OfiE40N L _� ��� �"
COMMISSIGN NO.418777 ��
My�SION EXPIRES APRIL 2S,20�� NO ARY PUB C OF ORE GON
My Conunission Expires: `���}S���
, � EXHiBIT �-
NOTIC�TO MORTGAC�E,LIENHOLDER,VENDOR OR SELLER
'1� TIGARD DEVELOPMENT QODE REQLJIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE Tf-�S NOTTC�,, IT SHALL BE PROM1yIT�Y
FORWARDED TO TI�PURQ�ASER
NOTICE OF PENDING ,,
LAND USE APPLICATION :
MINOR LAND PARTITION . , �
DATE OF NOTICE: June 11, 2008
FILE NO.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2008-00006
FILE TITLE: WHITE OAK PARTITION
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER White Oak Village,LLC REP.: SR Design,LLC
7955 SW Hall Blvd Attn: Jeff Caines,AIQ'
Beaverton,OR 97008 8196 SW Hall Blvd,Suite 232
Beaverton,OR 97008
REQLJEST: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into two lou of
8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant proposes to remove the e�sting single-family home
and btuld two new single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot. The subject property is
adjacent to the White Oak Village Planned Development (PD) site and owned by the same developer.
White the applicant proposes to construct public improvements as part of the White Oak Village PD, the
proposed partition is separate from the PD project.
LOCATION: 11030 SW 74�Avenue;Washington CounryTax Map 1S136DB,Tax Lot 2300.
ZONE: R 4.5: Low Densit�Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family
homes with or without accessory residential uniu at a r,,;n;mum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and
attached single-family iuuts are pernutted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also perniitted
conditionally.
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18J15, 18J45, 18J65, 18J90,
18.795 and 18.810.
YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS:
Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written
comments on the application to the Ciry. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON jUNE 25, 2008.
All comments should be directed to EmilvEng,Assistant Planner(�712� in the Planning Division at the Cityof Tigard, 13125 SW
Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at 503-639-4171 or by e-mail to
emil tigard-or.gov.
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE
DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION-
MAKING PROCESS
THE QTY OF 7TGARD APPREQATES RECEIVING COMIVIENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. CONIlVIENTS WILL
BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WIT�IIN THE NOTTCE OF DEQSION. A DEQSION ON T�IIS ISSLJE IS
7'ENTATIVELY SG'�-�DULED FOR JULY 22,2008. IF YOU PROVIDE CONIlVIENTS,YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF
TF-�', FULL DEQSION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN CONIlVIENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE
PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:
�
• Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be
applicable to this proposal;
• Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response;
• Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with
sufficient spccificity on that issue.
FAILURE OF ANY PARTY TO ADDRESS T'HE RELEVANI'APPROVAL C�ITERIA WITH SUFFIQENT SPEQFIQTY
MAY PREQ.UDE SUBSEQUENT APPEALS TO TI� LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS OR QRCLJIT COURT ON
'1'HAT ISSLJE. SPEQFIC FINDINGS DIRECI'ED AT TF-�', RELEVANf APPROVAL GRITERIA ARE WHAT
CONSTTTU'I�, RELEVANI'EVIDENCE.
AFTER THE 14-DAY CONA�NT PERIOD Q.OSES, Tf-IE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TrPE II ADMII�IISTRATTVE DEQSION. T�IE
DIREGTOR'S DEQSION SHALL BE Mt1ILED TO TI-�APPLICAN'T AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPER7'Y LOC'.ATED WITHIN SOO
FEET OF TI--IE SUBJECT SITE,AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN CONIIv1ENT'S OR WHO IS O'I�RWISE ENTITLED TO
NOTIC�. T�-�E DIRECI'OR'S DEQSION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANf APPROVAL QtI'TERIA. BASED UPON Tf-IE CRITERIA
E1ND TI-�FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN Tf�E RECORD,Tf�E DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE,APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY'1�-IE.
REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACITON.
SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS:
• The application is accepted by the City
• Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written
comment period.
• The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies.
• CityStaff issues a written decision.
• Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or concract purchase� of record of the site; all owners of record
of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized
neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an
intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise
entitled to such notice.
INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FORREVIEW:
The application, written commenu and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained
within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Depanmenc. If y�u want to
inspect the file,please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the planning technicians. Copies of these items may
be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be
directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written
Commenu."
v� -
� � � � � �- ��� - -
�'I�:INfI'1 �1:11'
�,E � JILP'rHiR-iiii�aib
s, ----------
\\�EI ITE c>.�I�
P_�Rl'ITI(.)N
; P T
e�� � �� < �+ f
� � � � \
LEGEND:
� SLiBJECT
SI'CE
1 • -I
' � i
� ; I
I.
.. .
i -L.r�:
N
T •
� �
�
n�ly 1 d ERe I1.^ ••Yneqc'M�I.
� EXH1B1�.
White Oak Village,LLC MLP2008-00006
7955 SW Hall Blvd. WHITE OAK PARTITION
Beaverton, OR 97008
SR Design,LLC
Attn:Jeff Caines, AIQ'
8196 SW Hall Blvd.,Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
, •
1 S 136DB-01700 1 S136DB-00501
ABBOTT BRUCE&REBECCA FRANCESCHI JEROME ht/GENEVIEVE R
10850 SW 74TH AVE INTER VIV05 TRUST AGREEMENT DATE MA
TIGARD, OR 97223 FRANCESCHI KENNETH A/BARBARA A
602 THIRD ST STE#9
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107
1S136CA-00100 1S136�8-00201
BRUCE LISA& FRED MEYER STORES INC
BRUCE SCOTT BY BURKE&NICKEL
7510 SW SPRUCE ST STORE#375
TIGARD, OR 97223 3336 EAST 32ND ST#217
TULSA,OK 74135
1S136CA-90151 15136AC-03400
BRUDERS EARL Fi� D MEYER STORES INC
10900 SW 76TH PL#15 BY B E& ' EL
TIGARD, OR 97223 STORE#
333 ST 32 ST#217
T SA,OK 74135
1S136D8-01400 1 136AC-03402
CARLASCIO GIL E FR MEYER STO ES INC
10915 SW 74TH AVE BY BU E& EL
TIGARD, OR 97223 STORE
333 AST 32 T#217
LSA,OK 74135
1S136CA-90341 1S136CA-90281
CATHEY CORRIN K FREEL HEATHER M&
10900 SW 76TH PL#34 JOHNSON FALONA P
TIGARD, OR 97223 3934 5W MULTNOMAH BLVD
PORTLAND, OR 97219
1S136D8-00700 1S136CA-90241
CORBIN GROVER D TRUSTEE FROHNMAYER SUSAN V
BY TBC TAX UNIT#016600 10900 SW 76TH PL#24
PO BOX 35370 TIGARD,OR 97223
LOUISVILLE, KY 40232
1S136AC-03801 1S136DB-00800
CROWDER DONALD L TRUSTEE GALVAN SALVADOR R 8 MERCEDES
82513 CROWDER RD PO BOX 23051
SEASIDE,OR 97138 TIGARD,OR 97281
1S136AC-03900 1S136DB-00900
DEAL LOR� MATHIS 8 J TODD GENSMAN MITCHELL EDWARD
10815 SW 74TH AVE PO BOX 1626
PORTLAND, OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140
1S136D6-01600 1S136D8-005DD
DORRELL DONAL N GGE TIGAR LLC
10885 SW 74TH ST 11619 SW PACIFIC HWY
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD.UR 97223
1S136DB-01500 1S136CA-90322
DORRELL DONA�V G DELMA GRAHAM RHONDA L
PO BOX 230482 10900 SW 76TH PL#32
TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223
t S 136CA-01600 1 S136DB-02600
HALL DONALD W&GRACE L& MCDONALDS RESTAURANTS OF OREGON
HALL JOHN G 8 PARKER CAROL J BY MCDONALD'S CORP(36-0105)
c/o AMAN WALTER S CREDIT SHELTE PO BOX 182571
PO BOX 2990 COLUMBUS,OH 43218
TUALATIN,OR 97062
1S136CA-90141 1S136D6-01800
HENNESSY JEFFREY R MICKLEY WILLIAM C&MARY R
10900 SW 76TH PL#14 10880 SW 74TH
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
15136CA-90231 1S136CA-01800
HOLTE SECELIA E MILNE REAL PROPERTIES INC
10900 SW 76TH PL#23 1312 SNl 16TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97201
1S136CA-90201 1S136CA-90172
JACOBSON KEVIN MISKA TRUST
10900 SW 76TH PL#20 BY MISKA EDWARDS P&
TIGARD, OR 97223 PHYLLIS A TRS
745 THIRD ST
LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034
1S136AC-03800 1S136CA-90272
JONES KEVIN L&JANICE A MITCHELL PATRICK W
7302 SW SPRUCE ST 10900 SW 76TH PL#27
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90131 1S136CA-90071
JUNG JAMES H MOTLAGH ZENAIDA F 8
10900 SW 76TH PL#13 MOTLAGH MEHDI SARY
TIGARD, OR 97223 10900 SW 76TH PL#7
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136DB-00200 1S136D8-02000
KBF II LLC 8� NELSON ROBERT L SHIRLEY
JGF II LLC 12316 NW CORNELL RD
602 THIRD ST STE#94107 PORTLAND, OR 97229
SAN FRANC15CO3 CA 94107
1 S 136 D B-02100 1 S 136CA-90061
LEWIS BENJAMIN NOLAN NICKLEN JEAN C
10970 SW 74TH AVE 10900 5W 76TH PL#6
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
t S 7 36CA-90291 1 S 136 D B-00190
MACY TIMOTHY&NANCY OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
35351 NE WILSONVILLE RD R/W PROPERTY MGMT UNIT
NEWBERG, OR 97132 FILE#06948-//1245
355 CAPITAL ST NE RM 411
SALEM,OR 97301
15136D8-01900 7 S736CA-90222
MAGLEY PAMELA L ORI JEFFREY F
10910 SW 74TH AVE 10900 SW 76TH PL#22
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136DB-01200 7S136DB-02602
PATELZICK JOHN J JR& STEWART PHYLLIS TRUST
PATELZICK CYNTHIA A BY US BANK TRUSTEE
10975 SW 74TH AVE REAL ESATE ASSET ADMIN
TIGARD,OR 97223 PO BOX 3168
PORTLAND,OR 97208
1 S 136 CA-90262 1 S 136CA-90182 .
PICKRELL CLARENCE B JR& TEVET SHONAH
KATHRYN E REVOCABLE TRUST 10900 SW 76TH PL#18
807 CEIBA PL TIGARD,OR 97223
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
1 S 136CA-901 11 136CA-900
REESOR LOUISA TIG OODS A CONDO COMMUNITY
10900 SW 76TH PL#11 UN NERS
TIGARD, OR 97223 0
t S 136 D B-02200 1 S 136 DB-00600
SATHER RONALD A TYSON FAMILY TRUST&
11000 SW 74TH AVE LARSON RAYMOND K/EILEEN FRANCIS
TIGARD, OR 97223 BY TBC#016600
PO BOX 35370
LOUISVILLE,KY 40232
1 S136CA-90212 1 St 36CA-90081
SCHAEFFER CAROL VANDIJK CAROLYN L
10900 5W 76TH PL#21 10900 SW 76TH PL#8
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 136 CA-90191 1 S 136D8-01000
SCHMUKI FRANK&MARTIE FAMILY T WHITE OAK VILLAGE LLC
BY FRANCIS C/MARTHA J SCHMUKI TRS BY STEVE DALTON
10900 SW 76TH PL#19 7955 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97223 BEAVERTON, OR 97008
1 S136CA-90051 1 S136D8-02300
SHORB ANN M WHITE OAK VILLAGE LLC
10900 SW 76TH PL#5 7955 SW HALL BLVD
PORTLAND, OR 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97008
1 S 136 D 8-01100 1 136CA-01700
SIMONSON KATHRYN A WH OAK GE LLC
11005 SW 74TH BY STE ALTON
TIGARD,OR 97223 795 W HAL LVD
AVERTON,OR 97008
1 S 136 D B-02601 1 S 136CA-90161
SLAGTER RICHARD A 8 TAMERA L WINANS EMILY
5760 SW NICOL RD 4901 PARKVIEW DR#M
PORTLAND, OR 97225 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035
15136CA-90332 1 S136CA-90121
SPANGLER JEROME WISCHMEYER SARAH M
PO BOX 55394 10900 SW 76TH PL#12
PORTLAND,OR 97230 TIGARD,OR 97223
. •
1S136CA-90251
ZEIS A J 8 IRENE C
10900 SW 76TH PL#25
TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 136 D B-01300
ZSOKA KENNETH&
NICHOLS TIFFANYE
10945 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223
Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design ��oup
PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren
Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120
Tigard, OR 97223
Sue Rorman Susan Beilke
11250 SW 82�d Avenue 11755 SW 114th Piace
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Naomi Gallucci Dayle D. 8� Evelyn 0. Beach
11285 SW 78th Avenue 11530 SW 72nd Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Diane Baldwin
3706 Kinsale Lane SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Brad Spring
7555 SW Spruce Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Alexander Craghead
12205 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223-6210
Gretchen Buehner
13249 SW 136th Place
Tigard, OR 97224
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
CPO 4B
16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242
Tigard, OR 97224
CPO 4M
Pat Whiting
8122 SW Spruce
Tigard, OR 97223
CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES �i:lcurpinlsetupllabels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 6-Aug-07
��
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING -
�
I, Patricia L. Lunsford being� first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Administrative
Assistant for the City of tI'igarci, Washington County,Oregon and that I served the following:
;�lx.k�nqouc&,x(s)R.�6,a�)
❑X NOTTC� OF DEQSION FOR
MI.P2008-00006/W�IITE OAK PARTTTTON
(Filc No./Num Relereoce)
� AMENDEDNOTI(�
� City of T'igard Planning Director
A copy of the said notice being hereto attached,marked E�ibit"A",and by reference made a part hereof,was mailed to each
named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s),marked Exhibit"B",and by reference made a part hereof,on
Julv 31,2008 and deposite ' he United States ' on July 31,2008,postage prepaid.
I //`�-�
(Peison that P ared Notice)
/
STATE OF ORE GON
County of Washington) ss.
City of Tigard )
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the dayof ,2008.
NOTARY PUBI.IC OF OREGON
My Coirunission Expires:
� � EXH I BIT..,.�,.�
NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION ,�
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP} 2008-00006 =
WHITE OAK PARTITION
120 D YS =10 8 2008
SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY
FILE NAME: WHITE OAK PARTITION
CASE NO: Minor Land Partition (MLP) MLP2008-00006
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into
two lots of 8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant proposes to remove the
e�usting single-f amily home and build two new single-f amily detached homes. Proposed Lot 2
will be a flag lot. The subject property is adjacent to the White Oak Village Planned
Development (PD) site and owned by the same developer. While the applicant proposes to
construct public impmvements as part of the White Oak Village PD,the proposed partition is
separate from the PD project.
APPLICANT/ APPLIC.ANT'S
O�i/NER White Oak Village, LLC REP: SR Design,LLC
7955 SW Hall Boulevard Attn: Jeff Caines,AIQ'
Beaverton, OR 97008 8196 SW Hall Boulevard,Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R 4.5 (PD): Low Density Residential District with Planned Development overlay. The R
4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or
without accessory residential uruts at a m;n;mLUn lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and
attached single-familyunits are perniitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are
also pernutted conditionally.
LOCATION: 11030 SW 74th Avenue;Washington CountyT�Map 1S136DB, Tax Lot 2300.
PROPOSE D PARCE L 1: 8,780 Square Feet.
PROPOSE D PARCE L 2: 8,500 Square Feet.
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 18390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715,
18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
SECTION II. DECISION
Notice is hereby given that the City of T'igard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the
above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at
City Hall.
THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS
FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION.
All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection.at no cost or copies can be
obtained for twenty-five cents (25 C} per page,or the current rate charged for copies at the tune of the request.
SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION
Notice:
Notice mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owner of record within the required distance
X Affected government agencies
Final Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JULY 31, 2008 AND BECOMES
EFFECI'IVE ON AUGUST 15, 2008 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
pA- �e—al-:
The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise
adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as� provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in
accordance with Section 18390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Commuruty Development Code which provides that a
written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director withui ten �10) busuiess day_s of the
date the Notice of Dec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are ava able from the I'lanning
Division of Tigard CityHall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the
specific issues ident�fied in the wntten comments subirutted by the parties during the comment period. Additional
evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party durui_g the appeal
hearing,subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted from time to tune by the appelIate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 14, 2008.
Fo�estions:
er information please contact the Planning�Division Staff Planner, Ga Pa enstecher at (503) 639-4171,
Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Uregon 97223 or by ema to gar�tigard-or.gov.
__ - ----��,�
___ I _ _I1dN `
�r �-� f- rT�.., _r� �_
� � �'I�:INff1�h1AF '
k � —1 7I ===-=o====
�E \[j,P?I NIti-11111 N 1(i
sr ----------
\\}I11'E(1_-�li
P_1RTITI(?N
y
t T
���m� �� �+
� � �
LEGEND:
� SLJB1ECT
SITE
< f -I
j ❑
+ � I.
`
1�ti�
H
� � � ..
nn, aass . mq�
I W I I I� F � �
8 � W I I rl :I
r � � E�=��.�,.�o_�� � V� �
� �,3
� li �� �►►��.J,
E�,.,��� i ^ i`I i I� !
�/1 I I I c -BnRPCW[Yt:�f Ph �F'-�"f�n P.
-�- � / i wtOf nnyFV�� ��+
—�—L _——— �d ` ��55 l�' Q��, -
s.an ' '�- ----- 1 - . �� -�— I I
,nr.s's.- .s�r?� .�!-ui�. m�cccss/ '� �— wo cnw � y
� 50 m/ UM[Ll � � � Rup�G ��y ���i
.,A•S7REET �-�"!- r � — � 5� ��
�,'n,��� ' I r � ° ' • € �
/ I I--�^'-7 �' �� R�a
����
s�e�p}! � i � I � i
� r-—� tiax. ,b.. I I I � �
/ � �� _-' v u* � � � �
rRac�a -- 5 5 . � I I �or z I I�a �
� �icu u�hR/ LOT i I � I e.wo s s ;, j g
_J �� �'�g s I 1]
� � n cola y_ ( o � � , �
- LOt77 y�� roiva� I � ��� i'
I o�� s / L oo`�, J ,� �8
_ (re) / �
_ � �� ��s' +�c ro� � �
a a ano�w
LGT 1
I �v 9831 SS'�v�9�/' f ��
______ I
I �'
i _� C.')1<' � I M���
I �
1S136DB-01700 � 1S136D8-00501 EXH I BIT�
ABBOTT BRUCE&REBECCA FRANCESCHI JEROMC r2/GENEVIEVE R
10850 SW 74TH AVE INTER VIVOS TRUST AGREEMENT DATE MA
TIGARD, OR 97223 FRANCESCHI KENNETH A/BARBARA A
602 THIRD ST STE#9
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107
1 S136CA-00100 1 S136DB-00201
BRUCE LISA& FRED MEYER STORES INC
BRUCE SCOTT BY BURKE&NICKEL
7510 SW SPRUCE ST STORE#375
TIGARD, OR 97223 3336 EAST 32ND ST#217
TULSA,OK 74135
1 S 136 CA-90151 1 S 136AC-0340D
BRUDERS EARL F�2 D MEYER STORES INC
10900 SW 76TH PL#15 BY B E& ' EL
TIGARD, OR 97223 STORE#
333 ST 32 ST#217
T SA,OK 74135
1S136DB-0140D 1 136AC-03402
CARLASCIO GIL E FR MEYER STO ES INC
10915 SW 74TH AVE BY BU E 8 EL
TIGARD, OR 97223 STORE
333 AST 32 T#217
LSA,OK 74135
1 S 136CA-90341 1 S136CA-90281
CATHEY CORRIN K FREEL HEATHER M 8
10900 SW 76TH PL#34 JOHNSON FALONA P
TIGARD, OR 97223 3934 SW MULTNOMAH BLVD
PORTLAND,OR 97219
t S 136 D B-00700 1 S 136 CA-90241
CORBIN GROVER D TRUSTEE FROHNMAYER SUSAN V
BY TBC TAX UNIT#016600 10900 SW 76TH PL#24
PO BOX 35370 TIGARD,OR 97223
LOUISVILLE, KY 40232
1 S 136AC-03801 1 S 136 D B-00800
CROWDER DONALD L TRUSTEE GALVAN SALVADOR R 8 MERCEDES
82513 CROWDER RD PO BOX 23051
SEASIDE, OR 97138 TIGARD,OR 97281
1 S136AC-03900 1 S136D8-OC900
DEAL LORI MATHIS 8 J TODD GENSMAN MITCHELL EDWARD
10815 SW 74TH AVE PO BOX 1626
PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140
1 S136DB-01600 1S136DB-D0500
DORRELL DONAL N GGE TIGAR LLC
10885 SW 74TH ST 11619 SW PACIFIC HWY
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,UR 97223
1 S 136 D B-01500 1 S 136CA-90322
DORRELL DONAL V G DELMA GRAHAM RHONDA L
PO BOX 230482 10900 SW 76TH PL#32
TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223
. .
1S136CA-01600 , 1S136DB-02600
HALL DONALD W&GRACE�8� MCDONALDS RESTAURANTS OF OREGON
HALL JOHN G& PARKER CAROL J BY MCDONALD'S CORP(36-0105)
Go AMAN WALTER S CREDIT SHELTE PO BOX 182571
PO BOX 2990 COLUMBUS,OH 43218
TUALATIN, OR 97062
1S136CA-90141 1S136DB-01800
HENNESSY JEFFREY R MICKLEY WILLIAM C 8 MARY R
10900 SW 76TH PL#14 10880 SW 74TH
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90231 1S136CA-01800
HOLTE SECELIA E MILNE REAL PROPERTIES INC
10900 SW 76TH PL#23 1312 SN!16TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97201
1S136CA-90201 1S136CA-90172
JACOBSON KEVIN MISKA TRUST
10900 SW 76TH PL#20 BY MISKA EDWARDS P&
TIGARD, OR 97223 PHYLLIS A TRS
745 THIRD ST
LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034
1S136AC-03800 1S136CA-90272
JONES KEVIN L&JANICE A MITCHELL PATRICK W
7302 SW SPRUCE ST 10900 SW 76TH PL#27
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90131 1S136CA-90071
JUNG JAMES H MOTLAGH ZENAIDA F 8
10900 SW 76TH PL#13 MOTLAGH MEHDI SARY
TIGARD, OR 97223 10900 SW 76TH PL#7
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136D6-00200 1S136D6-02000
KBF II LLC 8� NELSON ROBERT L SHIRLEY
JGF II LLC 12316 NW CORNELL RD
602 THIRD ST STE#94107 PORTLAND, OR 97229
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107
1 S 136DB-02100 1 S136CA-90061
LEWIS BENJAMIN NOLAN NICKLEN JEAN C
10970 SW 74TH AVE 10900 SW 76TH PL#6
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 136CA-90291 1 S136D8-00190
MACY TIMOTHY&NANCY OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
35351 NE WILSONVILLE RD R/W PROPERTY MGMT UNIT
NEWBERG, OR 97132 FILE#06948-//1245
355 CAPITAL ST NE RM 411
SALEM,OR 97301
1S136DB-01900 1S136CA-90222
MAGLEY PAMELA L ORI JEFFREY F
10910 SW 74TH AVE 10900 SW 76TH PL#22
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136D8-01200 • 1S136D8-02602
PATEIZICK JOHN J JR& STEWART PHYLLIS TRUST
PATELZICK CYNTHIA A BY US BANK TRUSTEE
10975 SW 74TH AVE REAL ESATE ASSET ADMIN
TIGARO,OR 97223 PO BOX 3168
PORTLAND,OR 97208
1S136CA-90262 1S136CA-90182
PICKRELL CLARENCE B JR& TEVET SHONAH
KATHRYN E REVOCABLE TRUST 10900 SW 76TH PL#18
807 CEIBA PL TIGARD,OR 97223
NEWPORT BEACH,CA 92660
1 S136CA-901 11 136CA-900
REESOR LOUISA TIG OODS A CONDO COMMUNITY
10900 SW 76TH PL#11 UN NERS
TIGARD, OR 97223 0
1 S 136D8-02200 1 S136DB-00600
SATHER RONALD A TYSON FAMILY TRUST&
11000 SW 74TH AVE LARSON RAYMOND K/EILEEN FRANCIS
TIGARD, OR 97223 BY TBC#016600
PO BOX 35370
LOUISVILLE, KY 40232
1S136CA-90212 1S136CA-9D081
SCHAEFFER CAROL VANDIJK CAROLYN L
10900 SW 76TH PL#21 10900 SW 76TH PL#8
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S136CA-90191 1S136D8-�t00D
SCHMUKI FRANK 8 MARTIE FAMILY T WHITE OAK VILLAGE LLC
BY FRANCIS C/MARTHA J SCHMUKI TRS BY STEVE DALTON
10900 SW 76TH PL#19 7955 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97008
1S136CA-90051 1S136DB-02300
SHORB ANN M WHITE OAK VILLAGE LLC
10900 SW 76TH PL#5 7955 SW HALL BLVD
PORTLAND,OR 97223 BEAVERTON, OR 97008
1S136D8-01100 1 136CA-01700
SIMONSON KATHRYN A WH OAK GE LLC
11005 SW 74TH BY STE ALTON
TIGARD,OR 97223 795 W HAL LVD
AVERTON,OR 97008
1S136D6-02601 1S136CA•90161
SLAGTER RICHARD A 8 TAMERA L WINANS EMILY
5760 SW NICOL RD 4901 PARKVIEW DR#M
PORTLAND,OR 97225 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035
1S136CA-90332 15136CA-90121
SPANGLER JEROME WISCHMEYER SARAH M
PO BOX 55394 10900 SW 76TH PL#12
PORTLAND, OR 97230 TIGARD,OR 97223
.
15136CA-90251
ZEIS A J 8 IRENE C
10900 SW 76TH PL#25
TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 136 D B-01300
ZSOKA KENNETH&
NICHOLS TIFFANYE
10945 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223
Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design �roup
PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren
Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120
Tigard, OR 97223
Sue Rorman Susan Beilke
11250 SW 82�d Avenue 11755 SW 114�h Place
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Naomi Gallucci Dayle D. & Evelyn 0. Beach
11285 SW 78'h Avenue 11530 SW 72nd Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Diane Baldwin
3706 Kinsale Lane SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Brad Spring
7555 SW Spruce Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Alexander Craghead
12205 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223-6210
Gretchen Buehner
13249 SW 136'h Place
Tigard, OR 97224
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
CPO 4B
16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242
Tigard, OR 97224
CPO 4M
Pat Whiting
8122 SW Spruce
Tigard, OR 97223
CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES �i:lcurpinlsetupllabelslClT East.doc) UPDATED: 6-Aug-07
M -
11
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING -
I, Patricia L. Lunsfor�d bein�first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Administrative
Assistant for the City of zI'iga ,Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following:
;<�,a�k�4x,nn,ti��is,c�,>n,•G,,.�}
X❑ NOTIC� OF DEQSION FOR
MLP2008-00006/W�IITE OAK PARTTTTON
��nk,.irz,��re,���e)
� AI�4ENDEDNOTIC�
� City of Tigard Plannulg Director
A copy of the said notice being hereto attached,marked Exhibit"A",and by reference made a part hereof,was mailed to each
named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s),marked Exl�►ibit"B",and byreference made a part hereof,on
Jl�1v 31,2008, and depos� e ui United St tes � on July 31,2008,postage prepaid.
, \
.
,
l%�G�( - � C� �
(Pe�on diat Prepared Nodce)i
STATE OF OREGON
County of Washington) ss.
City of Tigard )
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the � dayof ��'at-�-S'� ,2008.
OFFlCIAL SEAL </�'IG, , /J , _ � •(,� . �-f'
8NIRLEV L TRE/►T S, ,�1 (Jl.l'�� �i'LCJ(J'
NOTARY PUBUC-OHEQON NOTARY P LIC OF OREGON
COMMISSK7N NO.418777
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 2S,2011 My Corrunission Expires: �I�--�1 ��
' � � EXHIBIT.�.�
NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION ,�
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2008-00006 °
WHITE OAK PARTITION
120 DAYS =10 8 2008
SECTION I. APPLICATION SLJMMARY
FILE NAME: WHITE OAI�PAftTITION
CASE NO: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2008-00006
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into
two lors of 8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant proposes to remove the
existing single-family home and build two new single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2
will be a flag lot. The subject property is adjacent to the White Oak Village Planned
Development (PD) site and owned by the same developer. While the applicant proposes to
construct public improvements as part of the White Oak Village PD,the proposed partition is
separate from the PD project.
APPLICANT/ APPLICt1NT'S
OWNER White Oak Village,LLC REP: SR Design,LLC
7955 SW Hall Boulevard Attn: Jeff Caines,AIQ'
Beaverton,OR 97008 8196 SW Hall Boulevard,Suite 232
Beaverton,OR 97008
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R 4.5 (PD): I.ow Density Residential District with Planned Development overlay. The R 4.5
zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without
accessory residential units at a m;r,;mum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duple�es and attached
single-family units are pexmitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also
pemutted conditionally.
LOC',ATION: 11030 SW 74th Avenue;Washington CountyTax Map 1S136DB,Tax I,ot 2300.
PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 8,780 Square Feet.
PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 8,500 Square Feet.
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Communiry Development Code Chapte�s 18.35C 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18J15,
18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
SECTION II. DECISION
Nouce is hereby �iven that the City of Ti�ard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the
above request subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in
Section V.
NOTICE OF DIRECTOft'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WI-IITE OAK PARTI'IION PAGE 1 OF 19
! �
� CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT:
The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans
that address the following requirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary
Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EXT 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
l. Prior to final plat appro�•al, if joint access is proposed, the applicant shall submit a cop}' of a recorded
reciprocal access and maintenance easement for Lots 1 and 2.
2. Prior to fmal plat appro��al, the applicant shall submit a re�•ised de�-elopment plan showing street trees per
'I'DC 18.745.040 and include a note on their de�relopment plan that sli�ht��anations in placement may be
required due to dri�re�va�•s, utilities, etc., but e�-en' attempt will be made to keep the same net number of
street trees that are sho�vn on the de��elopment plan.
3. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit a reviscd dc�-clopmcnt plan showing rcquired
buffering and screening south and east of the site consistent with 'I'able 18.745.2, Buffer Combinations for
Landscaping and Screening.
4. Prior to fmal plat approval, the applicant shall transfer accurately the fencing and tree protecuon specificarions
in the arborist report to the site plans. 'I'he tree protecrion plan needs to address tree protecrion standards and
methods for after construcrion. Specifically, thet�need to address acceptable landscaping pracrices and materials
around presen-ed trees. This addirional informarion can be pro�-ided on the site plans as �vell. The re�-ised tree
protection plan must include a signature of appro�-a1 from the project arborist.
The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, alon�with any supporting documents and/or plans
that address the followin� requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM
MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
5. ;-1 Public Facilin� Improt-ement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover the public sidewalks and any
other work in the public right-of-wa��. Si�c (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for
review to the Engineering Departmcnt. NOTE: these plans are in addirion to any drawings rcyuircd by thc
Building Di�rision and should only include sheets rele��ant to public improvemcnts. Public Facilit��
Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to Cin- of Tigard Public Improvement Desi�,m Standards,which
are at�ailable at City Hall and the City's tveb page (w�vw.tigard-or.gov).
G. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the etact legal name, address and telephone number of the
individual ar corporate enrin' who will be desi�mated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial
assurance for the public impro�-ements. For esample, specif�� if the enrity is a corporarion, limited partnership,
LLC, etc. r11so specif�� the state within which the entity is incorporated and pro�-ide the name of the corporate
contact person. Failure to proeide accurate informarion to the Engineering Department will dela�� processing
of project documents.
7. The applicant shall pro�-ide a construction vchicle access and parl:ing plan for appro��al b�• the City 1Jngineer.
The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construcrion phase.
8. The City Engineer may determine the necessity for,and require submittal and appro�-a1 of, a construcrion acccss
and parking plan for the home building phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary, die applicant
shall pro��de the plan prior to issuance of building perniits.
9. Prior to fmal plat approval, the applicant shall pa�T the addressing fee. (ST�1FF CONTr1C'I': Bethany Stewart,
�ngineering�.
NO'1'ICI�:OI�I)IRI?C"I'OR'S I)I�:CISI()'�I �f1.P21diti-�uAH1G/WI fI'l7?O:11:1',AK'1'I'I'ION P,AGI�.2OI�19
10. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facilit�
Improvement pernut, indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 74
Avenue/Street"A" as a part of this project:
A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk with planter strip;
B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements;
� streetlight layout by applicant's engineer,to be approved by City Engineer, and
D. driveway apron (if apphcable).
11. The ap�licant's PFI permit plans shall be revised to provide separate storm sewer laterals, with separate
connections to the public storm sewer system.
12. The applicant shall obtain a proval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection
prior to�ssuance of the Ci� Public Facility Improvement perniit.
13. f1n erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) perniit drawings.
The plan shall contorm to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual,
Febniary 2003 edition."
14. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuciients with a tie to the Cit�s global
positiorung system(GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22) as recorded in Washington County survey records.
These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision
plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground
measuremenu to grid measuremenu and the angle from north to grid north. These coorciinates can be
established by:
♦ GPS tie networked to the Cit�s GPS survey.
• By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
15. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements:
A. Submit for City review four (4) pap er copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to
practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative.
B. Attach a check u1 the amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Plannuig/Engineering Pern�it
Technicians,at (503 639-4171,e�.2421).
G The final plat and ata or namative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon
Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington County, and bythe Cityof Tigard.
D. NOTE: Washington Countywill not begin theu-review of the final plat until theyreceive notice from
the Engineering Department indicating that the Caty has reviewed the final plat and submitted
comments to the applicant's surveyr�r.
E. After the City and Counry have reviewed the final plat,submit one paper copy of the final plat for City
Engineer signature (for partiuons), or City Engineer and CommunityDevelopment Director signatures
(for subdiv�sions).
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
e app icant s a prepare a cover etter an su mit it, a on wi any supportin ocuments an or p ans
that address the tollowing re�yuirements to the CUKRE�T PLANNING �IVISION, ATTN: C�ary
Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EXT 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
16. Prior to building perniits, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing a screen along the
nonhern propeny line of Lot 1 in accordance with Section 18.745.050.
17. Prior to building pernuts,the applicant shall demonstrate the building height for Lot 2 is consistent with Section
18.730.020.G
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOA'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 3 OF 19
18. Prior to demolition and building pernlits,the applicant shall position fencing as directed by the project arborist
in his report dated May 28? 200g to rotect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall protect all trees and
major vegetauon to be retauied with�ive or six (5': 6') foot high chain link fences. Fences are to be mounted
on two inch diameter galvanized iron posts,driven uzto the ground to a depth of at least 2-feet at no more than
10-foot spacing. The applicant shall ensure all proposed tree protecuon fencing is installed and inspected bythe
City Forester and allow access by the City Ar6onst for the purpose of morutonng and inspection of the uee
protecnon to verify that the tree protection measures are per�orrrung adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or
maulta�n tree protecuon fencuig ui the des��gnated locations shall be grounds for unmediate suspension of work
on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. Fencing shall remaui in place
through the duration of home building. After approval from the City Forester, the tree protecuon measures
may be removed.
19. If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal
detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely unpacts to the trees. The proposai shall be
reviewed and approved by the Cary Arborist before proposed work can proceed within a tree protecuon zone.
The Ciry Arbonst may require changes prior to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is
occiu7-ing withu7 the tree protection zone and submit a surrunary repon cert�fying that the work occurred per
the prop�osal and will not significantly impact the health and/or stabihty of the trees. This note shall be included
on the Tree Protection Plan.
20. The applicant shall have an on-�oing responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written
reports to the City Arborist, at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist monitors the construction
acuvities from irutial tree protection zone ('I'PZ) fencing installation through the building construction phase.
The reports shall evaluate the condition and location ot the tree protecuon fencuig, determuie �f any changes
occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was
reduced then the Project Arbonst shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the
overall, iong-term health and stabiliry of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted to the.City Arbonst at the
scheduled intervals, and if it appears.the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan are not beuig followed by the
contractor or a sub-contractor, the Gty can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the
Ciry Arborist and the Project Arbonst.
21. Prior to issuance of building pernzits, the applicant or builder shall submit site plan drawin s indicating the
locations of trees that were preserved on the lot during site development. In addition, the p�ans shall include
accurate locations of tree canopy driplines and protection fencuig, and a si nature of a�pproval from the project
ar�regarding the placement and construction techruques to be emp�oyed in 6uiId�ing the structures. All
proposed protecuon fencing shall be installed and inspected prior to commencing construction. The fencing
shaIl remain in place through the duration of all of the building construction phases, until the Certificate o}
Occupancy has 6een approved.
The a plicant shall pre are a cover letter and submit it, along with any su orting documents and/or plans
that address the }ollowing requirements to the ENGINEERING �EPARTMENT, ATTN: XIM
MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall cleariy identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
22. Prior to issuance of building pernzits,the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a paper copy
of the recorded final plat.
23. Prior to issuance of building permits the public improvements in SW 74`'' Avenue must be completed by
SUB2006-00010. If not completed, the applicant will be required to complete the improvements prior to
issuance of building perniits.
24. The applicant shall either place the e�stin� overhead utiliry lines along SW 74`'' Avenue underground as a part
of this project,or theyshall paythe fee ui-heu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated bythe frontage of
the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $70.00 per lineal foot. If the fee option �s chosen, the
amount will be $3,850.00 and it shall be paid prior to issuance of building pernuts.
25. During issuance of the building pernzit for Parcels 1 and 2,the applicant shall pay the standard water quality and
water quantity fees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest approved by CWS).
NOTICC�OF DIRECI'OR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 4 OF 19
PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED:
The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supportin� documents and/or plans
that address the following requirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary
Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EXT 2434. The cover letter shall cicarly identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
26. 1'rior to final inspecrion for Lots 1 and 2, the applicant shall submit a fmal report by the Project rlrborist
certif��ing the health of protected trees and that the strcet trees were properly planted per the approved streer
tree plan. Tree protecrion measures ma��be removed and fmal inspecuon authonzed upon reeiew and approval
b�� the Cin-�rborist.
27. Priar to final inspecrion for Lots 1 and 2, the a�plicant shall submit a letter to the Citt� from'1'ualatin L'alle�� I��ire
& Rescue ('I�'F&R) demonstrating that the esusttng fire h�-drant is capable of provic�ing the necessary fire flow
demand.
28. Prior to final inspecrion for Parcel #2, the applicant/owner shall record a deed restricrions for both Parcels #1
and #2 to the effect that am� e�isting trcc grcater than G" diamcter ma`- be remo�-ed onit if the tree dies or is
hazardous according to a certified arborist. "11ie deed restricrion ma�- be removed or will�be considered in�-alid
if a tree j�reser�-ed in accc�rdance�4ith tlus decision should either die or be remo�•ed as a hazardous tree.
THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS OF THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION NOTED UNDER THE PROCESS AND APPEAL SECTION
OF THIS DECISION.
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Pro�ertv Histor�
The subject propertv is located within the Cit�� of Tigard. 11ie property is desigciateci I.c�w-Densin� Residential with
Planned De�•elopment (PD) overlay on the Tigard Comprehensive Plan �fap. The subject propert}' was originall�-
developed with a single-famil� dwelling in 1952. In 2006 the subject propern• was included in the White Oak `'illage
Planned De�-elopment (PD) (SL B2006-00010, PDR2006-00001, ZON2007-00001) to pro�-ide access from SW 74`n
1lvenue. While the applicant will construct public unpro�-emcnt� c>n the subject parcel as part of the White Oak Village
PD, the proposed parririon is separate from the PD project. Because of the small size of thc parcel (.40 acres) and lack
of any si�,mificant natural resources, staff deterinined that the standards for planned development review are not
applicable to the subject site and will not be required for this applicarion.
Site Informarion and Pro�osal llescri�rions
'I1ie site is located �vitivn a large block with a perimeter of approximately G,200 lineal feet, bounded bj- Highwa�- 99W
and Pfaffle on the south,SW 78`h��-enue on the west, SW Spruce Street on the north,and SW 71"��i-enue on the east.
The site is located at the terminus of SW 74`�' .��-enue south of Spruce Street. The subject site is bordered by developed
land zoned R-12 (PD) to the west,R-4.5 to the north, and GG to the east and south.
The applicant is requesting approval to pararion one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into two lots of 8,780 square
feet and A,S�O square feet. The applicant proposes to remo�re the existing single-famil�� home and build two new
single-family�detached homes. Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot.
SECTION IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
'The Cin� mailed norice to properry o�vners within 500 feet of the subject site providing them an opportunit�- to
comment. One written comment was received from Jim �tilne regarding the access linking the White Oak �rillage
devel��menT�vith Hw�� 99 which nins along property belon�ring to 1�1r. ��ilne at 11G43 SW Pacific Hwy.
NO'1'ICI�.O1�lllRf{(;I'(1R'�l�l�:(:l�l(l� �f1.V21N�li-�NNxiG/\wl fl�ll�:O.Af�P.Vt'I'I'l'I()ti P:�GI�:5OI�19
RESPONSE: Mr. Milne raises issues regarding �contractor impacts to his buildin� along an access way between the
White Oak Village and Hw�99. The access is designed as a pedestnan and bicy�le access with surface
stormwater conveyance for the approved White Oak Village planned development. The proposed
application for a muior land partit�on LS not adjacent to Mr. Milne's property and is not related to his
concerns. A1 Dicl�nan, City Engineering Department,has relayed Mr. Milne's concerns to Len Dalton,
owner of the White 4ak V�llage project for resolution of the issue.
SEC'I'ION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIAAND FINDINGS
Planned Develo�ments (18.350.020.C.5�
In the case of an existing planned development overlay zone, once construction of the detailed plan has been completed,
subsequent applications conforming to the detailed plan shall be reviewed under the provisions required in the chapter
which apply to the particular land use application.
The decision for White Oak Village Subdivision (SUB2006-00010, PDR2006-00001, ZON2007-00001) approved a PD
overlayon three parcels.The subject parcel was required for an extension of SW 74`''Avenue for access to the proposed
development on the other two parcels. The subject parcel contained an existing residence that was retained and situated
such that the access improvements could be made without any conflicts. The access improvements on the subject lot
for the benefit of White C�ak Village have been completed. Therefore, this application for a minor land partition is
subject to the Land Partitions Chapter(18.420) and the applicable specific development standards in T"itle 18.
Land Partitions (18.420�
The proposed partition complies with all statutory and o�iinance requirements and regulations;
The proposed partition complies or can be made to comp ly with all statutory and ordinance requirements and
regulations as demonstrated by the analysis contained within this adininistrative dec�sion and through the imposition of
conditions of development approval. Provided all necessary conditions are satisfied as part of the development and
building process,this criterion�s met.
There are adequate public facilities available to serve the proposal;
Public facilities are discussed in detail later in this decision under Chapter 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement
Standards). Based on the analysis provided herein, Staff finds that adequate public facilities are availaable to serve the
proposal. Therefore,this critenon�s met.
All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards;and
The public facilities and proposed improvements are discussed and conditioned later in this decision under Chapter
18.8 r0 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards). Improvements will be reviewed as part of the pernut process and
during construction, at which tune the appropnate review authority will ensure that Caty and applicable agency
standards are met. Based on the analysis in this decision,Staff finds that this criterion is met.
All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below:
The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requireinent of the applicable zoning
district,
The ininunum lot width required for the R 4.5 zoning district is 50 feet. Parcel# 1 is 90 feet in width;parcel #2 is 85
feet wide. Therefore,this cnterion has been met.
The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning district In the case of a flag lot,the accessway may
not be included in the lot area.
The inuiunum lot area requirement in the R 4.5 zoning district is 7,500 square feet for detached
single-family units. The proposed partition creates two (2) lots that are 8,780 square feet (Lot 1) and 8,500 square feet
(Lot 2).The access for Lot 2 �s through an easement over Lot 1. The easement�s 1,200 square feet in area,wl�uch leaves
a 7,580 square feet not including the access,consistent with this standard.
NOTTCE OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 6 OF 19
Each lot created through the partition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least 15 feet or have a
legally recorded minimum 15-toot wide access easement
The pro�osed�artition plat (Sheet 2 of 3) illustrates that the proposed parcels meet tlus standard as Lot 1 has 60 feet
and Lot has 0 feet of}rontage on SW 74`�Avenue.
Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district
Setbacks for the R 4.5 zoning district are as follows: front = 20 feet; side = 5 feet;side on a corner = 15 feet; and rear
=15 feet. The applicant has proposed to remove the e�sting dwelling.The ap�plicant shows building envelopes for Lots
1 and 2 consistent wrth the setbacks required in the R 4.5 zorung d�stnct. Setback standards for proposed Lots 1 and 2
will be reviewed at the time of building pernzit submittal. Therefore,this cnterion is met.
When the partitioned lot is a flag lot, the developer may determine the location of the front yard,provided that
no side yard is less than 10 feet Structures shall generally be located so as to ma�cimize separation from
existing structures.
A flag lot is proposed for I.ot 2. The building envelope is shown on the PreliminaryLayout (Sheet C2) which identifies
the north as the front with a 10-foot side yard to the west and a 23-foot side yard to the east, cons�stent with this
standard.
A screen shall be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an accessway is
located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accorciance with Sections 18.745.050. Screening may also be
required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed
development
The proposed paved drive for Lot 2 would be located within 10 feet of the adjacent property to the north. The
applicant proposes a fence or other screening but does not show it on the Preliminary Layout. Tlvs standard requires a
screen along the property line of a lot of record where the access drive is within 10 feet. Therefore, as a condition of
approval the apphcant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing a screen along the propertyline ui accordance with
Secnon 18J45.050.
The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway would have a
detrimental effect on fire-fighting capabilities.
The fire district ('I'VF&R) has reviewed the proposal and has not required an additional fire hydrant.However,TVF&R
did state that the e�vsting fire hydrant shown on the submitted drawuigs must be capable of providing the reqwred fire
flow dcmand. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the applicant shall sub�ut a letter to the Caty from TVF&R
demonstrating that the ex�sting fire hydrant is capable of providulg the necessaryfire flowdemand.
Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement which will ensune
access and maintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partition map.
The applicant states that access to proposed Lot 1 has not yet been deterniined but maay include a joint access with the
access proposed for Lot 2. There}ore, if joint access is proposed, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded
reciprocal access and inaintenance easement.
Any access way shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705,Access,Egress and Cir�culation.
This standard is addressed under Chapter 18J05 (Access,Egress and Circulation) later in this decision.
Where landfill and/or develo ment is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred year floodplain, the city
shall require consideration o�the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within
the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a
pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway
plan.
The subject lot has an elevation between 250 feet on the west to 255 feet on the east. The nearest floodplain is located
appro�nately 3,400 feet northwest at an elevation 170 feet. Therefore,this standard does not apply.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-OD006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 7 OF 19
An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in accordance with
Chapter 18.370,Variances and Adjustrnents. The applications for the partition and variance(s)/adjustment(s)
will be processed concurrendy.
The applicant has not applied for a variance.Therefore,this standard does not apply.
FINDING: The proposed minor land partition meets, or can meet,all of the relevant standards of the land partition
section as uidicated in the above findings and required in the following conditions of approval.
GONDI'ITONS:
. If joint access is proposed,the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded reciprocal access and
maintenance easement for Lots I and 2.
. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing a screen along the north property
line of proposed Lot 1 in accordance with Section 18.745.050.
. The applicant shall submit a letter to the City from TVF&R demonstrating that the existing fire
hydrant is capable of providing the necessary f�re flow demand.
Residential Zoning Districts (18.510�
Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2 below:
TABLE 18.510.2- DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES
STANDARD R-4.5 Pamell Par�cel2
Minimum Lot Size
- Detached unit 7,500 sq.ft 8,780 sq.ft. 8,500 sq.ft.
- Duplexes 10,000 sq.ft. (7,580 sq.ft.
- Attached unit w/o access
Average Minimum Lot Width
- Detached unit lots 50 ft 90 ft. 85 ft.
- Duplex lots 90 ft.
- Attached unit lots
Maximum Lot Covera e - NA NA
Minimum Setbacks
- Front yard 20 ft. 20 ft. 20
- Side facing street on comer&through lots 15 ft. NA NA
- Side yard 5 ft 5/5 ft. 10/23 ft.
- Rear ya�i 15 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft.
- Side or rear yarci abutting more restrictive zoning district -- NA NA
- Distance between property line and front of garage 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft.
- Side Yard Setbacks for Fla Lots TDC 18.420.050 A 4 e 10 ft. NA 10/23 ft.
Maximum Hei ht 35 ft. TBD 35 TBD 35
Minimum Landsca e Re uirement - NA NA
FINDING: Prop os�ed Lou 1 and 2 can meet the development standards for the R 4.5 zone based on the
Preriminary Layout (Sheet C2). The development will be subject to review and approval at the time
of building permit application.
Access,Egress and Cir�ulation�18.705�
Continuing obli�ation of p%perty owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in
this tide are cont�nuing requirements for the use of any structure or pa�el of real property in the City.
The standards of this chapter will be a continuing obligation on the owners of these parcels.
Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals
which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stackin needs, sight distance
and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Waslungton County,the City and AASH�O.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-0000G/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 8 OF 19
The access for this two lot partition is at the eye-brow corner of SW 74th Avenue and "A" Street (under construction
with the White Oak Subdivision). The applicant's engineer, SR Design, submitted a preliminary sight distance
certification, dated May 29, 2008. The streets are both classified as local streets.with speed limits of 25 mph, which
reqwres a m;n;mlun of 250 feet sight distance in each direction from the access pouits.
The engineer states s��ght distance from the access points to the north on 74th Avenue was measured to be in excess of
250 feet. The sigh�t cGstance to the west in the direction of Street "A" was not detennined since the street is not fully
constructed at this time. The access points, however, are directly opposite Street "A", posing no sight distance
impediments.
Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be pennitted to be placed in the influence area of
collector or arterial street intexsections. Influence area of intersections is tFiat area where gueues of traffic
commonly form on ap�proach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a colIector or arterial
street intersection shaII be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat
of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater dependin upon the influence area, as determined
from C�ity Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by�e applicant's traffic engineer. In a case
where a pro�ect has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the apphcant must explore any op tion for shared
access with the ad jacent pa�el. If shared access is not possible or practical, the drivewa y shall be placed as
far from the inteisection as possible.
74th Avenue is classified as a local street. Therefore,this criterion dces not apply.
Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall
be 200 feet The minimum spacin�of drivewa�ys and streets along an artenal shall be 600 feet The minimum
spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet
No streets are proposed. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
Joint Access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or pa�els of land may agree to utilize joindy the same
access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, orp amels of land satisfies
the combined requirements as designated in this tide, provided: Satisfactoiy legal evidence shall be presented
in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and copies of the deeds,
easements,leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City.
The applicant states that access to proposed Lot 1 has not yet been deternuned but rna�y include a joint access with the
access proposed for Lot 2. There}ore, if joint access is proposed, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded
reciprocal access and maintenance easement.A condiuon has 6een unposed to this effect.
Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall
connect direcdy with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at
the required standards on a cont�nuous basis.
The applicant proposes direct access to SW 74�'Avenue,a public street. Therefore,this standard is met.
Minimum access requirements for residential use. Private residential access drives shall be provided and
maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code.
Each parcel will have a standard driveway with direct access to SW 74`� Avenue on flat land. Comments received from
Tualatui Valley Fire and Rescue state that there are no conflicts with the proposed access. Therefore, th�s standard is
met.
Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with app roved provisions for the turning around
of fire apparatus by one of the following:a) A circular,paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured
from center point to outside edge of 35 feet; b) A hammerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the
hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet; c) The maximum cross
slope of a required turnaround is 5°/o.
The access drive is shown as 60 feet,consistent with this standard.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 9 OF 19
To provide for increased traffic movement on congested streets and to eliminate turning movement
problems, the Director may restrict the location of driveways on streets and require the location of
driveways be placed on adjacent streets, upon the finding that the proposed access would cause or
increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles• or
cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a clear and present danger to the pu�lic
health, safety, and general welfare.
SW 74th Avenue is a local street serving a low and medium densiry residential neighborhood. There is no reason to
restrict the location of the proposed additional driveway.Therefore,this standarci does not apply.
FINDING: The standards of the Access Management chapter(18.705) have been satisfied.
Density Com�utations (18JL5�:
A. Definition of net development area. Net development area, in acres, shall be deternuned by
subtracting the following land area(s) from the gross acres, which is all of the land included in the
legal descnpt�on of the property to be developed:
1. All sensitive land areas
2. All land dedicated to the public for park puiposes;
3. All land dedicated for public rights-of way.
4. All land proposed for pnvate streets;and
5. A lot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an existing dwelling
is to remain on the site.
B. Calculating maximum number of residential units. To calculate the maacimum number of residential
units per net acre,divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of square
feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning distric�
G Calculating minimtun number of residential units. As re quired by Section 18.510.040, the minimum
number of residential units per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the maxunum number of
units detemiined in Subsect�on B above by 80% (0.8).
The subject .40-acre parcel totals 17,280 square feet. There are no sensitive land areas or private streets within the
subject proposal. Since pubhc right-of-way dedication and im rovements occurred with the adjacent White Oak
Village development, the net developable area is 17,280 square �eet. As the muiunum lot size for the R 4.5 zone is
7,500 square feet,the maxunum number of lots is 2 (17,28D/7,500 square feet =2.3 lots). The m�n�mum number of
lots �s one (2 x .80 = 1.6). Pursuant to 18.730.050.E the lot area for a flag lot shall be provided entirely within the
building site area exclusive of any access way. The area for Lot 1 as proposed �s 8,780 square feet consutent with
this standard. The proposed partition creates two (2) separate lots in conformance with the density requirements.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the Density Computation Standards have been met.
Building Heights And Flag Lots (18.730.020.C�
Limitations on the placement o residential structures on flag lots apply when a flag lot is created after
April 15, 1985 by an approved partition. The maximum height for an attached or detached single-family,
du.plex, or multiple-family residential structure on a fla lot or a lot having sole access from an accessway,
pnvate drive or easement is 1-1/2 stories or 25 feet, w�ichever is less, except that the maximum height
may be 2-1/2 stories or 35 feet, whichever is less, provided:
a. The proposed dwelling othenvise complies with the applicable dimensional requirements of the zoning
district;
b. A 10 feet side yard will be preserved;
c. A residential structure on any abutting lot either is located 50 feet or more from the nearest point of the
and�ect dwelling, or the residential structure exceeds 1-]/2 stories or 25 feet in height on any abutting lot;
NOT'IC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 10 OF 19
� d. Windows 15 feet or more above grade shall not face dwelling unit windows or patios on any abutting lot '
unless the proposal includes an agreement to plant trees capable of mitigating direct views, or that such
trees exist and will be preserved.
3. Where an agreement is made to plant trees capable of mitigatin direct views, the agreement shall be
deemed a condition of approval under the pmvisions of Section 18.3�0.030 D.
4. The tree planting agreement shall be a condition of Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review for three
or more attached units or a multiple-fainily residential structure, or, at the time of issuance o� building
permits, for single detached units, one duplex or two attached residential units.
FINDING: The applicant has shown in the Preliminary Layout (Sheet C2) that 10-foot side yards will be
preserved. It appears that dwellings on adjacent properties may not be more than 50 feet from
the building envelope. Therefore, the flag lot height limitation may apply to the proposed flag
Lot 2. The setbacks must be confirmed at the time of building pernut review. To ensure tlus
standard is met, the applicant shall demonstrate the building height �s consistent with the
Section 18.730.020.0
CONDITTON:
♦ Prior to building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the building height for Parcel
#2 is consistent with the Secnon 18.730.020.0
Landscaping and Screenin� (18.745�
Existing vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as possible: 1) The developer shall provide methods
for the protection of e�ustin� vegetation to remain during the construction process; and 2) the plants to be
saved sFiall be noted on the randscap e plans (e. ., areas not to be disturbed can be fenced, as in snow fencing
which can be placed around the indvidual trees�.
The applicant's Preluninary Layout (Sheet C2) shows tree protection fencing for existing on-site trees and trees on
adjacent parceLs,cons�stent with th�s standard.
Street Trees
Section 18.745.040.A: All development projects frontin� on a pu�blic street, private street or a private driveway
more than 100 feet in length approved after the adopt�on of tliis tide shall be required to plant street trees in
accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040C.
Tlvs requirement has not been met. No street trees are shown on the 74�'Avenue/A Street frontage. There appears to
be sufficient room for one street tree in the�plantin strip between the two water meters. The applicant states that street
trees may be planted with the White Oak ViIlage (P�),but no street trees were included in those plans.
The applicant shall include a note on their development plan that slight variations in placement may be required due to
driveways, utiliues, etc., but every attempt will be made to keep the same net number of street trees that are shown on
the Street Tree plan.
Buffering and Screening Requirements
Section I8.745.050: Buffer Matrix.The Buffer Matrices contained in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2 shall be used
in calculating widths of buffering/screening and required improvements to be installed between proposed
uses and abutting uses or zoning districts;
The proposed land panition occuts on a parcel.zoned R 4.5. The adjacent zone to the east and south is GG.According
to T"able 18J45.1 Buffer Matrix, when an ex�sting/abutting use is a GG zone or a parking lot, a Level C buffer �s
required. The Pre�imulary Layout (Sheet C2) does not show any buffering or screening�. Therefore, the applicant shall
subrrut a rev�sed plan cons�stent with Table 18J45.2,Buffer Combinauons for Landscapuig and Screening.
FINDING: The landscape and Screening standards have not all been met. However with conditions of
approval requinng street trees and buffering of adjacent uses,these standarc�s can be met.
NOTTC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-0000G/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 11 OF 19
GONDI'ITONS:
. The applicant shall submit a revised develo�ment plan showin street trees per TDC
18J45.040 and include a note on their development plan t�at slight vanations in
p lacement may be require d due to driveways, u u l ities, etc., but every attempt w i ll be
made to keep the same net number af street trees that are shown on the Street Tree
plan.
. The applicant shall submit a revised development pl�an showing required buffering and
screerung south and east of the site consistent withTI'able 18.745.2,Buffer
Tree Removal(18.790�
A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified ari�orist shall be provided
for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or par�els for which a develop ment ap plication for a subdivision
partition, site development review, planned development or conditionai use is tiled. Protection is preferrec�
over removal wherever possible.
As required,the applicant has provided a tree plan conducted byPhil Hickey,a certified arborist which meets all the
required elements except a protection program defining standards and methods that wrll be usec�bythe a plicant to
protect trees during and after construction. All existuig trees will be retained;therefore no mitigation�be required.
The fencing and tree protection specifications in the arborist report need be transferred accuratelyto the site plans. The
tree protecuon plan needs to address tree protection standards and methods for after constniction. SpecificaIly�they
needto address acceptable landscaping practices and materials around preserved trees.T�vs additional inforn�at�on can
be provided on the site plans as we�l. Finally,the revised tree protection plan needs to include a signature of approval
from the project arborist.
Section 18.790.040 states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may thereafter be
removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of
approval for a conditional use, and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter.
The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit
affected by this section to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous
according to a certified axfiorist The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree
preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a haza�clous tree. The form of
tlus deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director.
A condition of approval will ensure that this standard is met.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Tree Removal Standards have not all been met. In orcier to
meet these standards,the applicant shall satisfythe following conditions of approval:
CONDI'ITONS:
. The applicant shall transfer accurately the fencing and tree protecuon specifications in
the arborist rep�rt to the site plans. The tree protection plan needs to address tree
protection standards and methods for after construcuon. Spec�fically, they need to
address acc�eptable landscaping practices and materials around preserved trees. Tlvs
additional in�ormation can be provided on the site plans as well. The revised tree
protection plan must include a signature of approval from the project arborist.
. The applicant shall position fencing as directed by the �project arborist in his report
dated IVIay 28, 2008 to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall protect all
trees and major vegetation to be retained with five or six (5' - 6� foot high chain link
fences. Fences are to be mounted on two inch diameter galvanized iron posts, driven
into the ground to a depth of at least 2-feet at no more than 10-foot spacing. The
applicant shall� position fencmg as directed bythe project arborist to rotect the trees to
be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Arborist �or the purpose of
monitoring and inspection of the tree protecuon to verify that the tree pmtecuon
measures are perfornzing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or mauitaui tree
protection fencing in the designated locations shall be rounds for irrunediate
suspension of work on the site until remediation measures an�/or civil citations can be
processed.
NOTICE OF DIRECTORS DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 12 OF 19
. If work is required within an established tree protection zone,the project arborist shall
prepare a proposal detailing the construction techruques to be emp loyed and the likely
unpacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the Caty Arbonst
before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arborist
may requu-e changes pnor to approval. The project arbonst shall be or.site while work
is occurnng withui the tree protection zone and subrrut a s�iaryreport certifying that
the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly unpact the health and/or
stability of the trees. Th�s note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan.
. Prior to issuance of building, perniits, the applicant or builder shall submit site plan
drawings indicating the locanons of trees that were preserved on the lot dunng site
development. In addition, the plans shall include accurate locations of tree canopy
driplines and protection fencing, and a signature of approval from the pro�ect arborLSt
regarduig the� placement and construcuon techrugues to be employed m �uilding the
structures. AIl proposed protection fencing�shali be.installed and inspected pnor to
commencing construcuon. The fencmg shall remaui in place through the durauon of
all of the building construcuon phases, until the Certificate of Occupancy has been
approved.
. Prior to final inspection for each lot, the applicant shall submit a final report by the
Project Arborist cenifyu�g the health of protected trees and that the street trees were
properly planted per the approved street tree plan. Tree protection measures may be
removed and f inal inspecuon authorized upon review and approval by the City
Arborist.
. The applicant shall have an on-goin�responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist
has submitted wntten reports to the ty Arbonst, at least once every two weeks,as the
Project Arborist monitors the construction activities from initial tree�Protect�on zone
(TPZ) fencing installation through the building construction hases. The reports shall
evaluate the condition and location of the tree rotection �encing; deternune �f any
changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part o�the Tree Protection Plan has been
violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced,then the Project Arborist shall certify that
the construction activities did not adversely unpact the overall, long-term health and
stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted to the Ciry Arborist at the
scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan are not
being followed by the.contractor or a sub-contractor, the City can stop work on the
pro�ect unt�l an inspecuon can be done bythe CityArborist and the Pro�ect Arbonst.
. Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Ckcupancy, the applicant/owner shall record
deed restrictions to the effect that any e�sting tree greater than 6" diameter may be
removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous accorduig to a cert�fied arborist. The deed
restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in
accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree.
Visual Clearance Areas (18J95�
T 's Chapter requires t a c ear vision area shall be maintained on the cornets of all property adjacent to
intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area
shall contain no vehicIe hedge pl�antin fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction
exceedin three �3) feet in height TI'he coc�e provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall
be visual�y clear etween three (3) and eight(�) feet in height Trees may be placed within this area provided
that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by
measuring from the corner, 30-feet along the right-of-way and along the driveway and connecting thesc two
points with a straight line.
FINDING: The applicant's Preluninary Layout (Sheet C2) shows the vision clearance area for the access for the
proposed Lot 2,cons�stent v�nth tlus standard.
Im�act Study(18.390�
Section 18.360.090 states: "The Director shall make a finding with res�ect to each of the following criteria
when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application: '
NOTTC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-OOOOG/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 13 OF 19
� Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of
development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the
study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the
development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users.
In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the
applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide
evidence that supports that the real roperty dedicat�on is not roughly propoctional to the pro�ected impacts
of the develo ment Section 18.390.�40 states that when a condition of ap roval reyuires tlie transfer to the
public of an interest in real propeity,the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion
that the interest in real propeity to be transferned is roughly propottional to the impact the proposed
development will have on t1�ie pubLc.
The applicant has submitted an impact study. SW 74th Avenue is currently partially improved and will be fully
improved per SDR2006-00010. The applicant will be extending sarutary sewer and storm draulage connections to the
two parceLs to account for the additional impervious area beuig added to the site and to mitigate for the loss of the
present septic drain.field. Sewer is already ava�lable and has sufficient capacity to serve the development. Other
unpacts to public facilities are offset bythe collection of Systems Development Charges (SDC's) collected at the time of
bulding pemut �ssuance. Therefore, th�s standard can be satisfied through meeung the conditions of approval in this
dec�sion.
The TTF will be paid at the time of building pernuts and is a mitigation measure required for new development. Based
on Washington Cfluntyf' es,TTF's are e ected to recapture 20 percent of the traffic impact of new development on
the Collector and Arte�treet system, �e TTF for the proposed development �s $3,020 (1 new dwe]luig urut x
$3,020/per dwelling unit).
Based on the estimate that TIF fees cover 20% of the ' act on major street improvements cityvvide, a fee that would
cover 100% of this proJ'ect's traffic imp act is $15,100 ($3�20 =0.20). The difference between the TTF paid and the full
impact is considered the tuuzut' ated impact on the street system. The Luunitig ated impact of this project on the
transponation system is $12,080�$15,100 - $3,020). The apphcant is not required to dedicate any property and �s not
antiapated to uicur any mitigated costs.Therefore,the reqwred improvements meet the rough proportionahty test.
PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS
Street And Utility Im rovements Standards (Section 18.8101:
Chapter 18.810 provi�es construcdon stand`a�or the implementation of public and private facilities and
utilit�es such as streets, sewers,and drainage. The applicabie standards are addressed below:
Streets:
Improvements:
Sect�on 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in
accordance with the TDC standards.
Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing
street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC.
Minimum Ri hts-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E rec�uires a Neighborhood Route (without
bike lanes) to�ve a 54 toot right-of-way width and 32-foot paved section. Other improvements rec�uired may
include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and
street trees.
This site lies ad�acent to SW 74th Avenue and "A" Street, which is classified as a local street on the City of T"igard
Transportation �lan Map. The right-of-way for the eye-brow corner was dedicated with the land use for SUB 2006-
0001�,White Oak Subdrvision.
SW 74th Avenue (eye-brow corner) is currently not improved. However, SUB2006-00010 has been conditioned to
complete these u'np�rovements. The public street unp rovements as required by SUB2006-00010 must be complete prior
to�ssuance of builduig pernuts in orcier to mitigate the impact from tivs development.
NOT'ICE OF DIRECI'OR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-0000G/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 14 OF 19
� Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed
which shows the pattern of existin and proposed future stmets from the boundaries of the proposed land
division. This section also states �t where it is necessary to give access or pernut a satisfactory future
division of ad'oining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a
barricade sha� be constnicted at the end of the stree� These street stubs to adjoining properties are not
considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the
adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be consttucted at the end of the street by the property
owners wluch shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included
in the str+eet construction cost Tem orary hammerliead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be
constn.icted for stub streets in excess o�150 teet in length.
Due to existing development and access control on I-�'ighway 99 there are no oppomuuties to provide future streets or
extensions of streets.
Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten pencent on arterials, 12% on
collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments
with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shalI be as
determined by the City Engineer.
The grade along the 74'�'Avenue frontage does not exceed 12%,therefore this criterion is met.
Block Desig ns - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with
due regard to providing adequate buildin sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for
convement access, circulation, control an� safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and
oppoctunities of topography.
Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks fotmed by streets shall not exceed 1,800
feet measured along the right-of-way line except
• Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-
e�usting development or,
• For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways,major collectors or railroads.
• For non-residential blocks in which internal public cir�ulahon provides equivalent access.
No new streets are being created with this partiuon. Therefore,this standard is not applicable.
Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or ri ht-of
ways shall be provided when full street connechon is not�ossible. Spacing between connections sha�be no
more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing
development patterns,or stnct adherence to other standards in the code.
Siinilarly,since no streets are being proposed,and no connections are required,this standard is not applicable.
Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 tunes the average
lot width, unless the par�el is less than 1.5 t�mes the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district
Proposed Lots 1 and 2 are less than 1.5 times the ininiin lot size and are exempt from this standard.
Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of fronta�e on public or private
streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land pattition, 18.420.050.A.4.c ap lies, which requires a pa�el to
either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a mimmum 15-foot wide reco�ed access easement In cases
where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 fee�
The�roposed development is a minor land partition.Proposed Lot 1 has 60 feet of frontage on SW 74�'Avenue;Lot 2
has 0 feet of frontage on SW 74th Avenue.'Therefore,tivs criterion is met.
Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be
located on both sides of acterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets
shall have sidewalks on at least one side.
NOTICE OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 15 OF 19
� The public sidewalk is required as a condition of SUB2006-00010.. The�applicant.has a�reed to bond for the sidewalk
along this pro�ect frontage wlule the homes are under construction. The apphcant shall provide for this bonding
through the Clt�s PFI perrrut process.
Sanitary Sewers:
Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitaty sewer be installed to serve each new
develo ment and to connect developments to existin mains m accordance with the provisions set forth in
Design and Construction Standards}or Sanitary and Su rface Water Management(as adopted by Clean Water
Sernces in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the
comprehensive plan.
Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional
development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan.
There is an e�risting 8 inch sanitary sewer line in SW 74th Avenue. The applicant's plans show separate latera]s for each
lot.
Stomi Drainage:
General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm
water and flood water runoff.
Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvett or other drainage facility
shall be lar�e enou h to accommodate potential runoff froin its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside
or outside tlie deve�opment The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility based on the
pro� visions of Design and Construction Standards for Samtary and Surface Water Management�as adopted by
Clean Water Seivices in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments).
There are no upstream drainage ways that impact this development.
Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer
that the additional runoff resulti�ng from the development will overload an exist�ng drainag e facility, the
Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for
improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff
caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and
Surface Water Management(as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or
amendments).
In 1997, C1ean Water Services (C`�'1S) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek
Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a
stormwater detention/effective imp ervious area reduction prog ram resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up
to the 25-year event. The Caty will require that all new developments resultin in an increase of impervious surfaces
provide onsite detention faciliues,unless the develo�pment is located adjacent to�anno Creek For those developments
adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff wiIl be pernutted to d�scharge without detention.
The G1X/5 standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land partiuons. It would
be impractical to require� an on-srte water quantity facility to accommodate detention of the storm water from Lots 1
and 2. Rather, the G� standards provide that apphcants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed
appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee u�-lieu on this apphcation.
The ap licant's plans show the two private laterals combuung into one prior to connecting to the public storm line.
This�not be allowed. The PFI Per-mit plans shall be revised to provide separate laterals with separate connections to
the public storm sewer main.
Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways:
Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments ad'oining proposed bikeways identified on
the Cit}�s adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions �or the iuture extension of such bikeways
through the dedication of easements or nght-of-way.
SW 74`''Avenue is not classified as a bicycle facility.
NOTICE OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 160F 19
� Utilities:
Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication,
lighting and cable television servrces and related facilities shall be placed underg ro� und, except for surface
mounted transformeis, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above
ground, tempora�y utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operahng at 50,000
volts or above, and:
. The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the
unde round services;
. The �ty reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities;
. All underground utilit�es, incIuding sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the
developer, shall be constructedp nor to the surfacing of the streets;and
. Stubs for service connections sFiall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when
service connections are made.
Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-
lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing
utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the
cost and technical difficulty of under-groundin� the ut�lities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in
conjunction with the development The determinat�on shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common,
but not the only such situat�on is a short frontage development for which under- rounding would result in
the placement ot�additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities�acilities. An applicant for
a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public
right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding.
There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW 74th Avenue. If the fee in-lieu is proposed,it is egual
to $70.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contairis the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 551uieal teet;
therefore the fee would be $3,850.00.
ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY
IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS:
Storm Water�ualit.x
The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water
Services (CWS) Desi�n and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which
require the construct�on of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65
�ercent of the phosphorus contained in 100 pe�ent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created
impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and
method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year.
The CWS standa.rds include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land partitions. It would
be impractical to require an on-site water quality facility to accommodate treatment of the storm water from Parcels 1
and 2. Rather, the C�X� standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed
appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this application.
Grading and Erosion Control:
CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and
other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development,
construction, grading, excavatin�, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS
regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to
issuance of City permits.
The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan with the PFI pern�it application.
Address Assignments:
The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses fo� rparceLs within the City of T' ard. An addressing fee in the
amount of$50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the Cityprior to�inal plat approval.
NOTTCE OF DIRECI'OR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 17 OF 19
Survey Requirements
The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates [NAD 83 (91)] on two monuments with a tie to the
Ci�s global positioning system (GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line
an shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat
shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid
north. These coordinates can be established by:
. GPS tie networked to the Cit�s GPS survey.
. By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network The applicant's engineer shall provide
the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (rnanholes, catch basins,water valves, hydrants and other
water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD
83 (91).
SECI'ION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
City of Tigard Building Department has reviewed the proposal and has not objections to it.
City of Tigard Public Works Depattment was notified of the proposed partition but did not comment.
City of Ti ard Arborist has reviewed the proposal and the applicant's tree removal plan conducted by a certified
arborist,P�I�ickey. The report does not contau�all four of the required components, and, �s therefore, unacceptable.
The City Arborist comments have been included in the findings for the Landscapuig and Screening and Tree Removal
Chapters, above.
SECI'ION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS
Verizon Wireless reviewed the proposal and stated that "Verizon has current facilities that will be impacted. The
developer will need to request a d�sconnect for the building that is to be removed. A 5 foot easement on the west
property luze is indicated but none on the adjacent Lot 27 and Tract D. Currently,Verizon has a pole in that area is the
cnyvacation the previous easement that allowed placement of that pole. Can it be move to the 5 foot easement?"
RESPONSE: The plans show a 6-foot PUE on the west propertyline which continues on to the adjacent Tract D and
from there along the frontage of Lot 27. Pursuant to Section 18.810.120.0 the City requires
undergrounding of util.ines. Future service to the subject lots will reqwre underground service in the
public utility easement as shown on the plan.
Clean Water Services has reviewed the roposal and issued a Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment, File No.
08001251 on May 28 2008. CWS reques�ted clarification on the storm connection planned for the proposed lots and
the definition of tlag�ots as it relates to the proposed access easement over proposed Lot 1 for the benefit of proposed
Lot 2.
RESPONSE: The CWS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land
partitions. It would be impracncal to require an on-site water quantity facility to accommodate
detention of the storm water from Lots 1 and 2. Rather the CWS standards provide that applicants
should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemec�appropriate. Staff recommends payment of
the fee uz-lieu on this application.
The ap licant's plans show the two private lateraLs combining into one prior to connecting to the public storm line.
11vs � not be allowed. The City has conditioned the apphcant to rev�se the PFI Pernzit plans to provide separate
laterals with separate connections to the publ.ic storm sewer main.
TDC 18.120.030.90.c allows flag lots to gain access through an easement across the frontage lot,as proposed.
Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed the proposal and has not objections to it.
NOTIC�OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 18 OF 19
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue submitted a comment letter dated June 23, 2008 endorsing the subject proposal
predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval:
1) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS- REOUIRED FIRE FLOW: The min;mum available fire flowfor
single familydwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supplyshall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If
the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger,the required fire flow shall be detennined according to IFC
Append'u�B. (IFC B 105.1)
The fire hydrant shown on the submitted drawings must be capable of supplying the required fire flow
demand.
SECTION VIII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION
Notice: Notice was mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owner of record within the required distance
X Af f ected goverrunent agencies
Final Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JULY 31,2008 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 15,2008 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
�eal:
The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise
adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in
accordance with Section 18390.040.G.2. of the Tigard C�mmunity Development Code which provides that a written
ap eal together with the re�quired fee shall be filed with the Director witlun ten(10) business days of the date the Notice
o}�ec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forn�s are available from the Planrung Div�sion of Tigard Cary
Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,TI'igard,Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the
specific issues identified in the wntten comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional
evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party durui.g the appeal
hearing, subject to any addiuonal rules of procedure that maybe adopted f rom time to tune by the appellate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 14,2008.
I�estions:
e any questions, please call the City of T"igard Pla�inuig Division,Tigard Caty Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,
T'igard,Oregon at(503) 639-4171.
�
� - -
4 �" ��— ul 31 2008
PREPARED BY: ary Pa enstecher DATE
Assoc e Planner
i:\curpin\gary\minor land panition\m1p2008-00006(white oal�\m1p2008-0000G decision.doc
NOTICE OF DIRECTOR'S DEQSION MLI'2008-00006/WHITE OAK PARTITION PAGE 19 OF 19
� -_- - _ UAK --- ST _� �
� �- . �
i . �� ' I � � � � GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATiON SVStEM
_ = I I — � ,- - _; VICINITY MAP
i L � � � I 2 --- � w'
.. � � W i - a
- - _ �n I� � ----------
� - � ————————__
- — - J-- - ' a I ' MLP2008-00006
PINE - �
- - ST
I =_________
- I
' - --a W 1 1.1� �1�11
I ,_ , i
-- - , � � ; PARTITION
; � i � a
� , � _— �
� _ , �
= SPRUGE _ - - - �°
°. -- -
_,-T-I ST � "
_� E-- i
- � i
�
—i �I ---
o w
-_ \ - - o o `_ � o Q - ----- li
ST ° ��,\
- ° V"
w �° o�
� - > o o - 9
_ Q J o 0 0 � LEGEND:
J � o o �f- _
o °o °o °o
o � /
^_ - — % suBJEC�'
�
- ' � sl�
-- � , /
�
� _
'1� r� � � .;`�uRSFERRI .
.Q. . �' . _� _
_ � - -- � � cF?T�� � ,':5+.
w
� s��'�� � '
' i
-
� �
`
----i ,.--- y .. • i:_ �. ^. �
� ��iJT Rp .... QP.
' �` �+rBONT9_D
— _—___._ �/ �i ({ • aI 1
_ . _ _ I='._ _— ... BEN7FD-�y// Y� "
� ��c� { DURNA,y�_ �RO
�'.
/
I
:�
2 -- -!�I --- , _ /,�,
f- -; �,�,_I
� I^ � —I Tigard Area Map
1 I I .
J N
ST 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet
�. . _ 7- � � ��� ,
I ��—
1"=388 feet
\��G /� } '��
QPG`
`,. i
_�.�-.�
_ A'��A��-A � — Information on this map is for general location only and
��- � � -- -, I should be verified with the Development Services Division.
i �
� I
13125 SW Hall Blvd
' .. I I._ � � . _... ' Tigard.OR 97223
, ,. .—__ —________ I ,
, -__________ 'r--T -- Y
. - .. �', (503)639-0171
� � �- �� httpJlwww.ci.tigard.or.us
CommiiYiity�evelopment Plot date:Jun 11,2008;C:\magiclMAGIC03.APR
� i , � � �, ���'
� � � � ::
° � � ' � ���o�
J I � EXISiING CENTERUNE � � � �
I � =a �
� � I I ° r� ��� 6i �
EXISTING CENTERLINE
I � � I I � � I x � �af �
SCAL['�'-10'
I � BARRICADE SET 2' OFF P/L ,a� P�'�
_ _ _ _ _ _ I �����
� ------ --�
15' WIDE DRIVEWAY
/ 0 W -- -yl Q�
Z SS LAT
— -- -- — — --
Q
X
— x X X � ��
� - �— --
54' R/W � 3 �. � � F� �/``v x x x —X— —�— �
--+'� �q - � s �
5' 8852'25" 357 'y' _ �4 � TREE PROP. TREE—�
A9" �rSD I.AT � �0' ACCESS� pROTECTION 20 PROTECTION k � �
— SD SD / UTIL ESMT. I FENCING fENCING Z j
��- . J
•A,� STREET i�—�`j -- --- - - o ,� g a� a
--- ---_,_, � � � / --r � � � � �� ,
\ SS LAT ��SION CLEARANCE Y n� a
`� �' // UNE I �---48---�-I I � � Q
� � //5/8" x 3/� � I h � O �F �
� �— — f ---\ \ ` � QvE,� � WATER I � I I � � � �
7 � 6 ' � / � �
/ I \`. � __ .�� / SD LAT I � x I
� ' rk�cr �� - - I I � �or 2 � , �
_-- � ��R M�TER/ / LOT 1 I � a,soo sF t � I �;
,' _-- — -- - — � 8,780 SF t I I
__j � _ � � 23' � a
_ —�— � TL 11030 a�, I 10' I I o k ;n
POSSIBLE I I 'tl�.
1 LC)I ��� 5'� TREE UNIT ap J POSSIBLE ---I �,
v, r BUILDABLE I I o �
PROTECTION �
I — I � _ FOOTPRINT I
FENCING �s, I —J ' I v�
— ----- — -
� TREE TO� �
(TYP)
- � — — — — � — — —� 15'
� 6, BE REMOVED h
107 1 .�--
� X x �� .� X . ,� . .
�� =g �
I r� a�'s2'��" w ��2 0 ' g� 3
� o.n , ero�ro�
--— — — � ��, ��
EM41/R.Df�
� � _—'_—.—. I plEtl��
v�ccr nnc
V1 ) LAYW T
I — I � L O T /_ I 9�EE L In1MBER
I VL
• �
: EXHIBIT�
White Oak V�llage, LLC MLP2008-00006
` 7955 SW Hall Blvd. WHITE OAK PARTITION
Beaverton, OR 97008
SR Design, LLC
Aan:Jeff Caines,AIQ'
8196 SW Hall Blvd.,Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
Jim Milne,Registered Civil Engineer
1312 SW 16`h Avenue
Portland, OR 97201-2516
1 �
� �Q. � Q � �
�
r
� e c v v�t wta�
PRS-AP'P.H�D BY
,,
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION
= �� LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION
. - :
City of Ti�ard Permit Center 93125 SW Hall Blvc1., Tigard, OR 97223
' ' � Phone: 503.639.4171 Fax.•503.598.1960
File Other Case#
Date By � Receipt# Fee Date Complete �
TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR
❑:ldjustment/\'ariance(I or In �:hlinor Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone Change(II�
❑Comprehensive Plan rlmendment(I� ❑Planned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change 1lnnexauon (I��
❑Conditional Use(III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance�mendment(I��
❑ Hisroric Overlay(IJ or II� ❑Site Development Review(II)
❑Home Occupation (II) ❑Subdivision(II or IIn
LOCATION lX'HEIiE PROPOSED ACTMTY WII.I.00CUR(Address if available)
11030 SW 74`h Avenue,Ti ard,OR 97223
TA}:MAI'S ls:TA7�LOT NOti.
Ma 1S1-36DB lot 2300
TOTAL SITE SI7E ZONING CLASSIFICATION
.44 1lcres / 19,16G s uare feet R-4.5 (Sin�le Famil�� Kcsidential 7,50U s ft minimum
nri��ic��!�7�
`Z'hite Oak�'illa e LLC—Len Dalton
�4AILING AllDILrSS/CII�/STATE/ZIP
79�� SV�'Hall Blvd.,Beaverton OR 97008
P}{pry�,Np. FAX N .
503 G2G-8483 503 62G-8485
PRIMARI'CONTACT PERSOI\ PHONE NO.
jeff Caincs, SK Desi�n A licant's Re 503 469-1213
I'ROPEf:'I�]'OA�'NF�R;llP.Ell HU1.DliR(A«ach lisr if more than one)
�'hite Oak Villa e LLC—Lcn Dalton
MAILI�G AI)DRESS/C11'Y/ST'ATE ZIP
7955 S�X%Hall Blvd.,Beaverton OR 97008
PHONH NO. FAX NO.
�03 626-8483 503 G26-8485
*�'hen the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written
authorizadon frc�m the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space pro�rided on the back of this form
or submit a writren authorizauon with this a lication.
PRC)Pl)S�ll,ti�;A1�1:Al:]'(]'lex_ce be speciFicj
Create a two arcel artition from the above listed arcel.
APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS
DESCRIBED IN THE"BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS"INFORMATION SHEET.
�
THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: �
�
♦ If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and
� subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval.
� All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan,attachments, and eahibits transmitted herewith, are
� true;and the applicants so acknowledge that an�permit issued, based on this application,map be revoked if it is
found that any such statements are false.
� ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria, and understands
the requirements for approving or denying the application(s).
�
SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED.
�
� '
�' � +�/ .`�" �`- tJ�' ��
� Owner's Signature � f.,�t� pPr1� ���,C}�.tx������ Date
�
_ ��--�3 ��� C�
Ap 'c t/ ' ent/Representarive's Signature Date b
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
4
�
e
= LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION
� e �
120 DAYS = 10/8/2008
FILE NO.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2008-00006
FILE TITLE: WHITE OAK PARTITION
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER: White Oak Village, LLC REP: SR Design, LLC
7955 SW Hall Blvd r�ttn: Jeff Caines, �ICP
Bea�Terton, OR 97008 819G SW Hall Blvd, Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 17,280-square foot (0.40-acre) lot into two
lots of 8,780 square feet and 8,500 square feet. The applicant proposes to remo�re the existing
single-family home and build two new single-family detached homes. Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag
lot. The subject property is adjacent to the White Oak Village Planned Development (PD) site and
owned by the same developer. White the applicant proposes to construct public improvements as
part of the White Oak Village PD, the proposed partition is separate from the PD project.
LOCATION: 11030 SW 74`''Avenue;Washington Counry Ta� Map 1S136DB,Tax Lot 2300.
ZONE: R-4.5: Low Densit� Residenrial. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached
single-family homes with or without accessory residenrial units at a mm�mum lot size of 7,500 square
feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and
insriturional uses are also permitted conditionally.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Communiry Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.745, 18.765,
18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
DECISION MAHING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I � TYPE II ❑ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV
COMMENTS WERE SENT: _JUNE 11,2008 COMMENTS ARE DUE:TLTNE 25, 2008
❑ HEr1RINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HEr,RING: TIME: 7:00 PM
❑PLANNING COMMISSION (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM
❑CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) Dr�TE OF HEI�RING: TIME: 7:30 PM
� STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) Dr�TE OF DECISION: �ULY 22, 2008
COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
� VICINITY Mr�P � UTILITY PI.ANS � SITE DISTANCE CERTIF.
� SITE PLAN � SERVICE PROVIDER LTR. � IMPr,CT STUDY
� NARRr�TIVE � TREE PL.�1N � OTHER: MISCELLr1NE0US
STAFF CONTACT: Emily Eng,Assistant Planner (503) 639-4171, Ext. 2712
White Oak Partition
Com leteness Item Met Not Met N/A Comments
18.745.030: X
General Provisions
18.745.040: X -One street tree is required along the
Street Trees frontage between the two water meters.
This could be conditioned.
18.745.050: X
Buffering and
Screenin
18.745.060: X
Re-ve etation
18.790.030: X* -The applicant requested that I use my
Tree Plan discretion in determining whether the
Requirement requirements of the Director's
Interpretation have been met. In my
opinion, they have demonstrated
compliance with the Interpretation.
-The fencing and tree protection
specifications in the arborist report need
be transferred accurately to the site
plans.
-The tree protection plan needs to
address tree protection standards and
methods for after construction.
Specifically, they need to address
acceptable landscaping practices and
materials around preserved trees. This
additional information can be provided
on the site lans as well.
18.790.050: X
Permit Applicability
Todd Prager
City Arborist
June 3, 2008
City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SVUHaII Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223
)une G, 2(108 ��
�
�
,�
?.t`�•';i~�;
Jeff Caines,AICP .,� R �'� �
SR Design, LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
RI;: Completeness Review-White Oak Partition
Case File No. MLP2008-00006
Dear Jeff: �
The Cit,y has received your applicarion for Minor Land Partirion (MLP2008-00006) to divide
one lot into two at 11030 SW 74`h Avenue. Staff has determined the materials to be
substantively complete, provided that the plans are revised to show the following:
• Label centerline
• Provide street/ROW widtli dimensions
• Call out meter size
The following is necessary so that j�our application can be deemed complete:
• Four (4) copies of entire narrative bindex only (we have 3 already, trying to save pp)
• Seven (7) sets of full-size plans only
• Sui (6) copies of reduced plans only
• Two (2) sets of business-size envelopes with labels aff�ed and itrst-class stamps (not
metered)
The review process will begin upon completeness and takes an average of 6 weeks. Please
be aware that staff has not reviewed the application for compliance with the code and may
request additional items during the review period.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (503) 718-2712. Thank you.
Sincerely,
L%� � ---
�—
Emily Eng
Assistant Planner
Enclosure: Public Facilit��Plan Checklist
Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772
PUBLIC FACIUTY PLAN Project: ._,�ite Oak MLP
COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 6/6/OS
GRADING
� Existin and ro osed contours shown.
❑ Are there radin im acts on ad�acent arceis?
❑ Ad�acent arcel rades shown.
❑ Geotech stud submitted?
STREETISSUES
� Ri ht-of-wa clearl shown.
❑ Centerline of street s clearl shown. Label centerline
� Street name s shown.
� Existin / ro osed curb or ed e of avement shown.
❑ Street rofiles shown.
❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo
on ad�acent arcel s , etc.
❑ Traffic Im act and/or Access Re ort
❑ Street rades com liant?
❑ StreeUROW widths dimensioned and a ro riate? Provide dimensions
❑ Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width
a ro riate?
❑ Other:
SANITARY SEVNER ISSUES
� Existin / ro osed lir�es shown. — _� �
❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? �_
WATER ISSUES
� Existin / ro osed lines w/ sizes noted?
� Existin / ro osed fire h drants shown?
❑ Pro osed meter location and size shown? Call out meter size
❑ Pro osed fire rotection s stem shown?
STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES
� Existin / ro osed lines shown?
❑ Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention
rovided?
❑ Water ualit /detention facilit shown on lans?
❑ Area for facilit match re uirements from calcs?
❑ Facilit shown outside an wetland buffer?
❑ Storm stubs to ad�acent arcels re uired/shown?
The submittal is hereby deemed � COMPLETE ❑ INCOMPLETE
gy: �� J� Date: 6/6/08
REVISED: O6/06/08
LAND USE APPLIC: 'ION D�eect:_�-y ��-���-o�� �
COMPLETENESS REVIEW �I COMPLETE�- ❑ INCOMPLETE
STANDARD INFORMATION:
DeedlTitlelProof of Ownership ❑ -,- , ist of Attendees ❑ Impact Study(18.390)
USA Service Provider Letter ❑ C e Envelopes with Postage(Verify Count)
❑ #Sets Of Application MaterialslPlans-"Paper Copies" � Pre-Application Conference Notes
❑ #Sets Of Application MaterialslPlans-"CD's"
PROJECT STATISTICS' �,
. .�Prt�"3tze - - 'te -------- ite
PLANS DIMENSIONED:
Building Footprint ❑ P i e Parking�� Tr•-'•'� �' �����'""�°-° ^� "-able
�`-°""'"�� �, Access A roach and Aisle
Pp � Visual Clearance Triangle Shown
ADDITIONAL PLANS:
❑ Vic�`idlap ❑ Architec al Plan � Tree Inventory
�, Existing Conditions Plan ❑ Lan ape Plan
� Site Plan ❑ � ting Plan
TREE PLAN/MITIGATION PLAN:
���:� � �,�h�,
����
ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports)
°a °❑
O ❑
RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS:
❑ 18.330(Condit�onal Use) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review)
❑ 18.340(Director's�nterpretation) � 18.705(AccesslEgresslCircula6oni- ❑ 18,780{Signs)
❑ 18.35�(Planned Devebpment) ❑ 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits)
❑ 18.360(Site Development Review� [� 18.715(Density Computations� � 18.790(Tree RemovaE}
❑ 18.370(Variances'Adjustments) ❑ 18.72�(Design Compatibility Standards) � 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas}_
❑ 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ❑ 18.725(Environmental Perfortnance Standards) ❑ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities)
� 18.3g0(Decisan Making Proceduresllmpact Study)- � 1 a.73�(Exceptions To Development Standards}- � 18.81 O(Street&Utiiiry Improvement Standards�
❑ 18.410(lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.740(Histonc Overlay)
� 18.420(Land Partitions)� ❑ 1$.742(Home Occupation Permits)
❑ 18.430(Subdivisions) � 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards}-
;� 1$.510(Residential Zoning Districts� ❑ 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regula6ons)
❑ 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.755{Mixed Solid WastelRecycling Storage)
❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming SituaGons)
❑ 18.620(Tigard Tnangle Design Standards) � 18.765(Off-Street Parkin9/Loading Requirements�'
ADDITIONAL ITEMS:
���1'�GL��.1 S � �z���)�C a �'r �
1:lcurpin\masterslforms-revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 6-Jun-07
City o f Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223
��
.
��. ;.s,���,
dx
June 10, 2008 "�"
� /
Jeff Caines,AICP
SR Design, LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
RE: Completeness Review- White Oak Partition
Case File No. MLP2008-00006
Dear Jeff:
The City has received your application fot Minor Land Partirion (MLP2008-00006) to divide
one lot into two at 11030 SW 74`h Avenue. Staff has determined your application to be
complete as of 6/10/2008.
The review process will now begin and is expected to take 5-G weeks. Please be aware that
staff has not reviewed the application for compliance with the code and may request
addiuonal items during the review period.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (503) 718-2712. Thank you.
Sincerely,
G�� � �
Emily Eng
Assistant Planner
Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772
� . Mav 30, 2008
(revised June 9,20031
White �ak Partition
A Two-Parcel Partition
Tax Lot 2300 of Tax Map 1S1-36DB
11030 SV1174th Avenue
City of Tigard, Oregon
97223
. Applicant:
White Oak Village LLC
7955 SW Hall Blvd.
Beaverton, OR 97008
Applicant's Representative:
SR Design LLC
Jeff Caines, AICP
8196 SW Hall Blvd. Suite 232
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone: (503) 469-1213
Fax: (5U3) 469-855y
' ��V�� �l�V
• . _ JUN ,l 0 2008 .
- � ClTYQFTIGIIRD
- Pt.R!�F!!M!�►�M�tIV��RINC
May 30, 2008
(revised june 9,2008)
White Oak Partition
A Two-Parcel Partition
Tax Lot 2300 of Tax Map 1S1-36DB
11030 SW 74th Avenue
City of Tigard, Oregon
97223
Applicant:
White Oak Village LLC
7955 SW Hall Blvd.
Beaverton, OR 97008
Applicant's Representative:
SR Design LLC
jeff Caines, AICP
8196 SW Hall Blvd. Suite 232
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone: (503) 469-1213
Fax: (503) 469-8559
_: �;���,v��� �-�.
1� y `'V
��',� � 0
'��3
,� .
���,
�
�� . . �,
/54•/G! ^
Introduction 3
TITLE 18- TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE
Chapter 18.350 Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria 5
Chapter 18.390- Decision Making Procedure/Impact Study 6
Chapter 18.420 - Land Partitions 11
Chapter 18.510-Residential Zoning Districts 16
Chapter 18.705-Access, Egress,and Circulation 19
Chapter 18.715-Density Computations 24
Chapter 18.730- Exceptions to Development Standards 26
Chapter 18.745 -Landscaping and Screening 2g
Chapter 18.765 -Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements 36
Chapter 18.790-Tree Removal 40
Chapter 18.795 -Visual Clearance Areas 43
Chapter 18.810- Street and Utility Improvement 5tandards 45
Conclusion 6�
Exhibits
Exhibit A-Pre-ApplicaEion Notes
Exhibit B-Property Title Information
Exhibit C- CWS Service Provider Letter
Exhibit D-Arborist Report
Exhibit E-Preliminary Sight Distance Certification
4Vhite Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 2
INTRODUCTION
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant/Owner: �Vhite Oak Village LLC
7955 SW Hall Blvd.
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Applicant's Representative: SR Design LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone: (503) 469-1213
Fax: (503) 469-8553
Contact: Jeff Caines, AICP, Land Use Planner
Arborist: Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants
P.O. Box 1182
Tualatin, OR 97062
Phone: (503) 646-4349
Contact: David Halstead
Tax Lot: Map 1S1-36DB, Tax Lot 2300
Site Address: 11030 SW 74�h Avenue
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Location: Located on the southeast corner of the SW 74th Avenue. A
tax map has been provided to specifically identify the
location of the site.
Current Zoning: R-4.5 (PD) Low Density Residential (7,500 square feet
� minimum lot size) �
Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential
Project Area: ± .40 acres, approximately 17,280 square feet
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 3
Summary of Proposal
REQUEST:
The Applicant requests preliminary approval for a two-parcel partitioned to be designed
and constructed on the above listed parcel.
SITE DESCRIPTION:
The subject site is located within the R-4.5 (7,500 square feet) zoning designation within the
City of Tigard. The Applicant proposes to partition the current legal lot of record into two
separate legal lots of record. Design and construction of the dwelling units will be decided
once the partition plat has been recorded. The site is ± .40 acres, approximately 17,280
square feet in size. Parcel 1 is approximately 8,780 square feet, Parcel2, is approximately
8,000 square feet. There is an existing dwelling unit located on the property that will be
removed as part of the overall development. The existing trees on the eastern portion of the
site are intended to remain. There are no trees scheduled for removal since all the trees are
located again the eastern property line.
SW 74� Avenue is identified as a local street and is under City of Tigard jurisdiction.
Currently, there is one single family home that takes direct access from SW 74th Avenue.
However, the dwelling unit will be removed as part of the development. Once the partition
plat has been recorded the second home may be developed. As a result both dwelling units
will take access to SW 74th Avenue within the eyebrow corner of the street. Public
improvements will be constructed as part of the White Oak Village PD currently being
constructed west of the project site.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 4
1
��
�
/
18.350.070 DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL CRITERIA
A. Detailed development plan approval criteria. A detailed development plan may be
approved only if all the following criteria are met:
1. The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan. Minor changes
from the concept plan do not make the detailed plan inconsistent with the concept
plan unless:
a. The change increases the residential densities, increases the lot coverage by
buildings or reduces the amount of parking;
Comment: The proposed partition does not change the overall density of the project
site. Since the subject site is zoned R-4.5 the density allowed for the site is a maximum
of two d��elling units and a minimum of one dwelling unit. It should be noted that the
PD to the west (White Oak Village) is associated with this partition only in the matter
that right-of-way was dedicated for the construction of street improvements. However,
the zoning map shows that this parcel has a "PD Overlay" and therefore, Section
18.350.070 needs to be addressed as a result.
b. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping;
Comment: The proposed partition does not propose to reduce the amount of open
space for the White Oak Village PD. As stated above, this project is associated with the
PD to the west in right-of-way dedication only. Therefore, the amount of open space
and landscaping is not reduced.
c. The change involves a change in use;
Comment: The proposed partition project is to construct residential dwelling units.
There is no change in use.
d. The change commits Iand to development which is environmentally sensitive or
subject to a potential hazard; and
Comment: The subject site is not classified as environmentally sensitive or subject to
potential hazards. The site has undergone an environmental review form CWS and has
obtained a letter dated August 1, 2006 stating that there is no environmentally sensitive
area within 200-feet of the subject site.
e. The change involves a major shift in the location of buildings, proposed streets,
parking lots, landscaping or other site improvements.
Comment: The proposed partition does not change any of the street layouts already
approved by the City. The project proposes to develop the site with two single family
dwelling units.
All other provisions of the Detailed Development Plans may not be applicable. The site is
under a PD overlay zone due to the right-of-way that was dedicated for the development of
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 5
the White Oak Village PD. The remaining code provisions under Chapter 18.350 are not
applicable in a manner that the application does not desire to modify any of the adopted
Development Code standards. The application addresses the remain code sections as a
standard land use partition application and not as a Planned Development.
CHAPTER 18.390-DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES/IMPACT STUDY
18.390.040 Type II Procedure
A. Pre-application conference. A pre-application conference is required for Type II actions. Pre-
application conference requirements and procedures are set forth in section 18.390.OSOC.
Comment: The applicant participated in the pre-application conference held May 8,
2008. The applicant reviewed the planning and engineering notes as a result of this
meeting prior to developing the narrative and the site design for this partition.
B. Application requirements.
1. Application Forms. Type II applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director
as provided by Section 18.390.080 E1;
2. Subrnittal Information. The application shali:
a. Include the information requested an the application form;
b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action;
c. Be accompanied by the required fee;
d. Include two sets of pre-stamped and pre-addressed enz�elopes for ail property owners of
record as specified in Section 18.390.040C. The records of the Washington County
Department of Assessment and Taxation are the official records for determining ownership.
The applicant slzall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to
produce the notice Iist;
e. Include an impact study. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on
public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation
system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the
sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and
type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards and
to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems,
and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code
requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur
with the dedication requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion tYcat the
real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of
the development.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC (,
Comment: The applicant reviewed the submittal requirements regarding the Type II
Minor Land Partition and will comply with this Code Section. The applicant has
considered the impacts of this partition per Section 18.390.40.B.2 (e). The following
Impact Study outlines the public facilities and services this project affects.
IMPACT STUDY
Transportation System:
The proposed two-parcel partition fronts SW 74th Avenue. Both parcels will access
SW 74t'' Avenue. Tri-Met has bus routes located on Pacific Highway going to Tigard
or Portland. The existing home will be removed as part of this development, so only
one additional home will be built with this partition. Therefore, approximately 10
vehicle trips will be added to the transportation system.
Da�ainage System:
Storm water runoff from the site drains from the east to the west in to SW 74�''
Avenue. It is anticipated that the storm water generated form this site will "weep
hole" into SW 74�h Avenue. The water will then drain to the catch basins located in
SW 74'h Avenue. A storm water fee in-lieu will be assessed on a per lot basis.
Park System:
This development is not proposing to donate any land to the City of Tigard for open
space and parks. If required by the City Building Department the new dwelling
units may pay the City's Park SDC charge.
Sewer System:
The two homes will connect to the sanitary sewer line located in SW 74th Avenue.
Each parcel will connect via individual private laterals to the sanitary sewer line in
SW 74'" Avenue.
Water System:
There will be one new service meter for the newly created parcel. The existing house
will utilize the existing meter. 'This will adequately serve all both parcels.
Noise Impacts:
This development is a single-family detached residential partition that should not
generate any extraordinary noise impacts to the surrounding neighbors. It should be
noted that the subject site is located adjacent to two commercial area, (Fred Meyer &
Gospel Rescue Mission).
The Applicant has demonstrated by addressing the above listed systems that this
partition meets the impact study requirements listed above.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 7
C. Notice of pending Type II Administrative Decision.
1. Prior to making a Type II Administrative Decision, the Director shall provide notice to:
a. All owners of record within 500 feet of the subject site;
b. Any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site;
c. Any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental
agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or who is
otherwise entitled to such notice.
2. The purpose of such notice is to provide nearby property owners and other interested
parties with an opportunity to submit written comments concerning the application, prior to
issuance of the Type II Administrative Decision. The goal of this notice is to invite relevant
parties of interest fo participate early in the decision-making process;
3. Notice of a pending Type II Administrative Decision shall:
a. Provide a 14-day period for the submission of written comments prior to issuance of a
decision on the permit;
b. List by commonly used citation, the approvai criteria relevant to the decision;
c. State the place, date and time the comments are due, and the person to whom the
comments should be addressed;
d. Include the name and telephone number of the person w12o will make the Administrative
Decision;
e. Identify the specific permits or approvals requested;
f. Describe the street address or other easily understandable geographic reference to the
subject site;
g. Indicate that failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient
specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit
Court on that issue. Comments directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute
relevant evidence;
h. Indicate that all evidence relied upon by the Director to make this decision shall be
contained within the record, and is available for public review. Copies of this evidence can be
obtained at a reasonable cost from the Director;
i. Indicate that after the comment period closes, the Director shall issue a Type II
Administrative Decision. The Director's decision shall be mailed to the applicant and to
owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the subject site, and to anyone else
who submitted written comments or who is otherwise entitled to notice;
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC g
j. Contain the following notice: "Notice to mortgagee, lienholder, vendor, or selder: The
Tigal�d Development Code requires that if you receive this notice it sha11 be promptly
forwarded to the purchaser."
Comment: The applicant acknowledges the notice requirements and will comply with
the submittal requirements as it is stated above.
D. Administrative decision requirements. The Director's Decision shall address all of the
r•elevant approval criteria. Based upon the criteria and the facts contained within the record,
the Director shaIl approve, approve with conditions or deny the requested permit or action.
E. Notice of decision.
1. Within five days after signing the decision, a Notice of Decision shali be sent by mail to:
a. The applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site which is the
subject of the application;
b. All owners of record of property as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll,
located within 500 feet of the site;
c. Any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site;
d. Any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental
agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or who is
otherwise entitled to such notice.
2. The Director shall cause an affidavit of mailing of such notice to be prepared and make a
part of the file, which indicates the date the notice was mailed and demonstrates thaf the
reqacired notice was mailed to the necessa��y parties in a timely manner;
3. The content of the Type II Notice of Decision shall contain:
a. Tlze nature of the application in sufficient detaii to apprise persons entitled to notice of the
applicant's proposal and of the decision;
b. The address or other geographic description of the subject property, including a map of the
site in relation to the surrounding area, where applicable;
c. A statement of where the Director's decision can be obtained;
d. The date the Director's decision shall become final, unless appealed;
e. A statement that all persons entitied to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or
aggrieved by the decision may appeal the decision;
f.A statement briefly explaining how an appeal can be taken, the deadline for filing such an
appeal, and where further information can be obtained concerning the appeal; and
g. A statement that unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the
Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written conzments
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 9
submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues
properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal
hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time
b� the appellate body.
Comment: The applicant acknowledges that the director will base the decision for
approval based on the applicable criteria and will notice all those required through this
Code Section.
F. Final decision and effective date. A Type II Administrative Decision is final for purposes of
appeal when notice of the decision is mailed. A Type II Administrative Decision becomes
effective on the day after the appeal period expires, unless an appeal is filed. If an appeal is
filed and dismissed after the appeal period has expired, the Type II Administrative Decision
becomes effective on dismissal of the appeal.
G. Appeal. A Type II administrative decision may be appealed as follows:
1. Standing to appeal. The following parties have standing to appeal a Type II
Administrative Decision:
a. The applicant;
b. Any party who was mailed written notice of a pending Type II administrative decision;
c. Any other party, who demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that they
participated in the proceeding through the submission of written or verbal testimony;
2. Appeal procedure.
a. Notice of appeal. Any party with standing, as provided in Section G1 above, may appeal a
Type II Administrative Decision by filing a Notice of Appeal according to the following
procedures;
(1) Time for filing. A Notice of Appeal shall be filed with the Director within ten business
days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed;
(2) Content of notice of appeal. The Notice of Appeal shall contain:
(a)An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision;
(b)A statement demonstrating the party filing the Notice of Appeal has standing to appeal;
(c)A detailed statement of the specific issues raised on appeal;
(d)A statement demonstrating that the specific issues raised on appeal were raised during
the cornment period, except when the appeal is filed by the applicant;
(e) Filing fee.
(3)All Notices of Appeal for Type II Adminisfrative Appeals sha11 be fiied with the Director,
together with the required filing fee. The amount of the filing fee shall be established by the
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 10
Director. The maximum fee for an initial hearing shall be the cost to the Iocal government for
preparing and for conducting the hearing, or the statutory maximum, whichever is Iess.
b. Scope of appeal. The appeal of a Type II Administrative Decision by a person with
standing shall be limited to the specific issues raised during the written comment period, as
provided under Section 18.390.040C, unless the Hearings Officer, at his or her discretion,
allows additional evidence or testimony concerning any other relevant issue. The Hearings
Officer may allow such additional evidence if he or she determines that such evidence is
necessary to resoIve the case. The intent of this requirement is to limit the scope of Type 77
Administrative Appeals by encouraging persons with standing to submit tlieir specific
concerns in writing during the comment period. The written comments received during the
comment period will usually limit the scope of issues on appeal. Oni� in extraordinary
circumstances shouid new issues be considered by the Hearings Officer on appeal of a Type II
Administrative Decision;
c. Appeal procedures. Type III notice and hearing procedures shall be used for all Type II
Administrative Appeals, as provided in Sections 18.390.050 C-F;
H. Final decision and effective date. The decision of the Hearings Officer with regard to any
appeal of a Type II Administrative Decision is the final decision of the City. The decision of
the Hearings Officer is final for purposes of appeal on the day the decision is mailed. The
decision is effective on the day after the appeal period expires, unless an appeal is filed. If an
appeal is filed, the decision is effective on the day after the appeai is resolved;
Comment: The applicant acknowledges the appeal process and will comply with its
provisions.
Chapter 18.420 - LAND PARTITIONS
18.420.020 Administration
A. Applicant. The applicant of a partition proposal shail be the recorded owner af the property
or an agent authorized in writing by the owner.
B. Conformance with state statute. Any application for a land partition shall be in conformity
with all state regulations set forth in ORS Chapter 92, Subdivision and Partitions.
C. Prohibition on sale of lots. No lot or parcel to be created through the partitioning process
shall be sold until approvaI and filing of the final partition piat.
D. Future re-division. When partitioning tracts into large parcels, the Director shall require
that the parcels be of such size and shape to facilitate future re-partitioning of such parcels in
accordance with the requirements of tlie zoning district and this title.
Comment: The applicant of this partirion proposal is the recorded owner of the
property and the agent is authorized by the applicant to prepare this application. The
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 11
applicant will conform with the state statute as it pertains to the partition. The applicant
will not sell any of the proposed parcels created through the partitioning process until
the approval and filing of the final partition plat. The proposed lot sizes are not
considered oversized, therefore no future land divisions can take place under the
current zoning regulations. The application meets this criterion.
18.420.030 Approval Process
A. Decision-making process. The Director shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an
application partition, which shall be reviewed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed
b� Chapter 18.390, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.420.050.
B. Time limit on approval. The partition approval b� the Director shail be effective for a period
of 1-1/2 years from the date of approval.
C. Lapsing of approval. The partition or approval by the Director shail lapse if.�
1. The partition has not been recorded or has been improperly recorded with Washington
County without the satisfactory completion of aIl conditions attached to the approval;
2. The final recording is a departure from the approved plan.
D. Extension. The Director sha11, upon written request by the applicant and payment of the
required fee, grant an extension of the approval period not to exceed one year provided that:
1. No changes are made on the original plan as approved by the Director;
2. The applicant can show intent of recording the approved partition or lot line adjustrnent
within the one-year extension period; and
3. There have been no changes in the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance
provisions on which the approvai was based.
Comment: The applicant understands that the approval process involves a decision-
making process that is governed by the Type II procedure using the approval criteria
contained in Chapter 18.420.050, that there is a time limit of one and one-half years on
the decision and that the decision will lapse if the partition has not been recorded or
improperly recorded with Washington County without the satisfactory completion of
all conditions attached to the approval or if the final recording is a departure from the
approved plan. The application acknowledges that an extension may be filed if the
criteria have not been met. The application meets this criterion.
18.420.040 Application Submission Requirements
A. General submission requirements. All applicafions shail be made on forms provided by the
Director and shall include information required for a Type 7I application, as governed by
Chapter 18.390.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
5R Design LLC lZ
B. Specific submission requirements. All applications shall include the preliminary lot line map
and necessar� information in graphic and/or written form. The Director shall provide the
applicant with detailed information about these submission requirements.
Comment: The application contains the submission requirements necessary to comply
with the Type II application process as governed in this Code Section. This application
meets the criterion.
18.420.050 Approval Criteria
A. Approval criteria. A request to partition land shall meet all of the following criteria:
1. The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and
regulations;
Comment: The proposed partition has been specifically designed to comply with all of
Tigard's statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations. Specifically, this
partition has been designed to be compatible with the R-4.5 zoning codes and related
comprehensive planning policies.
2. There are adeqa�ate public facilities are available to serve the proposaI;
Comment: The composite utility plan shows a sanitary sewer line that will serve the
site. The sanitary sewer line which will serve the newly created parcel will be stubbed
to the property line during the development of the White Oak Village PD. The plans for
the utility location have been reviewed by the City of Tigard to ensure that adequate
public facilities are available. Water meters are shown along the perimeter of the
property lines. Therefore, this criterion has been met.
3. All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards; and
Comment: The design of the partition shows the potential driveway locations for the
two parcels. The improvements for the eyebrow corner are being done as part of the
White Oak Village PD located to the west of the site. It is not anticipated that other
improvernents will be required as part of this partition. Therefore, this criterion has
been met.
4. All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below:
a. The minimum width of the building envelope area shali meet the lot requirement of the
applicable zoning district.
b. The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning district. In the case of a flag lot,
the accessway may not be included in the lot area calculation.
c. Each lot created through the partition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least
15 feet or have a legally recorded minimum 15 foot wide access easement.
d. Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 13
e. When the partitioned lot is a flag lot, tlie developer may determine the location of the front
yard, provided that no side yard is less than 10 feet. Structures shall generally be located so
as to maximize separation from existing structures.
Comment: T'he proposed partition does include a flag lot; however, the lot area does
not include the flag pole or access easement area. The proposed dwelling units will
meet all the applicable setback requirements. Therefore, this criterion has been met.
f. A screen slzall be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in
an accessway is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accordance with Sections
18.745.050. Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to
provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed development.
Comment: It is anticipated that once the dwellings have been constructed either a fence
or vegetative screening will be planted in order to give the individual property owners
additional privacy. Therefore, the use of additional screening should not be a factor in
this development.
g. The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an
accessway would have a detrimenfaI effect on fire fighting capabilities.
Comment: The composite utility plan shows the locations of the existing fire hydrant.
The fire marshal will have and opportunity to review the proposed project to ensure
that the project meets all applicable Fire and Development Codes. Therefore, this
criterion has been met.
h. Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement
which will ensure access and maintenance rights shall he recorded with the approved
partition map.
Comment: It is not determined if the final design of the partition will use a common
driveway to be used by both parcell and parcel2 to reduce the number of curb cuts for
the project. If a common driveway is to be designed and constructed then a reciprocal
access easement will be recorded on the plat. Therefore, this criterion has been met.
5. Any accessway shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705, Access,
Egress, and Circulation.
Comment: The proposal as submitted complies with the Access, Egress and Circulation
section of the Tigard Development Code. SW 74�h Avenue is classified as local street and
therefore does not have access a spacing standard requirement. Therefore, this code
secdon has been met.
6. Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred-year
floodplain, the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area
for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 14
suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycie pathway with the floodplain in
accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan.
Comment: This project is not located in or near the 100-year flood plain. Therefore, this
section does not apply.
7. An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in
accordance with Chapter 18.370, Variances and Adjustments. The applications for the
partition and variance(s)/adjustment(s) will be processed concurrently.
Comment: This application has not requested an adjustment to the street standards of
Chapter 18.810. Therefore, this criterion is met.
18.420.060 Final Plat Submission Requirements
A. Submittal. A11 final plats for partitions shall be accompanied by three copies of the partition
plat prepared by a land surveyor or engineer licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary
data or narrative. The final plat shall incorporate any conditions of approval imposed by the
Director as part of the preliminary plat approval.
B. Staradards. The partition plat and data or narrative shal2 be drawn to the minimum
standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05) and by Washington
County, as described in defail by information provided by the Director at the time of
application.
Comment: The applicant will comply with the final plat submission requirements
prepared by a land surveyor or engineer. The final plat will incorporate any conditions
of approval imposed by the Director as part of the preliminary plat approval.
28.420.070 City Acceptance of Dedicated Land
A. Acceptance of dedications by City Engineer. The City Engineer shall accept the proposed
right-of wa� dedication prior to recording a iand partition.
B. Acceptance of public easements by City Engineer. The City Engineer shall accept all public
ensements shown for dedication on partition pIats.
Comment: The applicant has prepared the site design drawings using the already
dedicated right-of-way from the White Oak PD. It is not anticipated that additional
dedication will be needed with this project. Furthermore, the improvements will be
constructed during the development of the White Oak Village PD. Therefore, this
criterion has been met.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 15
18.420.080 Recording Partition Plats
A. Recording requirements. Llpon the Director's approval of the proposed minor partition, the
applicant shall record the final partition plat with Washington County and submit a copy of
the recorded survey map to the City, to be incorporated into the record.
B. Time Iimit. The applicant shall submit the copy of the recorded minor partition survey map
to tlie City within 15 days of recording, and shall be completed prior to the issuance of any
building permits on the re-configured Iots.
Comment: The applicant will comply with the final plat recording requirements and
submit a copy of the recorded survey map to the City to be incorporated into to the
record within 15 days of recording and shall be completed before the issuance of any building
permits on the re-configured lot, not the existing lot of record. The applicant meets this
criterion.
CHAPTER 18.510 - RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
D. R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District.
The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single family homes with or
without accessor� residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 sqacare feet. Duplexes and
attached single family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses
are also permitted conditionally.
Comment: The property is within the R-4.5 zoning district in the City of Tigard. The
applicant is proposing detached single-family homes, without accessory residential
units, as a part of development. All of the proposed parcels are greater than 7,500
square feet: Parcell: 8,780 square feet and Parcel2: 8,000 square feet. T'his criterion is
met.
18.510.030 Uses
A. T�pes of uses. For the purposes of this chapter, there are four kinds of use:
1. A permitted (P) use is a use which is permitted outright, but subject to all of the
applicable provisions of this title. If a use is not lisfed as a permitted use, it may be
held to be a similar unlisted used under the provisions of Chapter 18.230;
2. A restricted (R) use is permitted outright providing it is in compliance with special
requirements, exceptions or restrictions;
3. A conditionaI use (C) is a use the approval of which is discretionary with the Hearings
Officer.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 16
The approval process and criteria are set forth in Chapters 18.310 and 18.320. If a use is
not listed as a conditional use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted used under the
provisions of Chapter 18.230;
4. A prohibited (N) use is one which is not permitted in a zoning district under any
circumstances.
Comment: The applicant is proposing single-family detached dwelling units, a
permitted use in the R-4.5 zone. This criterion is met.
18.510.040 Minimum and Maximum Densities
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish minimum and maximicm
densities in each residential zoning district. To ensure the quality and density of
development envisioned, the maximum density establishes the ceiling for development in
each zoning district based on minimum lot size. To ensure that property develops at or near
the density envisioned for the zone, the minimum density for each zoning district has been
established at 80% of maximum density.
B. Calculating minimum and maximum densities. The calculation of minimum and
maximums densities is governed by the formulas in Chapter 18.715, Density Computations.
C. Adjustments. Applicants may request an adjustment when, because of the size of the
site or other constraint, it is not possible to accommodate the proportianaI minirnum
density as required by Section 18.715020C and still compIy with ail of the development
standards in the underlying zoning district, as contained in Table 18.510.2 below. Such
an adjustment may be granted by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Chapter
18.390, using approval criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.2.
Comment: The minimum and maximum densities are calculated in Chapter 18.715,
Density Computations, later in the narrative. The applicant is not requesting any
adjustments with this application; it is possible to accommodate the minimum density
requirement.
18.510.050 Development Standards
A. Compliance required. All development must comply with:
1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district,
except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with
Chapters 18.370;
2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title.
B. Development Standards. Development standards in residential zoning districts are
contained in Table 18.510.2.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC ly
TABLE 18.310.2
DE�'ELOPI'IENT STA1�'DARDS IN RESIDE:�TIAL ZO�NES
ST:�\'DARD R-1 R-2 R-3.5 Ft-4S R-7
R4inimum Lot Size
-Detached imit 30,004 sq.ft. 20,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 7,500 sq.fr. :,000 sq.ft.
-Duplexes I0,000 sq.ft. 10.000 sq.$.
-Attached uiut[i �,000 sq.R.
Anerage I4{inimum Lat 4['idch
-Detached uuit lots 100 ft. 100 ft. 6S fr. SO ft. 50 fr.
-Duplex Yots 90 ft. 90 ft. 50 fr.
-Attathed unii lou qp�
R3aximum Lot Covera�e 80°io Z
R�nimuvz Srtbacks
-Front pazd 30 fr. 3D ft. 20 ft. 20 R. 15 fr.
-Side facing strcet on
comer&tluough lou 26 ft. 20 fr. 20 fr. 15 fr. 10 ft.
-Side}ud 5 ft. 5 ft. S fr. 5 fr. 5 ft.
-Reu y ud 25 ft. ?�ft. 15 ft. 15 fr. 15 f�.
-Side or reaz yard abuiting uiare
resnictive zoaing districY 30 ft.
-Distance between property line
and frovt of gazage 20 fr. 20 ft_ 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft.
n3aximum Hciehi 3o fr. 30 ft. 30£t. 30 ft. 35 fr.
R4inrmum Laudsc e Re uirement - ZO:�a
[1]Singie-fauul�-attached cesidenrial units pernutted at oae dwelling per lot tivith uo more that five atsached units in one groupiug.
[Z]Lot coverage includei all btuldings and imprn7ous surfaces.
Comment: Per Table 18.510.2, above, all of the lots are greater than 7,500 square feet
and have a minimum lot width greater than 50 feet, distance between the front lot line
to the garage of greater than 20 feet, sides of 5 feet and rear lots of 15 feet. The proposed
flag lot will have additional setbacks of 10 feet on the sides per the requirements of the
Development Code. Therefore, this application meets this criterion.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC lg
CHAPTER 18.705 - ACCESS, EGRESS,AND CIRCULATION
18.705.020 Applicability of Provisions
A. When provisions apply. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development
including the construction of new structures, the remodeiing of existing structures (see
Section 18.360.050), and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading
requirements or which changes the access requirements.
B. Change or enlargement of use. Should the owner or occupant of a lot or buiIding change or
eniarge the use to which the lot or building is put, thereby increasing access and egress
requirements, it is unlawful and is a violation of this title to begin or maintain such altered
use until the provisions of this chapter have been met if required o1� until the appropriate
approval authority has approved the change.
C. When site design review is not required. Where the provisions of Chapter 18.360, Site
Development Review, do not apply, fhe Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or
deny an access plan submitted under the provisions of this chapter in conjunction with
another permit or land use action.
D. Conflict with subdivision requirements. The requirements and standards of this chapter shall
not apply where they conflict with the subdivision rules and standards of this title.
Comment: The applicant is proposing to partition the existing legal lot of record and
thus this section applies.
18.705.030 General Provisions
A. Continuing obligation of property owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and
egress stipulated in this title are continuing requirements for the use of any structure or
parcel of real property in the City.
Comment: Each property owner of the individual parcel will be responsible for the
maintenance of the access and egress onto their parcel. This criterion is met
B. Access plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are
presented and approved as provided by this chapter that sliow how access, egress and
circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The
Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission
requirement.
Comment:The applicant has submitted a site plan that illustrates how access, egress
and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. Each parcel will have access to SW 74�h
Avenue through an individual driveway or a common driveway. Please refer to the site
plans for a graphical representation of the driveway connections.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 19
C. Joint access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of Iand may agree to utilize
jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses,
structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title,
provided:
1. Satisfactory legal evidence shalI be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or
contracts to esfablish the joint use; and
2. Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are�laced on permanent file with the
City.
Comment:The applicant is proposing that Parcell have their own access to SW 74tn
Avenue and that Parcel2 may gain access through a combined driveway access onto
SW 74th Avenue. This application meets this criterion.
D. Public street access All vehicuIar access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and
18.705.0307 shali connect directly with a public or private street appraved by the City for
public use and shall be rnaintained at the required standards on a continuous basis.
Comment:The applicant is proposing that Parcell and Parcels 2 will have access to SW
74th Avenue. This application meets this criterion.
E. Curb cuts. Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N.
Comment:The applicant is proposing one curb cut for both dwelling units which will
connect with SW 74th Avenue to meet the standards set forth in Section 18.810.030.N.
This criterion is met.
F. Required walkway location. On-sife pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following
standards:
1. Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing
of stairs, ramps, or eievators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the
streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient
connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial
complexes. Unless impractical, waIkways shall be constructed between new and existing
developments and neighboring developments;
2. Within all attached housing (except two famil� dwellings)and multi family developments,
each residential dwelling shail be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and
common open space and recreation facilities;
3. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings
shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically
separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6-inch vertical
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 2p
separation (curbed) or a minimum 3 foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian
crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate
landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways
shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions
such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with
ADA standards;
4. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt,
stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety
purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are
provided in addition to required pathways.
Comment: The applicant is proposing single family homes and therefore this section is
not applicable.
G. Inadeqacate or hazardous access.
1. Appiications for building permits shall be referred to fhe Commission for rez�iew when, in
the opinion of the Director, the access proposed:
a. Wouid cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or
b. Would provide inadequafe access for emergency vehicles; or
c. Would in any other way cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a
clear and present danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare.
2. Direct individual access to arterial or collector streets from singie family dwellings and
duplex lots shall be discouraged. Direct access to collector or arterial streets shall be
considered only if there is no practical alternative way to access the site. If direct access is
permitted by the City, the applicant will be required to mitigate for any safety or
neigliborhood t��affic management (NTM) impacts deemed applicable by the City Engineer.
This may incIude, but wi11 not be limited to, the construction of a vehicle turnaround on the
srte to eliminate the need for a vehicle to back out onto the roadway.
3. In no case shaIl the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward
movement or other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an a11ey. Single-
family and duplex dwellings are exempt from this requirement.
Comment: The access proposed for the two parcels are not anticipated to cause
hazardous traffic conditions, provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles or
present danger to the public. The proposed partition is not located on streets labeled
arterial or collector streets, but on an eyebrow corner leading into the White Oak Village
PD and thus this criterion is not applicable.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 21
H. Access Management
1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies
design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance
and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO
(depending on jurisdiction of facility.)
Comment: The applicant is proposing a two-parcel partition located at an eyebrow
corner leading into the approved White Oak Village PD. Additionally, no streets are
proposed within the parrition and there are no driveways to be positioned along any
collector or arterial streets. Adequate site distance exists from the corner when
measuring 250 feet to the north on SW 74t"Avenue and the west into White Oak
Village PD. This criterion is met.
2. Driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial
street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic
commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a
collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line
of the intersecting street fo the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater
depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic
impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less
than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with
the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed
as far from the intersection as possibie.
3. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The
minimum spacing of driveways and streefs along an arterial shall be 600 feet.
4. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shali be 125 feet.
Comment: The applicant is proposing a two-parcel partition located at the eyebrow
corner of SW 74th Avenue leading into the White Oak Village PD. Additionally, no
streets are proposed within the partition and there are no driveways to be positioned
along any collector or arterial streets; therefore, this section is not applicable.
I. Minimum access requirements for residential use.
1. Vehicular access and egress for single family, duplex or attached single family dwelling
units on individual lots and multi family residential uses shall not be less than as provided
in Table 18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2;
2. Vehicular access to multi family structures shall be brought to within 50 feet of the ground
floor entrance or the ground floor landing of a stairway, ramp, or elevator leading to the
dwelling units;
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 22
TABLE 18.705.1
\'EHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQL'IRET7EITS:
RESIDE:�TIAL U5E(6 OR FE�VER UtiITS
\umber D�s'elling bIinimum\umber of ritnimum Accrss Wldth DZiuiinam Pavement
tiaiUZ.ots DM��e�•a�•sRe utred R'idth
1 or 2 1 15' 10'
3-6 1 20' 20'
Comment: The applicant is proposing two single family dwelling units on individual
parcels. Parcel 1 will have its own individual driveway connecting to SW 74t'' Avenue.
Parcel 2 will use an access easement through Parcel 1 to also access SW 74th Avenue. The
project will have a minimum access width of 15-feet and a minimum pavement width
of 10-feet. Please refer to the submitted site plans for a graphical representation of the
site and the location of the proposed driveways which meets the code standards as
identified in Table 18.705.1. This criterion is met.
3. Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the
provisions of the Llniform Fire Code;
Comment: The applicant is not proposing private residential access drives (i.e., Private
Streets) for this project. The project will provide two residential driveways that will be
maintained by the individual home owner. This criterion is not applicable.
4. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for
the turning around of fire apparatus by one of the following:
a. A circular, paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured from center point to
outside edge of 35 feet;
b. A hammerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a
minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet;
c. The maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%.
5. Vehicle turnouts, (providing a minimum total driveway width of 24 feet for a distance of
at least 30 feet), may be required so as to reduce the need for excessive vehicular backing
motions in situations where two vehicles traveling in opposite directions meet on driveways
in excess of 200 feet in length;
Comment: The applicant is proposing a driveway in excess of 150 feet to Parcel2,
however this project will be reviewed by the Fire Marshall during the development
process. There is a fire hydrant located in front of Parcell and it is not anticipated that
the Fire Department will have any troubles in fighting a fire should a fire occur on
Parcel2. The project is not proposing a turnaround and requests the Fire Marshall to
accept this design as satisfactory.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 23
6. Where permitted, minimum width for driveway approaches to arterials or collector streets
shall be no less than 20 feet so as to avoid traffic turrcing from the street having to wai t for
traffic exiting the site.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing any driveways to connect to arterials or
collector streets. SW 74� Avenue is a local street; therefore, this section is not applicable.
CHAPTER 18.715 - DENSITY COMPUTATION
18.715.020 Density Calculation
A. Definition of net developrnent area. Net development area, in acres, shalI be determined by
subtracting the foilowing land area(s)from the gross acres, which is all of the Iarcd included
in tlze legai description of the property to be develaped:
1. All sensitive land areas:
a. Land within the 100-year floodplain;
b. Land or slopes exceeding 25%;
c. Drainage ways; and
d. Wetlands.
2. All land dedicated to the public for park purposes;
3. All land dedicated for public rights-of-way. When actacal information is not available, the
following formulas may be used:
a. Singie family development: allocate 20% of gross acreage;
b. Multi family development: allocate 15% of gross acreage.
4. All land proposed for private streets; and
5. A lot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an existing
dwelling is to remain on the site.
Comment: There are no sensitive land areas, floodplains, excessive slopes, drainage
ways, wetlands, or dedicated parks. There will be no right of way dedication since the
right-of-way was dedicated during the development of the White Oak Village PD and
therefore, it will not be considered as part of the net development area of the property.
Therefore the net area is approximately 17,280 square feet. This criterion is met.
B. Calculating ma.ximum number of residential units. To caIculate the maximum number of
residential units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the
minimum number of square feet required for each lot in the appIicable zoning district.
Comment: The applicant calculated the maximum number of residential units per net
acre by dividing the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC Z4
square feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district. The maximum
number of additional residential units is (17,280/7,500 =2.30) which equals 2 parcels.
C. Calculating minimum number of residential units. As required by Section 18.510.040, the
minimum number of residential units per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the
maximum number of units determined in Subsection B above by 80% (0.8).
Comment: The rninimum number of residential units is 2 x .8 =1.6 which equals 1
residential unit. The applicant is proposing a two-parcel partition. The applicant has
demonstrated how the partition meets the City's minimum (and maximum) density
requirements. This criterion is met.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 2j
CHAPTER 18.730 - EXCEPTIONS TQ DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
18.730.020 Exceptions to Building Height Limitations
C. Building heights and flag lots.
1. Limitations on the piacement of residential structures on flag lots apply when any of the
- following exist:
a. A flag lot was created prior to April 15, 1985;
b. A flag lot is created after April 15, 1985 b� an approved partition; or
c. A flag lot Ts created by the approval of a subdivision and the flag lot is located on the
periphery of the subdivision so that the lot adjoins other residentially-zoned Iand.
2. The maximum height for an attached or detached single family, dicplex, or multiple family
residential structure on a flag lot or a lot having sole access from an accessway, private drive
or easement is 1-1/2 stories or 25 feet, whichever is less, except that the maximum height may
be 2-1/2 stories or 35 feet, whichever is less, provided:
a. The proposed dwelling otherwise complies with the applicable dimensional requirements of
the zoning district;
b. A 10 feet side yard will be preserved;
c. A residential structure on any abutting lot either is located 50 feet or more from the
nearest point of the subject dwelling, or the residential structure exceeds 1-1/2 stories or 25
feet in height on any abutting lot; and
� d. Windows 15 feet or more above grade shall not face dwelling unit windows or patios on
any abutting lot unless the proposal includes an agreemenf to plant trees capable of
mitigating direct views, or that such trees exist and will be preserved.
3. Where an agreement is made to plant trees capable of mitigating direct views, the
agreement shall be deemed a condition of approval under the provisions of Section
18.390.030 D.
4. The tree planting agreement shall be a condition of Chapter 18.360, Site Developrnent
Review,for three or more attached units or a multipie farnily residential structure, or, at the
time of issuance of building permits,for single detached units, one duplex or two attached
residential units.
Comment: The applicant is proposing an access easement to Parcel2 which can be
considered a flag lot with this development application. Since Parcel2 will be created
after Apri115, 1985 the flag lot section (18.730.050.E) will be applicable. This section has
been addressed below.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 26
18.730.030 Zero Lot Line Setback Standards
A. Applicability and limitations. The provisions of this chapter apply to the R-4.5 and R-7
zoning districts and are limited to single family detached dwelling units. The provisions of
this chapter shall be applied in conjunction with:
Comment: The applicant is not requesting a zero lot line, thus this criterion is not
applicable.
18.730.040 Additional Setback Requirements
A. Additional setback fi•om roadways. The minimum yard requi��ement shall be Tncreased in the
event a yard abuts a street having a right-of-way width less than required by its functional
classification on the City's transportation plan map and, in such case, the setback shall be not
less than the setback required by the zone plus one-half of the projected road widtlz as shown
on the transportation map.
Comment: The proposal does not require an additional setback. Thus this criterion is
not applicable.
18.730.050 Lot Area for Flag Lots
E. Lot area for fla�lots.
1. The lot area for a flag lot shall comply with the lot area requirements of the
applicable zoning district;
" 2. The lot area shall be provided entirely within the building site area exclusive of
any accessway.
Comment: The lot area proposed on Parcel 2 complies with the minimum lot size for
the R-4.5 zoning district. The area proposed for Parcel 2 is approximately 8,500 square
feet. This area does not include the area within the access easement. Therefore, this
. criterion has been met.
F. Front vard determination. The owner or developer of a flag lot may determine the
location of the front yard, provided no side yard setback area is less than 10 feet and
provided the requirements of Section 18.730.010C, Building Heights and Flag Lots,
are satisfied.
Comment: The final design of the proposed dwelling unit has not been determined. The
site plans that are submitted under review show that the lot can be developed with a
front yard set back of 20-feet and a rear yard setback of 15-feet. In addition, the building
envelope on the site plans shows a minirnum 10-foot side yard setback as required by
this Section of the Development Code. Please note that the building envelope, as shown
on the site plans only demonstrates that proposed Parcel2 can be developed. It does not
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 2�
affirm the location of the front yard setback. That determination will be decided once a
final dwelling unit design has been chosen for this site. The Planning Department will
have an opportunity to review the building design once it has been submitted to the
Building Deparhnent for permits to ensure that all setback requirements have been met.
T'herefore, this criterion has been met for approval.
CHAPTER 18.745 - LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
18.745.020 Applicability
A. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the
construction of new structures, remodeling of existing structures where the Iandscaping is
nonconforming (Section 18.760.040.C), and to a change of use which results in the need for
- increased on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirernents.
C. Site plan requirements. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the
applicanf with detailed information about this submission requirement.
Comment: Since this is a partition, a full landscape plan is not required. Landscaping
will be provided once the homes are constructed, but the specific design will not be
determined at this stage of the development. Therefore this criterion is met.
18.745.030 General Provisions
A. Obligation to maintain. Unless otherwise provided by the lease agreement, the owner, tenant
and his agent, if any, shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all
_ landscaping and screening which shali be maintained in good condition so as to present a
` healthy, neat and orderly appearance, shall be replaced or repaired as necessary, and sha11 be
kept free from refuse and debris.
Comment: The applicant will be responsible for the maintenance of the landscaping
until the property is sold to an individual homeowner. At that time, the new
homeowner will maintain the landscaping and screening. This criterion is met.
B. Pruning required. AII plant growth in landscaped areas of developments shall be contralled
by pruning, trimming or otherwise so that:
1. It will not interfere with the maintenance or repair of any public utility;
2. It will not restrict pedestrian or vehicular access; and
3. It will not constitute a traffic hazard because of reduced visibility.
Comment: All landscaping will be maintained by the homeowner to allow for
maintenance or repair of public utility to allow pedestrian or vehicular access, and to
maintain traffic visibility. This criterion is met
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 2g
C. Instaliation requirements. The installation of all landscaping shall be as follows:
1. All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures;
2. The plant materials shall be of high grade, and shall meet the size and grading standards
of the American Standards for Nurberg Stock (ANSI Z60, 1-1986, and any future revisions);
and
3. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of this title.
Comment: All landscaping will be installed according to accepted planting procedures,
being of high grade and meeting the size and grading standards. All landscaping will
be installed, as required, to meet the provisions of this title.
D. Certificate of Occupancy. Certificates of occupancy shail not be issued unless the landscaping
requirements have been met or other arrangements have been made and approved by the City
such as the posting of a bond.
Comment: The applicant acknowledges that certificates of occupancy will not be issued
until the landscaping requirements, as applied to single-family partitions have been met
to comply with this section.
E. Protection of existing vegetation. Existing vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as
possible:
1. The developer shall provide methods for the protectton of existing vegetation to remain
during the construction process; and
2. The plants to be saved shall be noted on the landscape pians (e.g., areas not to be disturbed
can be fenced, as in snow fencing which can be placed around individual trees).
, Comment: All trees are to remain on site as shown on the submitted site plans. It is not
anticipated that any trees will be removed as part of this development. The site plans
show the location of the tree protection fencing. The final location will be determined I
the field. The City will review the tree mitigation plan to ensure compliance with this
provision of the Development Code.
F. Care of landscaping along public rights-of-way. Appropriate methods for the care and
maintenance of street trees and landscaping materials shail be provided by the owner of the
property abutting the rights-of-way unless otherwise required for emergency conditions and
tlle safety of the general public.
Comment: The homeowners that will live in this partition will maintain any street trees
and landscaping materials along the rights-of-way to comply with this section. This
criterion is met.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 29
G. Conditions of approval of existing vegetation. The review procedures and standards for
required landscaping and screening shall be specified in the conditions of approval during
development review and in no instance shall be less than that required for conventional
development.
Comment: The application understands that the conditions of approval will state what
type of landscaping and screening will be required. The application is not requesting an
adjustment to the landscape requirement to be less than the minimum landscaping
required by the development code. All landscaping standards, as detailed by this Code,
will be met as part of the overall development of two single-family homes in a single
family zoning district. This criterion is met.
H. Height restrictions abutting public rights-of-way. No trees, shrubs or plantings more than
18 inches in height shall be planted in the public right-of-way abutting roadways having no
established curb and gutter.
Cornment: The proposed application will have the right-of-way improvements already
constructed as part of the White Oak Village PD. Therefore, this criterion is not
applicable.
18.745.040 Street Trees
A. Protection of existing vegetation. All development projects fronting on a public street,
private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the adoption
of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section
18.745.040.C.
Comment There site does not have more than 100-feet of street frontage. Therefore,
street trees should not be required. However, street trees may be planted along the
frontage in locations that are not affected by the proposed driveway location. The street
trees may be planted as part of the White Oak PD project and not for this partition
project. If street trees are to be planted they will be planted as part of the White Pak PD
will be placed and approved in the field. This criterion is met.
B. Street tree planting list. Certain trees can severely damage utilities, streets and sidewalks or
can cause personal injury. Approval of any planting list shall be subject to review by the
Director.
C. Size and spacing of street trees.
1. Landscaping in the front and exterior side yards shall include trees with a minimum
caliper of two inches at four feet in height as specified in the requirements stated in Section
18.745.040.C.2 below;
2. The specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows:
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 30
a. Small or narrow-stature trees under 25 feet tall and less than 16 feet wide branching at
maturity shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet apart;
b. Medium-sized trees 25 feet to 40 feef tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturify
shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart;
c. Large trees over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be
spaced no greater than 40 feet apart;
d. Except for signalized intersections as provided in Section 18.745.040.H, trees shall not be
planted closer than 20 feet from a street intersection, nor closer than two feet from priz�ate
drivewc�ys (measured af the back edge of the sidewalk),fire l�ydrants or utility poles to
maintain visual clearance;
e. No new utility pole location shall be established closer than five feet to any existing street
tree;
f. Tree pits shall be located so as not to include utilities (e.g., water and gas meters) in the
tree well;
g. On-premises utilities (e.g., water and gas meters) shall not be installed within existing
tree well areas;
li. Street trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards;
i. New light standards shall not be positioned closer than 20 feet to existing street trees
except when public safety dictates, then they may be positioned no closer than 10 feet;
j. 4Vhere there are overhead power lines, the street tree species selected shall be of a type
which, at full maturity, wi11 not interfere with the lines;
k. Trees shall not be planted within two feet from the face of the curb; and
1. Trees shall not be planted within two feet of any permanent hard surface paving or
walkway:
(1) Space between the tree and the hard surface may be covered by a nonpermanent hard
surface such as grates, bricks on sand, paver blocks and cobblestones; and
(2) Sidewalk cuts in concrete for tree planting shall be at leasf four by four feet to allow for
air and water into the root area.
Comment: Any additional street trees that may be required will have a minimum
caliper of two (2) inches and be four feet in height as specified in the requirements and
will be a species listed on the City's approved tree list. As stated above, the street trees
may be installed during the White Oak PD project and not during this project. The final
location of the street will be determined in the field. Therefore, this criterion is met.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 31
D. Pruning requirements. Trees, as they grow, shall be pruned to provide at ieast eight feet of
clearance above sidewalks and 13 feet above local street, 15 feet above collector street, and 18
feet above arterial street roadway surfaces.
Comment: If planted, any street trees will be pruned and maintained by the applicant
until new owners purchase the individual parcels. At that time, the new homeowners
will maintain the trees to meet the requirements of the section. This criterion is met.
E. Cut and fi11 around existing trees. Existing trees may be used as street trees if no cutting or
filling takes place within the drip-line of the tree unless an adjustment is approved by the
Director by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, using approval
criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.4.a.
Comment: There are no existing trees located in the right-of-way. Therefore, this section
of the Development Code is not applicable.
F. Replacement of street trees. Existing street trees removed by development projects or other
construction shall be replaced by the developer with those types of trees approved by the
Director. The replacement trees shall be of a size and species similar to the trees that are
being removed unless lesser sized alternatives are approved by the Director.
G. Granting of adjustments. Adjustments to the street tree requirements may be granted by the
Director by means of a Type I procedure, as regulated in Section 18.390.030, using approvai
criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.4.b.
H. Location of trees near signalized intersections. The Director may allow trees closer to
specified intersections which are signalized, provided the provisions of Chapter 18.795,
Visual Clearance, are satisfied.
Comment: The applicant may plant an appropriate number of street trees to be
replanted and spaced according to city specification and be of an acceptable size and
height. The street trees may be planted as part of the White Oak Village PD. The trees, if
planted, used will be from the approved street tree list provided by the City. This
criterion is met.
18.745.050 Buffering and Screening
A. GeneraI provisions.
1. It is the intent that these requirements shall provide for privacy and protection and reduce
01� eiiminate the adverse impacts of visual or noise pollution at a development site, without
unduIy interfering with the view from neighboring properties or jeopardizing the safety of
pedestrians and vehicles;
2. Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a
different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2).
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 32
The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the instailation and effective
maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another
except for separation by a right-of-way, buffering, but not screening, shall be required as
specified in the matrix;
3. In Iieu of these standards, a detailed buffer area landscaping and screening plan may be
submitted for the Director's approval as an alternative to the buffer area landscaping and
screening standards, provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as
required by this code.
Comment: The project site is adjacent to multiple zoning designations. To the east and
south the zoning is CG while the west is PD (R-12). There is already an existing wall to
the east and south. To the west is the White Oak Village PD. Since there is an existing
wall, the buffer requirement will be 6-feet. This will fall within the required setback for
Parcel2. Therefore, the buffering requirement is not at issue. Parcell also has a wall to
the south and right-of-way and single-family dwelling unit to the west. As with Parcel
2, the buffer requirement for Parcell is not at issue. Therefore, this requirement has
been met or is not applicable.
B. Buffering and screening requirements.
Cornment: For the facts and findings stated above, the screening and buffering
requirements for both parcels have been met. The application has not submitted a
landscape plan since the proposed project meets the matrix requirements. Therefore,
this criterion has been met.
C. Setbacks for fences or walls.
1. No fence or wall shalI be constructed which exceeds tlze standards in Section
18.745.050.C.2 except when the approval authority, as a condition of approval, allows that a
fence or wall be constructed to a height greater than otheru�ise permitted to mitigate against
potential c�dverse effects;
2. Fences or walls:
a. May not exceed three feet in height in a required front yard aIong local streets or eight feet
in all other lacations and, in all other cases, shall meet vision clearance area requirements in
Chapter 18.795;
b. Are permitted up to six feet in height in front yards adjacent to any designated arteriai or
collector street. For any fence over three feet in height in the required front yard area,
permission shall be subject to administrative review of the location of the fence or wall.
3. All fences or walls shall meet vision clearance area requirements in Chapter 18.795;
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 33
4. All fences or walls greater than six feet in height shall be subject to building permit
a�proval.
Comment: The applicant does not propose any fences or walls along local streets nor
will any��alls or fences be taller than eight feet in height. There are walls already in
existence to the south and east of this project site. This criterion is met.
D. Height restrictions.
1. The prescribed heights of required fences, walls or landscaping shall be measured from the
actual adjoining level of finished grade, except that where parking, loading, storage or similar
areas are located above finished grade, the height of fences, walls or landscaping required to
screen such areas or space shall be measured from the Ievel of such improvements;
2. An earthen berm and fence or wall combination shall not exceed the six foot height
limitation for screening.
Comment: The applicant does not propose fences that would exceed the height
restriction of this section. This criterion is met.
E. Screening: special provisions.
1. Screening and landscaping of parking and loading areas:
a. Screening of parking and loading areas is required. The specifications for this screening are
as follows:
(1) Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen
the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped
be��ms, decorative walls and raised planters;
(2) Landscape pIanters may be used to define or screen the appearance of off-street parking
areas from the public right-of-way;
(3)Materiais to be installed should achieve a balance between low lying and vertical
shrubbery and trees;
(4) Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally
distributed and on the basis of one tree for each seven parking spaces in order to provide a
canopy effect; and
(5) The minimum dimension of the landscape islands shall be three feet and the landscaping
shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb.
2. Screening of service facilities. Except for one family and two family dwellings, any refuse
container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which
would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public
facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placernenf of a solid wood fence
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 34
or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained
within the screened area;
3. Screening of swimming pools. All swimming pools shall be enclosed as required by City of
Tigard Building Code;
4. Screening of refuse containers. Except for one- and two family dwellings, any refuse
container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot,
residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be
screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonr�wall or
evef•green hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing any screening situation that would trigger
the special provisions of this code section. Therefore, this section is not applicable.
F. Buffer Matrix.
?. The Buffer Matrices contairced in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2 shall be used in
caiculating widths of buffering/screening and required improvements to be installed between
proposed uses and abutting uses or zoning districts;
2. An application for a variance to the standards required in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2,
sliall be processed as a Type 77 procedure, as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using approval
cr•iteria in Section 18.370.010. (Ord. 02-33)
Comment: As stated above, there are existing walls located to the south and east of this
site. The buffer requirement is not applicable since the buffer lies within the required
setbacks. This criterion is met.
18.745.060 Re-vegetation
A. Wlien re-vegetation is required. Where natural vegetation has been removed through grading
in areas not affected by the landscaping requirements and that are not to be occupied by
structures, such areas are to be replanted as set farth in this section to prevent erosion after
construction activities are completed.
Comment: This application is not proposing additional grading in areas that will be
affected by public improvements and private improvements associated with the
construction of the new dwelling units and associated driveways. In areas that are
disturbed by site development, replanting will occur in order to prevent erosion on the
site after construction. Therefore, this criterion is met.
B. Preparation for re-vegetation. Topsoil removed from the surface in preparation for grading
and construction is to be stored on or near the sites and protected from erosion while grading
operations are underway; and
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 35
1. Such storage may not be located where it wouid cause suffocation of root systems of trees
intended to be preserved; and
2. After completion of such grading, the topsoil is to be restored to exposed cut and fiil
embankments or building pads to provide a suitable base for seeding and planting.
Comment: This application is not proposing mass grading on the site as part of this
application. However, if topsoil is removed during construction of the utility
improvements, then any topsoil removed for grading and construction will be stored on
or near the site and protected from erosion as detailed in this section. After any grading,
the soil will be restored on the site for planting. Therefore, this criterion is met.
C. Methods of re-vegetation.
1. Acceptable methods of re-vegetation include hydro-miciching or the planting of rye grass,
barley, or other seed with equivalent germination rates, and:
a. Where lawn or turf grass is to be established, lawn grass seed or other appropriate
landscape cover is to be sown at not less than four pounds to each 1,000 square feet of Zand
area;
b. Other re-vegetation methods offering equivalent protection may be approved by the
approval authority;
c. Plant materials are to be watered at intervais sufficient to ensure survival c�nd growth; and
d. The use of native plant materials is encouraged to reduce irrigation and maintenance
demands.
Comment: The applicant will perform all re-vegetation as described above to fully
comply with the standards set forth in this Code Section. This criterion is met.
CHAPTER 18.765 - OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS
18.765.020 Applicability of Provisions
A. New construction. At the time of the erection of a new structure within any zoning district,
off-street vehicle parking wiil be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070.
B. Expansion of existing use. At the time of an enlargement of a structure which increases the
on-site vehicle parking requirements, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance
with Section 18.765.070 subject to the foilowing:
E. Building permit conditions. The provision and maintenance of off-street vehicle parking and
loading spaces are the continuing obligation of the property owner:
1. No building or other permit shall be issued until plans are presented to the Director to
show that property is and will remain available for exclusive use as off-streef vehicle parking
and loading space; and
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 36
2. The subse�uent use of property for which the building permit is issued shall be conditional
upon the unqualifi'ed continuance and availability of the amount of vehicle parking and
loading space required by this title;
3. Required vehicle parking shall:
a. Be available for the parking of operable passenger vehicles of residents, patron and
employees only;
b. Not he used for storage of vehicles or materials or for the parking of trucks used in conduct
of the business or use; and
c. Not be rented, leased or assigned to any other person or organization.
Comment: The applicant is proposing a two-parcel partition which will be designed for
single-family homes. Each dwelling unit will have amble room to park at least one
vehicle off-street. All off-street parking and loading requirements will be met as a
condition of approval of this development. Therefore, this standard will be met as
applied to the development.
18.765.030 General Provisions
A. Velzicle parking plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled
plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress
and circulation requirements are to be fuifilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The
Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission
requirement.
B. Locatian of vehicle parking. The location of off-street parking will be as follows:
1. Off-street parking spaces for single family and dupiex dwellings and single family
attaclied dwellings shall be located on the same Iot with the dwelling(s);
Comment: The Preliminary Site plan shows how access, egress and circulation to access
each lot will be granted. Although homes are not proposed at this time, each parcel will
have ample room to have passenger vehicles to park off the street and in the individual
parcels.
C. Joint parking.
Cornment: The applicant is not proposing joint parking with this application; therefore,
this section is not applicable to the development.
D. Parking in mixed-use projects.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing a mixed-use project; therefore, this section is
not applicable to the development.
E. Visitor parking in multi family residential developments.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 37
Comment: This application is for single-family residential development; therefore, this
section is not applicable.
F. Preferential long-term carpool/vanpool parking.
Comment: Carpool and vanpool parking is not required with this development;
therefore, this section is not applicable.
G. Disabled-accessible parking.
Comment: Parking areas are not required with single-family detached dwelling units;
therefore, this section is not applicable to the development.
18.765.040 General Desig�rt Standards
A. Maintenance of parking areas. All parking lots shall be kept clean and in good repair at all
times. Breaks in paved surfaces shall be repaired promptly and broken or splintered wheel
stops sha11 be replaced so that their function will not be impaired.
Comment: A parking lot is not being proposed with this application; therefore, this
section is not applicable to the development.
B. Access drives. With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking:
1. Access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and
constratcted to facilitate fhe flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and
vehicular traffic on the site;
2. The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter, 18.705,Access, Egress and Circulation;
3. Access drives shall be clearly and permanentiy marked and defined through use of rails,
fences, walls or other barriers or rnarkers on frontage not occupied by service drives;
4. Access drives slzall have a minirnum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795,
Visuai Clearance;
5. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and
6. Excluding single family and dupiex residences, except as provided by Subsection
18.810.030P, groups of two or more parking spaces shalI be served by a service drive so tlzat
no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will
be required.
Comment: The access drives for the dwelling units will comply with all of the
standards required for single-family detached residences as stated within this Code
Section. This criterion is met.
H. Parking space surfacing.
1. Except for single family and dupiex residences, and for temporary uses or fleet storage
areas as authorized in 18.765.040.H.3 and 4 below, a11 areas used for the parking or storage
�h'hite Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 3g
or maneuvering of any vehicle, boaf or trailer shall be improved with asphait or concrete
surfaces;
2. Off-street parking spaces for single and two family residences shall be improved with an
asphalt or concrete surface;
Comment: All off-street parking spaces will be improved with an asphalt or concrete
surface to comply with this standard for single-family residences.
K. Drainage. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be drained in accordance with
specifications approved by the City Engineer to ensure that ponds do not occur, except for
single family and duplex residences, off-street parking and loading facilities shall be drained
to avoid flow of water across pubiic sidewalks.
Comment: All off-street parking spaces for the single-family residences will be well-
drained to ensure that ponds do not occur. Therefore, this criterion is met.
18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards
Commen�According to Table 18.765.2, bicycle parking is not required with this
application.
Table 18.765.2 Minimum and Maximum Required Off-street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking
Re uirements
MINIMU ZONE A MAXIMUM ZONE B BICYCLE
RESIDENTIAL
Household Livin
Sin le Unit,Detached 1.0/DU None(M) None(M) None(M)
Accessor Units 1.0/DU None None None
(M):Metro Requirement
18.765.070 Mircimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements
A. Parking requirements for unlisted uses.
1. The Director may ruIe that a use, not specificall� listed in Section 18.765.070.H, is a use
similar to a listed use and that the same parking standards shall apply. If the applicant
requests that the Director's decision be rendered in writing, it shall constitute a Director's
Interpretation, as governed by Section 18.340;
2. The Director shall maintain a list of approved unlisted use parking requirements which
shall have the same effect as an amendment to this chapter.
B. Choice of parking requirements. When a building or use is planned or constructed in such a
manner that a choice of parking requirements could be made, the use which requires the
greater number of parking spaces shall govern.
H. Specific requirements. (See Tab1e 18.765.2
White Oak Partirion City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 39
Comment: The applicant is proposing a two-parcel partition for the development for
single-family detached dwelling units, within the R-4.5 zone, a listed use. T'he
minimum required off-street parking space is 1.0/DU, per Table 18.765.2. Residential
developments do not have a maximum off-street parking space requirement.
18.765.080 Off-Street Loading Requirements
A. Off-street loading spaces. Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures
to be ba�ilt or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall
�rovide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows:
Commen� The applicant is proposing development in a residential zone, R-4.5;
therefore, this section is not applicable to the development.
CHAPTER 18.790 - TREE REMOVAL
18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement
A. Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by
a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parceis for
which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review,
planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal
wherever possible.
Comment: The applicant has prepared a tree plan in compliance with this Code Section.
The proposed partition is not preparing to remove any of the existing trees along the
eastern property line, with the exception of tree #1 which has been identified as
hazardous by the project arborist. The applicant has supplied an arborist report
prepared by a certified arborist, as required by the City to demonstrate that the trees
will remain on site and that the tree protection fencing is in the proper location. Since
only one hazardous tree is proposed to be removed, the application does not find it
necessary to address how the design of the project will preserve trees. The application
has designed the project to preserve all but one if the existing trees on the site. The
protection of the trees has taken a paramount role rather then removing the trees. The
application requests that the City use discretion when reviewing this Code Section in
relation to the Director's Interpretation to not request a full explanation of the
preservation of tress when all trees will be preserved. Therefore, this requirement has
been met for approval.
B. Plan requirernents. The tree plan shall include the following:
1. Identification of the Iocation, size and species of ail existing trees including trees
designated as significant by the city;
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 40
Comment: The tree assessment from the tree plan identifies the trees that will remain
on the site as required by the City. This criterion is met.
2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in
caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in
accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other
development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots:
a. Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caiiper requires a mitigation
program in accordance with Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees;
b. Retention of from 25% to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two
thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
c. Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50
percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
d. Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper reqa�ires no
mitigation.
Comment: The tree assessment from the tree plan indicates that only one tree will be
removed from the site. This tree is under 12-inches and not subject to mitigation.
Therefore, there is a 100% retention rate which means that no mitigation will be
required for this partition. Therefore, this criterion has been met.
3. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed;
Comment: As stated above, no trees are proposed to be removed in association with
this project. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
4. A protection program defining standards and methods tlzat will be used by the applicant to
protect trees during and after construction.
Comment: The Improvement Plan shows the approximate location of the tree
protection fencing. This fencing will be installed prior to any major site work. Therefore,
this criterion has been met.
C. Subsequent tree removal. Trees removed within the period of one year prior to a development
application listed above will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced
according to Section 18.790.060D.
Comment: As stated above, no trees are proposed to be removed in association with
this project. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 41
T8.790.040 Incentives for Tree Retention
A. Incentives. To assist in the preservation and retention of existing trees, the Director may
apply one or more of the following incentives as part of development review approval and the
B. Subsequent removaI of a tree. Any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section
may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with
Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be
subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a
deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by this section
to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a
certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree
preserved in accordance with this section sl�ould either die or be removed as a hazardous tree.
The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director.
C. Site development modifications granted as incentives. A rnodification to development
requirements granted under this section shall not conflict with any other restriction on the
use of the property, inciuding but not limited to easements and conditions of development
approval.
D. Design modifications of public improvernents. The City Engineer may adjust design
specifications of public improvements to accommodate tree retention where possible and
where it would not interfere with safety or increase maintenance costs.
Comment: The applicant does not request any incentives or modifications to the
development requirements with this application. Therefore this section is not
applicable.
18.790.050 Permit Applicability
A. Removal permit required. Tree removal permits shall be required only for the removal of any
tree which is located on or in a sensitive land area as defined by Chapter 18.775. The permit
for removal of a tree shall be processed as a Type I procedure, as governed by Section
18.390.030, using the following approval criteria:
B. Effective date of permit. A tree removal permit shall be effective for one and one-half years
from the date of approval.
C. Extension. Upon written request by the applicant prior to the expiration of the existing
permit, a tree removal permit shaIl be extended for a period of up to one year if the Director
finds that the applicant is in compliance with all prior conditions of permit approval and that
no material facts stated in the original application have changed.
D. Removal permit not required. A tree removal permit shall not be required for the removal of a
tree which:
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 42
E. Prohibition of commercial forestry. Commercial forestry as defined by Section 18.790.020
A.2., excluding D.4. above, is not permitted.
Comment: No portion of the site is within a sensitive land as defined by Chapter 18.775.
This criterion is not applicable.
18.790.060 Illegal Tree Removai
Comment: The tree assessment from the tree plan indicates that no trees will be
removed from the site. Therefore, there is a 100% retention rate which means that no
trees will be removed as part of this development. Therefore, this criterion has been
met.
CHAPTER 18.795 -VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS
18.795.020 Ap�licability of Provisions
A. When provisions apply. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development
including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a
clzange of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes
tlie access requirements.
B. When site development review is not required. Where the provisions of Chapter 18.330, Site
DeveIopment Review, do not apply, the Di��ectar shall approve, approve with conditions, or
deny a plan submitted under the provisions of fhis chapter through a Type I procedure, as
governed b� Section 18.390.030, using the standards in this chapter as approval criteria.
Comment: The applicant is proposing a two-parcel partition. All vision clearance
provisions of this Code Section will be met.
18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements
A. At corners. Except within the CBD zoning district a visual clearance area shall be
maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to the intersection of two streets, a street
and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street.
B. Obstructions prohibited. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting,fence,
wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole
or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb
exists,from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located
in this area, provided all branches beiow eight feet are removed.
C. Additionai topographical constraints. Where the crest of a hill or vertical curve conditions
contribute to the obstrucfion of clear vision areas at a sfreet or driveway intersection, hedges,
piantings,fences, wails, wall structures and temporary or permanent obstructions sha11 be
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 43
further reduced in height or eliminated to comply with the intent of the required clear vision
area.
Comrnent: The applicant has prepared a preliminary sight distance certification for the
two parcels. Since the parcels are located at the corner of an eye-brow corer vision
clearance should not be an issue. The applicant will not obstruct this clear vision area by
placing a hedge, plantings, a fence or wall structure over three feet high measured from
the top of the curb. This criterion is met.
18.795.040 Computations
B. Non-ai•terial streets.
1. Non-arterial streets 24 feet or more in width. At all intersections of two non-arterial
streets, a non-arterial street and a driveway, and a non-arterial street or driveway and
railroad where at least one of the streets or driveways is 24 feet or more in width, a visual
clearance area shall be a triangle formed by the right-of-way or property lines along such lots
and a straight line joining the right of- way ar property line at points wlzich are 30 feet
distance from the intersection of the right-of-way line and measured along such lines. See
Figurc 18.795.1:
� �. �(.� kr',�r�i��i •: 'F
�►�Y , I ' .,
. ., .
�� �,{� �{��1 - � . .
� ho1'bAG.IC`C/ � 1 .',•, s�p'
_ � � Ltnv . •
40' 30' � C_�g(1{'O� �, �, ..._
�ee� W�.� ���
FIGL'RE 18.795.1
ILLLTSTR?�TIO\S OF�'ISL:�L CLEARA�CE REQLTREME:�TS
2. Non-arterial streets Iess than 24 feet in width. At alI intersections of two non-arterial streets,
a non-arterial street and a driveway, and a non-arterial street or driveway and railroad
where both streets and/or driveways are less than 24 feet in width, a visual clearance area
shail be a triangle whose base extends 30 feet along the street right-of-way line in both
directions from the centerline of the accessway at the front setback line of a single family and
two family residence, and 30 feet back from the property line on all other types of uses.
Comment: The applicant has prepared a preliminary sight distance certification for the
site. Since the site is at the corner of an eye-brow corner the vehicles leaving the site will
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 44
have plenty of distance to see any on coming vehicles. The site plan shows the vision
clearance triangle. Therefore, this section has been met for approval.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 45
CHAPTER 18.810 - STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
18.810.020 General Provisions
A. When standards apply. Unless otherwise provided, construction, reconstruction or repair of
streets, sidewalks, curbs and other public improvernents shall occur in accordance with the
standards of this title. No development may occur and no land use application may be
approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the puhlic facility
requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available.
Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements onl�
when tke required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the
development.
B. Standard specifications. The City Engineer shall establish standard specifications consistent
with the application of engineering principles.
C. Section 7.40 applies. The provision of Section 7.40 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply
to this chapter.
D. Adjustments. Adjustments to the provisions in this chapter related to street improvements
may be granted by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using
approval criteria in Section 18.370.030 C9.
E. Except as provided in Section 18.810.0305, as used in this chapter, the term "streets" shall
mean "public streets" unless an adjustment under Section 18.810.020.D is allowed. (Ord.
99-22)
Comment: The applicant has prepared a two-parcel partition application in compliance
with the requirements of this section. The applicant makes assurances that adequate
public facilities exist for the development of this partition. This criterion is met.
18.810.030 Streets
A. Improvements.
1. No development shalI occur unless the development has frontage or approved access to a
public street.
2. No development shall occur uniess streets within the development meet the standards of
this chapter.
3. No development shall occur unless the streets adjacent to the deveiopment meet the
standards of this chapter, provided, however, that a development may be approved if the
adjacent street does not meet the standards but half-street improvements meeting the '
standards of this title are constructed adjacent to the development.
4. Any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall
meet the standards of this chapter;
VVhite Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 46
5. If the City couid and would otherwise require the applicant to provide street
improvements, tlie City Engineer may accept a future improvements guarantee in lieu of
street improvements if one or more of the following conditions exist:
a. A partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design
standards;
b. A partial improvement may create a potentinl safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians;
c. Due to the nature of existing deveiopment on adjacent properties it is uniikely that street
improvements would be extended in the foreseeable future c�nd the improvement associated
with the project under review does not, by itself, provide a significant improvement to street
safety or capacity;
d. The improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan;
e. The improvement is associated with an approved land partition on property zoned
residential and the proposed land partition does not create any new streets; or
f. Additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the
street and the application is for a project which would contribute only a minor portion of the
anticipated future traffic on the street.
6. The standards of fhis chapter include the standard specifications adopted by the City
Engineer pursuant to Section 18.810.020.B.
7. The approval authority may approve adjustments to the standards of this chapter if
compliance with the standards would result in an adverse impact on natural features such as
wetlands, steep slopes, or existing mature trees. The approval authority may also approve
adjustments to the standards of this chapter if compliance with the standards would have a
substantial adverse impact on existing deveiopment or wouid preclude devetopment on the
property where the development is proposed. In approving an adjustment to the standards,
the approval authority shali baiance the benefit of the adjustment with the impact on the
public interest represented by the standards. In evaluating the impact on the pubiic interest,
the approval authority shalI consider the criteria listed in Section T 8.810.030 E.1. An
adjustment to the standards may not be granted if the adjustment would risk public safet�.
Comment: Each parcel in the partition has access to SW 74th Avenue, either by direct
frontage or an access easement. No new streets are being created as a result of this
development. Therefore, this section may not apply due to the type of development
being proposed.
B. Creation of rights-of-way for streets and related purposes. Rights-of-way shall be created
through the approval of a final subdivision plat or major partition; however, the Council may
approve the creation of a street by acceptance of a deed, provided that such streef is deemed
essential by the Council for the purpose of general traffic circulation:
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 47
1. The Council may approve the creation of a street by deed of dedication without full
compliance with the regulations applicable to subdivisions or major partitions if any one or
more of the following conditions are found by the Council to be present:
a. Establishment of a street is initiated by the Council and is found to be essential for the
purpose of general traffic circulation and partitioning or subdivision of land has an
incidental effect rather than being the primary objective in establishing the road or street for
public use; or
b. The tract in which the road or street is to be dedicated is an isolated ownership of one acre
or less and such dedication is recommended by the Commission to the Council based on a
finding that the proposal is not an attempt to evade the provisions of this title governing the
control of subdivisions or major partitions.
2. With each application for approval of a road or street right-of-way not in full compliance
with the regulations applicable to the standards, the proposed dedication shall be made a
condition of subdivision and major partition approval:
a. The applicant shall submit such additional information and justification as may Ue
necessary to enable the Commission in its review to determine whether or not a
recommendation for approval by the Council shall be made;
b. The recommendation, if any, shall be based upon a finding that the proposal is not in
conflict with the purpose of this title;
c. The Commission in submitting the proposal with a recommendation to the Council may
attach conditions which are necessary to preserve the standards of this title; and
3. AlI deeds of dedication shall be in a form prescribed by the City and shall name "the
public,"as grantee.
Comment: The applicant is requesting approval of a two-parcel partition at the
eyebrow corner of SW 74th Avenue. There is no additional dedication since the property
has already dedicated the required right-of-way during the development of the White
Oak Village PD. As a result, this criterion is met.
C. Creation of access easements. The approvai authority may approve an access easement
established by deed without fuli compiiance with this title provided such an easement is the
oniy reasonable method by which a iot large enough to develop can be created:
1. Access easements shali be provided and maintained in accordance with the Uniform Fire
Code Section 10.207;
2. Access shaii be in accordance with Sections 18.705.030.H and 18.705.030I.
Comment: The only access easement being created is to allow vehicle access to Parcel2.
However,both parcels are large enough to develop with or without the use of an
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 48
easement. The access easement will be maintained in accordance with Tigard
Development and Uniform Fire standards. This criterion is met.
D. Street location, width and grade. Except as noted below, the location, width and grade of all
streets shall conform to an approved street plan and shall be considered in their relation to
existing and planned streets, to topographic conditions, to public convenience and safety, and
in their appropriate relation to the proposed use of the land to be served by such streets:
1. Street grades shall be approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Subsection N
below; and
2. Wl2ere the location of a street is not shown in an approved street plan, the arrangement of
streets in a development shall either:
a. Provide for the continuation or appropriate projection of existing streets in the
surrounding areas, or
b. Conform to a plan adopted by the Commission, if it is impractical to conform to existing
street patterns because of particular topographical or other existing conditions of the land.
Sucl2 a plan shall be based on the type of land use to be served, the volume of traffic, the
capacity of adjoining streets and the need for public convenience and safety.
E. Minirnum rights-of-way and street widths. Unless otherwise indicated on an approved street
plan, or as needed to continue an existing improved street, street right-of-way and roadway
widths shall not be iess than the minimum width described below. Where a range is
indicated, the width shall be determined by the decision-making authority based upon
anticipated average daily traffic (ADT) on the new street segment. (The City Council may
adopt by resolution, design standards for street construction and other pubiic improvements.
The design standards will provide guidance for determining improvement requirements
within the specified ranges.) These are presented in Table 18.810.1.
1. The decision-making body shall make ifs decision about desired right-of-way width and
pavement width of the various street ftjpes within the subdivision or development after
consideration of the following:
a. The type of road as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Chapter-
Functionai Street Classification;
b. Anticipated traffic generation;
c. On-street parking needs;
d. Sidewalk and bikeway requirements;
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 49
- v �. r e r g Y .a
s'— x � �^ ° '`� �
�� � , i �V c4 � ��^ •-
T�pe of Street ' s .z L .+^ s � `� ' ^ �_ �
i� s 9� �z � =� �`�.r R`.
L Y � Y
+ E �s �e
�+ E e TS c -� � �+ �
'a ° ;�, i
a � + p
Anrnal 64'-12E' Vanes 2-7(Refer m 1^_' NJA 6'(Pkr•Saeen) 8'(Rr�.&Ind.2ameaj 5' 12•t��
�P) 5'-6' Streetal IO' Comm Zmes
Collecta 58'-96' l'au+ 2�5(Refer a 11' N/A 6'(4ew Sucen) 6'(Rn.&Ind.Zaues) 5' 12'u�
TSP) 5'-6' Sueets !' Con�.Zones
N-hborhoodAoute 50'-58' ?8�-36' 10' 8' S'-6' S'-6'� 5' NiA
Lool
lndntrul�'Coawxrail 50' 36� 2 L:.!A 5'-6-� 5' �i�A
Local Residmtial Y�A
Under ISW ADT SJ750'a: 3?'28'0� 2 8'(botl�s�dn) AVA 5'•6'Q 5'
t3ndrr 500 ADT $0'1�'0> 2E'/2�'�� 2 d'(me ude) N!A
Under 200 ADT 46'/42'P� 2d'20'� 2 o Pak� PZ'A
Culde-sac 6ulbs�n i0' s?'ndw� N!A IS%A N/A S1/A
Indusmal and ndms
Cmunmcial zones
Cul-de-.ucbulbsin 47' 40�rad�u� N:A NiA N;A N:A N:A
Aecufecvalzooes radn¢
Allev Rn�denoul 16' 16' N/A WA NiA N!A N�A
Alln��Hvs�MSS 20' 20' NfA N/A N�A ;I/A N%A
(Ord.02-33)
i Medims required frir 5 nad 7 Inne ro�Aa roys. 'ILey�rc optio�l for 3 Lae roadways,
'Sidew-alk midtha for these streets ahall be 5 ft w•it6 lmdccwpe atrip:6 ft if agaiact cutb(if petmitted ia accordance with 18.810.070.C7.
'"SWnny Sneet"roed���ay widrhs ure permiaeA n•here crou tecbou aad rmew cntrria ere met. Refer to conespo�iug croes aeetio`u(Figwts 18.810.3,
18.870.4 and 18.810.5)f;u deuilc sad con&tions.
Cornment: The applicant has designed the project to reflect the dedication already
given to the City for the development of White Oak Village PD. This right of way is
already dedication is sufficient to meet current eyebrow corner standards, which
include the sidewalk and planter strip. This criterion is met.
F. Future street plan and extension of streets.
1. A future street plan shall:
a. Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition.
The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of
the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 530 feet surrounding and
adjacent to the proposed land division. At the applicant's request, the City may prepare a
futicre streets proposal. Costs of the City preparing a future streets proposaI slzall Ue
reimbursed for the time involved. A street proposal may be modified when subsequent
subdivision proposals are submitted.
b. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes
and pedestrian facilities on or within 530 feet of the site.
2. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining Iand,
streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed, and
a. These extended streets or street stubs to adjoining properfies are not considered to be cul-
de-sac since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining
property is developed.
b. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall
not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in
the street construction cost.
6ti'hite Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 50
c. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs s1za11 be constructed for
stub street in excess of 150 feet in length.
G. Street spacing and access management. Refer to 18.705.030.H.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing any future streets or extensions with this
application thus this criterion is not applicable.
H. Street alignment and connections.
1. Full streef connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is
required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads,freeways, pre-
existing developments, Iease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing
prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections.A full street connection may also be
exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction.
2. All local, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be
extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental
oi� topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other
standards in fhis code. A street connection or extension is considered precluded when it is
not possible to redesign or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land
is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15%for a distance of
250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence
of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The appiicant
must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection.
3. Proposed street or street extensions shall be located to provide direct access to existing or
planned transit stops, commercial services, and other neighborhood facilities, such as schools,
shop�ing areas and parks.
4. All developments should provide an internal network of connecting streets that provide
short, direct travel routes and minimize traveI distances within the development.
Comment: The application and site design does not include any new future street
connections nor does it create any street extensions. Each parcel in the partition has
access to SW 74�'' Avenue, either by direct frontage or an access easement. This criterion
is not applicable.
I. Intersection angles. Streets shall be iaid out so as to intersecf at an angle as near to a right
angle as practicable, except where topography requires a lesser angle, but in no case shall the
angle be less than 75° unless there is special intersection design, and:
1. Streets shall have at least 25 feet of tangent adjacent to the right-of-way intersection
unless topography requires a lesser distance;
1Nhite Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 51
2. Intersections which are not at right angles shall have a minimum corner radius of 20 feet
along the right-of-way lines of the acute angle; and
3. Right-of-way lines at intersection with arterial streets shall have a corner radius of not less
than 20 feet.
Comment: The application does not create any new streets. This criterion is not
applicable.
J. Existing rights-of-way. Wlienever existing rights-of-way adjacent to or within a tract are of
less than standard width, additional rights-of-way sliall be provided at the time of
subdivision or development.
Comment: The subject site has already dedicated right-of-way for the development of
the White Oak Village PD. This application is not proposing to dedicate any additional
right-of-way. This criterion is met.
K. Partial street impravements Partial street improvements resulting in a pavement width of
less than 20 feet; while generally not acceptable, may be approved where essential to
reasonable development when in conformity with the other requirements of these regulations,
and wlTen it will be practical to require the improvement of the other half when the adjoining
property developed.
Comment: As stated above, the subject site has already dedicated right-of-way for the
development of the White Oak Village PD. This application is not proposing to dedicate
any additional right-of-way. This criterion is met.
L. Cu1s-de-sacs. A cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long shall not provide access to
greater than 20 dwelling units, and shail only be used when environmental or topographical
constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in tlzis code
preclude street extension and through circulation:
1. All cuis-de-sac sha11 terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other
than circular, shall be approved by the City Engineer; and
2. The length of the cul-de-sac shali be measured from the centerline intersection point of the
two streets to the radius point of the bulb.
3. If a cui-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street
may be required to be provided and dedicated to the City.
Comment: This project is not located on a cul-de-sac. Therefore, this criterion does not
apply.
M. Street names. No street name shall be used which will duplicate or be confused with the
names of existing streets in Washington County, except for extensions of existing streets.
th'hite Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 52
Street names and numbers shall conform to the established pattern in the surrounding area
and as approved by the City Engineer.
Comment: The application does not propose any new streets and thus this criterion is
not applicable.
N. Grades and curves.
1. Grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any
other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up
to 15%for distances of no greater than 250 feet), and
2. Cenferline radii of curves shalI be as determined by the City Engineer.
Comment: As stated above, this partition is located along an eyebrow corner of SW 74th
Avenue. The design of the corner was completed during the construction documents of
the White Oak Village PD. T'herefore, this criterion does not apply.
O. Curbs, curb cuts, ramps, and driveway approaches. Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair,
bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards
specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080; and:
1. Concrete curbs ana driveway approaches are required; except
2. Where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City
Engineer approval; and
3. Asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shaIl be buiit to City
configuration standards.
Comment: All curbs, curb cuts, ramps and driveway approaches will be constructed in
accordance with the standards specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080. The
majority of this work will be constructed during the construction of the White Oak
Village PD. It is unknown if modifications to the curb cut and sidewalk standards may
be requested or revised. This criterion is met.
P. Streets adjacent to railroad right-of-way. Wherever the proposed development contains or is
adjacent to a railroad right-of-way, provision shall be made for a street approximateIy parallel
to and on each side of such right-of-way at a distance suitable for the appropriate use of the
land. The distance shall be determined with due consideration at cross streets or the
minimum distance required for approach grades and to provide sufficient depth to aliow
screen planting along the railroad right-of-way in nonindustrial areas.
Comment: The application does not contain any streets that are adjacent to railroad
right of way and therefore this criterion is not applicable.
4Vhite Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 53
Q. Access to arterials and collectors. Where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing
or proposed arterial or collector street, the development design shall provide adequate
protection for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic,
or if separation is not feasible, the design shall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall
include any of the following:
1. A parallel access street along the arterial or collector;
2. Lots of suitaUle depth abutting the arterial or colIector to provide adequate buffering with
frontage along another street;
3. Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a nonaccess reservation
along tlie arterial or collector; or
4. Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection;
5. If a lot has access to two streets with different classifications, primary access should be
from tlze Iower classification street.
Comment: The site is not adjacent to, abutting or traversed by any arterials or collector
streets and thus this criterion is not applicable.
R. AlIeys, public or private.
1. Alleys shalI be no less than 20 feet in width. In commercial and industrial districts, alleys
shall be provided unless other permanent provisions for access to off-street parking and
loading faciIities are made.
2. WJ1ile aIley intersections and sharp changes in alignment shall be avoided, the corners of
necessary alley intersections shall have a radius of not Iess than 12 feet.
Comment: The application does not contain any alleys and thus the criterion is not
applicable.
S. Survey monuments. Upon completion of a street improvement and prior to acceptance by the
City, it shall be the responsibility of the developer's registered professionai land surveyor to
provide certificafion to the City that all boundary and interior monuments shail be
reestablished and protected.
Comment: The applicant acknowledges that it is the responsibility of the developer's
professional land surveyor to provide certification to the City that all boundary and
interior monuments will be reestablished and protected. This criterion is met.
T. Private streets.
1. Design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer; and
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 54
2. The City shall require Iegal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets,
such as a recorded maintenance agreement.
3. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned
developments, mobile home parks, and multi family residential developments.
Comment: The application does not contain any private streets and thus this criterion is
not applicable.
U. Railroad crossings. Where an adjacent developrnent results in a need to install or improve a
r•ailroad crossing, the cost for such improvements may be a condition of development
approz�al or another equitable means of cost distribution slzall be determined by the public
works Director and approved by the Commission.
Comment: The application is not adjacent to a development that will result in a need to
install or improve a railroad crossing and thus criterion is not applicable.
V. Street signs. The City sha11 install all street signs, relative to traffic control and street names,
as specified Uy the City Engineer for any development. The cost of signs shall be the
responsihility of the developer.
Comment: It is not anticipated that additional street signs will be required. However,
the applicant acknowledges that the cost of any street signs procured by the City for the
partition will be the responsibility of the developer. This criterion is met.
W. Mailboxes. Joint mailbox facilities shail be proz�ided in all residential developments, with each
joint mailbox serving at least two dwelling units.
1. Joint mailbox structures shall be placed adjacent to roadway curbs;
2. Proposed locations of joint mailboxes shall be designated on a copy of the preliminary plat
or development plan, and shall be approved by the City Engineer/US Post Office prior to
final plan approval; and
3. Plans for the joint maiibox structures to be used shall be submitted for approval by the
Citi� Engineer/US Post Office prior to final approval.
Comment: The applicant will work with the Postal Service and Ciiy Engineer to
determine the ultimate location of the mailboxes for this partition. This criterion is met.
X. Traffic signals. The location of traffic signals shall be noted on approved street plans. Where
a proposed street intersection will result in an immediate need for a traffic signal, a signal
meeting approved specifications shall be installed. The cost shall be included as a condition of
development.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 55
Y. Street Iight standards. Street lights shall be installed in accordance with regulations adopted
by the City's direction.
Z. Street name signs. Street name signs shaIl be installed at all street intersections. Stop signs
and other signs may be required.
Comment: It is not anticipated that traffic signals, street lights or street name signs will
be required with this two-parcel partition. This criterion is not applicable.
AA. Street cross-sections. The final lift of asphalt concrete pavement shall be placed on ail new
const��ucted public roadways prior to final City acceptance of the roadway and within one
year of the conditional acceptance of the roadway unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer. The final lift shall also be placed no later than when 90% of the structures in the
new deveiopment are completed or three years from the commencement of initial construction
of the development, whichever is less.
Camment: The final lift will occur once all the construction for the White Oak Village
PD is complete. The design of the roadway is already approved and will be constructed
with the improvements of the PD. Therefore, this criterion has been met.
AB. Traffic calming. When, in the opinion of the City Engineer, the proposed development will
create a negative traffic condition on existing neighborhood streets, such as excessive
speeding, the deveioper may be required to provide traffic calming measures. These measures
may be required within the development and/or offsite as deemed appropriate. As an
alternative, the developer may be required to deposit funds with the City to help pay for
traffic calming measures that become necessary once the development is occupied and the
Cify Engineer determines that the additional traffic from the development has triggered the
need for traffic caIming measures. The City Engineer will determine the amount of funds
required, and will collect said funds from the developer prior fo the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy, or in the case of subdivision, prior to the approval of the final plat. The funds will
be held by the City for a period of five (5)years from the date of issuance of certificate of
occupancy, or in the case of a subdivision, the date of final plat approval. Any funds not used
by the City within the five-year time period wiIl be refunded to the developer.
AC. Traffic study.
1. A traffic study shall be required for aiI new or expanded uses or developments under any
of the following circumstances:
a. when they generate a 10% or greater increase in existing traffic to high collision
intersections identified by Washington County.
b. Trip generations from deveIopment onto the City street at fhe point of access and the
existing ADT fall within the following ranges:
c. If any of the following issues become evident to the City engineer:
White Oak Partition Cit}'of Tigard
SR Design LLC 56
(1)High traffic volumes on the adjacent roadway that may affect movement into or out of the
site
(2) Lack of existing left-turn lanes onto the adjacent roadway at the proposed access drive(s)
(3) Inadequate horizontal or verticaI sight distance at access points
(4) The proximity of the proposed access to other existing drives or intersections is a potential
hazard
(5) The proposal requires a conditional use permit or involves a drive-through operation
(6) The proposed development may result in excessive traffic volumes on adjacent local
streets.
2. In addition, a traffic study may be required for all new or expanded uses or developrnents
under any of the following circumstances:
a. when the site is within 500 feet of an ODOT facility and/or
b. trip generation from a development adds 300 or more vehicle trips per day to an ODOT
facility and/or
c. trip generation from a development adds 50 or more peak hour trips to an ODOT facility.
Comment: This is a two-parcel partition; one house already existed on the site.
Therefore the increase in traffic will be from one additional dwelling unit,
approximately ten vehicle trips. This is well under the threshold requirement for a
traffic study or impact statement. This development will not cause traffic congestion
that would trigger traffic calming devises. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
18.810.040 Blocks
A. Block design. The length, width and shape of blocks sha11 be designed with due regard to
providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for
convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of
Iimitations and opportunities of topography.
Comment: The application does not propose to change the current block design since
the eyebrow corner is already under construction. This criterion is met.
B. Sizes.
1. The perimeter of blocks formed by streets shail not exceed 2,000 feet measured along the
centerline of the streets except:
a. Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of
water, or pre-existircg development; or
b. For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, collectors or railroads.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 57
c. For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access.
2. Bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided
when full street connection is exempted by B.1 above. Spacing between connections shall be
no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical
constraints, exisfing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code.
Comment: The application does not contemplate changing the size of the block since
the project is at a bend in the road and is surrounded by developed commercial
property. This criterion is not applicable.
18.810.050 Easements
A. Easements. Easements for sewers, drainage, water mains, electric lines or other public
utilities shall be either dedicated or provided for in the deed restrictions, and where a
development traversed by a watercourse, or drainageway, there shail be provided a storm
water easement or drainage right-of-way conforming substantially with the lines of the
u�atercourse.
Comment: The application proposes easements for sewers, drainage water mains, and
electric lines where required. The final location of the easements will be identified on
the final plat. The final plat will be submitted to the city for review prior to recording at
the County Surveyor's Office. This criterion is met.
B. Utilit� easements. A property owner proposing a deveiopment shall make arrangements
with the City, the applicable district and each utility franchise for the provision and
dedication of utility easements necessary to provide full services to the development. The
City's standard width for public main line utility easements shall he 15 feet unless otherwise
specified by the utility company, applicable district, or City Engineer.
Comment: The applicant has made arrangements that provide for full services to the
development. In fact all the utilities will be installed during the development of the
White Oak Village PD. This criterion is met.
18.810.060 Lots
A. Size and shape. Lot size, width, shape and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of
the development and for the type of use contemplated, and:
1. No iot shall contain part of an existing or proposed picblic right-of-way within its
dimenstons;
2. The depth of a111ots shall not exceed 2-1/2 times the average width, unless the parcel is less
than 1-1/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district;
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
5R Design LLC 58
3. Depth and width of properties zoned for commercial and industrial purposes shall be
adequate to provide for the off-street parking and service facilities required by the fype of use
proposed.
Comment: The application contains parcels that are the size and shape appropriate for
the location of the development. The depth of all proposed parcels will not exceed 2-1/2
times the average width and is zoned residential. This criterion is met.
B. Lot fi�ontage. Each lot shall abatt upon a public or private street, otker than an alley,for a
width of at least 25 feet unless the lot is created through a minor land partition in which case
Subsection 18.162.050 (C) applies, or unless the lot is for an attached single family dwelling
unit, in which case the Iot frontage shall be at least 15 feet.
Comment: The application is for a minor land partition and each parcel in the partition
has access to SW 74t" Avenue, either by direct frontage or an access easement; therefore
Chapter 18.162.050 (C) applies. Parcell has approximately 77 feet of street frontage and
Parcel 2 has a 20-foot access easement through Parcell to SW 74th Avenue. This
criterion is met.
C. Through lots. Through lots shall be avoided except where they are essential to provide
separation of residential development from major traffic arterials or to overcome specific
disadvantages of topography and orientation, and:
1. A planting buffer at least ten feet wide is required abutting the arterial rights-of-way; and
2. All through lots shall provide the required front yard setback on each street.
D. Lot side lines. The side lines of Iots, as far as practicaUle, shall be at right angies to the street
t�pon wlzich the lots front.
E. La1-ge Iots. In dividing tracts into large lots or parcels which at some future time are likely to
be redivided, the Commission may require that the lots be of such size and shape, and be so
divided into building sites, and contain such site restrictions as wiil provide for the extension
and opening of streets at intervais which wiil permit a subsequent division of any tract into
lots or parcels of smaller size. The land division shaii be denied if the proposed large
development lot does not provide for the future division of the lots and future extension of
public facilities.
Comment: The application contains no through lots, the lot side lines are at right
angles as near as possible to the street and there are no large parcels that will likely be
re-divided due to the site development requirements and configuration proposed for
both parcels. This criterion is met.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 59
18.810.070 Sidewalks
A. Sidewalks. All industriai streets and private streets shali have sidewalks meeting City
standards along at least one side of the street. All other streets shail have sidewalks meeting
City standards along both sides of the street. A development may be approved if an adjoining
street has sidewalks on the side adjoining the development, even if no sidewalk exists on the
other side of the street.
Comment: The application will have the site improvements installed as part of the
White Oak Village PD. The sidewalks may be bonded until the dwelling units are
constructed. A sidewalk is only proposed along the frontage of this partition. The
sidewalk should be able to tie into the sidewalk being proposed with the PD to the
west. This criterion is met.
B. Requirement of developers
1. As part of any development proposal, or change in use resulting in an additional 1,000
vehicle trips or more per day, an applicant shall be required to identify direct, safe (1.25 x the
straight line distance)pedestrian routes within 1/2 mile of their site to all transit facilities
and Neighborhood Activity Centers (schools, parks, libraries, etc.). In addition, the developer
may be required to participate in the removal of any gaps in the pedestrian system off-site if
justified by the development.
Comment: Due to the size of this partition, there will be not be an additiona11,000
vehicle trips per day near or at this location, therefore this section is not applicable.
2. If there is an existing sidewalk, on the same side of the street as the development, within
300 feet of a development site in either direction, the sidewalk shall be extended from the site
to meet the existing sidewalk, subject to rough proportionality (even if the sidewalk does not
serve a neighborhood activity center).
Comment: Sidewalks will be constructed in front of this project.Therefore this criterion
has been met.
C. Planter strip requirements.A planter strip separation of at least five feet between the curb
and the sidewalk shaIl be required in the design of streets, except where the following
conditions exist: there is inadequate right-of-way; the curbside sidewaiks already exist on
predominant portions of the street;
it would conflict with the ufilities, there are significant natural features (large trees, water
features, etc) that would be destroyed if the sidewalk were located as required, or where there
are existing structures in close proximity to the street (15 feet or less)Additional
consideration for exempting the planter strip requirement may be given on a case by case
basis if a property abuts more than one street frontage.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 60
Comment: The applicant is proposing to construct sidewalks around the frontage of the
site in a similar fashion to the improvements being proposed for the White Oak Village
PD. As stated above, all improvements will be installed during the development of the
White Oak Village PD being constructed west of this site.
E. Maintenance. Maintenance of sidewalks, curbs, and planter strips is the continuing
obligation of the adjacent property ozvner.
F. Application for permit and inspection. If the construction of a sidewalk is not included in a
performance bond of an approved sacbdivision or tlze performance bond has lapsed, then every
person,firm or corporation desiring to construct sidewalks as provided by this chapter, shall,
before entering upon the work or improvement, apply for a street opening permit to the
Engineering department to so build or construct:
1. An occupancy permit shail not be issued for a development until the provisions of this
section are satisfied.
2. The City Engineer may issue a permit and certificate allowing temporary noncompliance
with the provisions of this section to the owner, builder or contractor when, in his opinion,
the construction of the sidewalk is impractical for one or more of the following reasons:
a. Sidewalk grades have not and cannot be established for the property in question within a
reasonabie length of time;
b. Forthcoming installation of public utilities or street paving would be likeiy to cause severe
damage to the new sidewalk;
c. Street right-of-way is insufficient to accommodate a sidewalk on one or both sides of the
street; or
d. Topography or elevation of the sidewalk base area makes construction of a sidewalk
impractical or economically infeasible; and
3. The City Engineer shall inspect the construction of sidewalks for compliance with the
provision set forth in the standard specifications manual.
Comment: The sidewalks will most likely be installed during the construction of the
White Oak Village PD, located west of this site. The design of the sidewalk and planter
strip should have already been reviewed by the City Engineer. This criterion is met.
18.810.080 Public Use Areas
A. Dedication requirements.
1. Where a proposed park, playground or other public use shown in a development ptan
adopted by the City is located in whoie or in part in a subdivision, the Commission may
require the dedication or reservation of such area within the subdivision, provided that the
White Oak PartiHon City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 61
reservation or dedication is roughty proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the park
system.
2. Where considered desirable by the Commission in accordance with adopted comprehensive
plan policies, and where a development plan of the City does not indicate proposed public use
areas, the Commission may require the dedication or reservation of areas within the
subdivision or sites of a character, extent and location suitable for the development of parks
or other public use, provided that the reservation or dedication is roughly proportional to tlze
impact of the subdivision on the park system.
B. Acquisition by public agency. If the developer is required to reserve land area for a park,
playground, or other public use, such land shall be acquired by the appropriate public agenc�
within 18 months folIowing plat approval, at a price agreed upon prior to approval of the
plat, or such reservation shall be released to the subdivider.
Comment: The application does not propose any dedication for a park, playground or
public use as none are proposed within a development plan adopted by the City. This
criterion is not applicable.
18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers
A. Sewers required. Sanitary sewers shali be installed to serve each new development and to
connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design
and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the
Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments)and
the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan.
B. Sewer plan approval. The City Engineer shall approve all sanitary sewer plans and proposed
systems prior to issuance of development permits involving sewer service.
C. Over-sizing. Proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development
within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan.
D. Permits denied. Development permits rnay be restricted by the Commission or Hearings
Officer where a deficiency exists in the existing sewer system or portion thereof which cannot
be rectified within the development and which if not rectified will result in a tlzreat to public
heaIth or safety, surcharging of existing mains, or violations of state or federal standards
pertaining to operation of the sewage treatment s�stem.
Comment: The applicant will meet the City Engineering standards for the sanitary
sewer. The applicant is proposing to install the sanitary sewers for both lots during the
construction of the White Oak PD. During the pre-application conference, the City
Engineer stated that it would be okay to install all utilities during the construcrion of the
White Oak PD in order to minimize the construction and disturbance of the
improvements. The utilities that are to be installed with the White �ak PD should have
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 62
been reviewed by the City to ensure compliance with these standards. T'his criterion is
met.
18.810.100 Storm Drainage
A. General provisions. The Director and City Engineer shall issue a development permit only
where adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff have been made, and:
1. The storm water drainage system shall be separate and independent of any sanitary
sewerage system;
2. Where possible, inlets shall be provided so sacrface water is not carried across any
intersection or allowed to flood any street; and
3. Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown on every development proposal plan.
B. Easements. Where a development is traversed by a watercourse, drainageway, channel or
stream, there shall be provided a storm water easement or drainage right-of-wa� conforming
substantially with the lines of such watercourse and such further width as wiil be adequate
for conveyance and maintenance.
C. Accommodation of upstream drainage. A culvert or other drainage facility shall be large
enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether
inside or outside tlie development, and:
1. The City Engineer shail approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions
of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as
adopted by tlze Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or
amendments).
D. Effect on downstream drainage. Where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the
additional runoff resulting from the development wili overload an existing drainage facility,
the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have
been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for
storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and
Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the
Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments).
Comment: The applicant will meet the City Engineering standards for the storm sewer.
The applicant is proposing to install the storm sewers for both lots during the
construction of the White Oak PD. During the pre-application conference, the City
Engineer stated that it would be okay to install all utilities during the construction of the
White Oak PD in order to minimize the construction and disturbance of the
improvements. The utilities that are to be installed with the White Oak PD should have
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 63
been reviewed by the City to ensure compliance with these standards. This criterion is
met.
18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways
A. Bikeway extensian.
1. As a standard, bike lanes shall be required along all Arterial and Collector routes and
where identified on the City's adopted bicycle plan in the Transportation System Plan (TSP).
2. Developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on fhe City's adopted
pedestrian/bikeway pIan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways
through the dedication of easements or rights-of-way, provided such dedication is directly
related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development.
3. Any new street improvement project shall include bicycle lanes as required in this
document and on the adopted bicycle pIan.
B. Cost of construction. Development permits issued for planned unit developments,
conditional use permits, subdivisions and other developments which will principally benefit
from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway
improvements in an amount roughly proportional to the impact of the development.
C. Minimum width.
1. Minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane.
2. Minimum width multi-use paths separated from the road is ten (10)feet. The widtlz may
be reduced to eight (8)feet if there are environmental or other constraints.
3. The minimum width for pedestrian only off-street paths is five (5)feet.
4. Design standards for bike and pedestrian-ways shall be determined by the City Engineer.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing any additional bikeways or pedestrian
pathways other than the potential sidewalks along the eyebrow corner of SW 74t"
Avenue. This criterion is not applicable.
18.810.120 Utilities
A. Underground utiIities. All utility Iines including, but not Iimited to those required for
electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shail be
placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection
boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service
facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above,
and:
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 64
1. The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the
underground services;
2. The Cify reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities;
3. All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets
hy tlze developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and
4. Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street
improvements when service connections are made.
B. Information on development plans. The applicant for a development shall show on the
development plan or in the explanatory information, easements for all underground utility
facilities, and:
1. Plans showing the location of aIl underground facilities as described herein shall be
submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval; and
2. Care shall be taken in ail cases to ensure that above ground equipment does not obstruct
vision clearance areas for vehicular traffic.
C. Exception to under-grounding requirement.
1. The developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is
proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities wliich are not underground will
serve the development and the approval authority determines that fhe cost and technical
difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of undergrounding in
conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The
most common, but not the only, such situation is a shorf frontage development for which
undergrounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of
above-ground utiiities facilities.
2. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground
and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay the
fee in-Iieu of undergrounding.
3. Properties within the CBD zoning district shall be exempt from the requirements for
undergrounding of utility lines and from the fee in-Iieu of undergrounding.
4. The exceptions in Subsections 1 through 3 of this section shall apply only to existing
utility lines. AIl new utility lirces shall be placed underground.
D. Fee in-lieu of undergrounding.
1. The City Engineer shall establish utility service areas in the City. All development which
occurs within a utiiity service area shall pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding for utilities if
the development does not provide underground utilities, unless exempted by this code.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 65
2. The City Engineer shall establish the fee by utility service area which shall be deterrnined
based upon the estimated cost to underground utilities within each service area. The total
estimated cost for undergrounding in a service area shall be allocated on a front foot basis to
each party within the service area. The fee due from any developer shall be calculated based
on a front foot basis.
3. A developer shall receive a credit against the fee for costs incurred in the undergrounding
of existing overhead utilities. The City Engineer shall determine the amount of the credit,
after review of cost information subrnitted by the applicant with the request for credit.
4. The funds colIected in each service area shall be used for undergrounding utilities within
the City at large. The City Engineer shall prepare and maintain a list of proposed
undergrounding projects which may be funded with the fees collected by the City. The list
shall indicate the estimated timing and cost of each project. The list shall be submitted to the
City Council for their review and approvai annuall�.
Comment: The applicant will meet the City Engineering standards for utilities. The
applicant is proposing to install the utilities for both lots during the construction of the
White Oak PD. During the pre-application conference, the City Engineer stated that it
would be okay to install all utilities during the construction of the White Oak PD in
order to minimize the construction and disturbance of the improvements. The utilities
that are to be installed with the White Oak PD should have been reviewed by the City
to ensure compliance with these standards. The applicant has shown the easements for
all underground utility facilities in the development plans. This criterion is met.
18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required
A. Guarantee. All improvements installed by the developer shall be guaranteed as to
workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City CounciI.
B. Cash deposit or bond. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash depasit or bond in the amount
of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer.
C. Compiiance requirements. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of
Section 18.430.090.
Comment: The applicant will guarantee all improvements installed as to workmanship
and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City Council. The
cash deposit or bond shall be secured in the amount of the value of the improvements
as set by the City Engineer and comply with the terms and conditions of Chapter
18.430.090. This criterion is met.
18.810.140 Monuments
A. Repiacement required. Arcy rnonuments thaf are disturbed before all improvements are
completed by the subdivider shall be replaced prior to final acceptance of the improvements.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 66
Comment: The applicant will replace any monuments that are disturbed before all
improvements are completed prior to final acceptance of the improvements.
18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite
A. Approval required. No public improvements, including sanitar�sewers, storm sewers,
streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the
plans have been approved by the City, permit fee paid, and permit issued.
B. Permit fee. The permit fee is required to defray the cost and expenses incurred by the City for
construction and other services in connection with the improvement. The permit fee shall be
set by Council resolution.
Cornment: The applicant acknowledges that the plans need to be approved by the City
and the permit fees paid and permit issued prior to commencement of the construction of
the public improvements. This criterion is met.
18.810.160Installation Conformation
A. Conformance required. In addition to other requirements, improvements installed by the
developer either as a requirement of these regulations or at his own option, s)zall conform to
t1�e requirements of this chapter and to improvement standards and specifications followed by
tlie City.
B. Adopted installafion standards. The Standard Specifications for PubIic Works Construction,
Oregon Chapter A.P.W.A., and Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and
Surface Water
Martagement (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future
revisions or amendments)shall be a part of the City's adopted installation standard(s); other
standards may also be required upon recommendation of the City Engineer.
Comment: The applicant will conform to the requirements of this chapter and to the
improvement standards and specifications followed by the City of Tigard. This criterion
is met.
18.810.170 Plan Check
A. Submittal requirements. Work shall not begin until construction plans and construction
estimates have been submitted and checked for adequacy and approved by the City Engineer
in writing. The developer can obtain detailed information about submittal requirements from
the City Engineer.
B. Compliance. Ali such plans shall be prepared in accordance with requirements of the City.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 67
Comment: The construction drawing to install all the improvements have been
reviewed by the City to ensure accuracy. As stated above, all utilities have been
installed as part of the improvements of the White Oak PD. This criterion is met.
18.810.180 Notice to City
A. Commencement. Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance.
B. Resumption. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is
notified.
Commen�The applicant will not begin work until the City has been notified in
advance. This criterion is met.
18.810.190 City Inspection
A. Inspection of improvemenfs. Improvements shall be constructed under the inspection and to
the satisfaction of the City. The City may require changes in typical sections and details if
unicsual conditions arising during construction warrant such changes in the public interest.
Comment: Any improvements will be constructed under the inspection and to the
satisfaction of the City during the White Oak PD construction improvements. This
criterion is met.
18.810.200 Engineer's Certification
A. Written certification required. The developer's engineer shall provide written certification of
a form provided by the City that all improvements, workmanship and materials are in accord
with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade,
prior to City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for
operation and maintenance.
Comment: The applicant's professional engineer, will provide written certification that all
improvements, workmanship and materials will be in accordance with current and
standard engineering and construction practices, and are of a high grade, prior to City
acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for the operation and
maintenance. This criterion is met.
Conclusion
The applicant has satisfied the requirements of the Development Code for the City of
Tigard and the two-parcel partition application should be approved as submitted.
White Oak Partition City of Tigard
SR Design LLC 68
� � I E I h i I _ \��
I ' I I � ��'��
i I �� � �i a
_ �i I ' �I �- � �
� � I ' '_ Wi � � � I W �
i � •,,, ,�,- � � � � � p
i � , � � � � �_ �
i � ' - ��
I < I EDGE OF PAVElIFT1T I ��a P� �
�._.___'. �____ _ __.__ __ __—' _ .\ / / I, $�n� ^ � �
I = O �,T°^ �
� � 1 I IE 10�IN�249.41 I o
�--------�I � \ � r �13 �
I �
' � � �' TL 110Q0 m � � '
�� � � 4
� i � �+ SCAL£• J'�10" .
.__ .__ �,. �
♦\. — - — _—� / (,/7 � � f0 5 D
� �� ] � , �- ; .t 10
� I �
—. —____ — -�...� - - _�' -- �__ -- �- _ - =-588'52'25"E 142 57'
_ _____.._ _;,_- , - _ _ .
��� � � �-�� �� � �� ; _x—%—x_X—x_X—x—x=A'��t— x �_� l ����P
✓ I V
/ 6 � f ��/
� M STREE T� A �� � i ExisTiNC sroRM uNE �� � , ,-�'��`�� � LEGEND
, , ,
� ���� Q
'� i� I/ 1 SD LATERAL \ `� ''� �� ' ` ��� I i - - LOT LINE
, sa �\ �, % ` _ , � ,�; � I i _ _ ---- ROW LINE
� `� � ry � � �'� SS LATERALS � ��. ��� j -- BOUNDARY LINE
' I I — CONCRETE LINE
--- _ ��� �� ,� � TL 11030 �� � :,, �,.
�, � i � 0.40 ACRES � > >��� I � - — — — — - EASEMENT LINE
� \�� ' ME'TER �/ � R_W DATA: �� � �� � 1 � AC LINE �
� , i - f i -�-- I�I STORM LINE
�' _l- ' R=46.00' % ��� � �
�,...-� , -� � ,� � =96'27'15" � ', i.� o �
,` __ a�` ,� _
1 � � loi SANITARY LINE Q Z �
-"- -- HYDRAN �\ � � DEDICATE[l� ` I �' '�,� x � w WATER LINE � �
_��- RIGHT-OF-�VAY '� � �;,�=' —x—X—z— o
� FLOW ARROW ` � FENCE LINE � �x � �
_ \�� 5D LA�ERAL ' (TYP) � �, 1 �� .� i x�I - CENTERLINE Z Q 3 � S
--_ � ' ; EXISTING BUILDING � !, i % I�n� 8 O m � o
�' �� / � � � TO BE REMOVED � ; � �� � 488 1' CONTOUR LINE � F �
TRACT D �i��� n, ,� ', `� , ', i ,��.�.. �� 490 5' CONTOUR LINE � � �
�' °O�i � % `� ��� � ���\ �'. ' `� � S� CONIFER TREE
---___ --- -_._ _- ----__ �f , _r
_�.,� ��� / ` � �I .' �_, �,- X�'i d^� �
� ', ' : , ' WATER METER �
_ �i , �,-- . !`� i �
wii \ -=�-25�� I � �, ' ` I � FIRE HYDRANT
� ;t-,i� v, t �._ �,;
.�� a,.� i
L 0 T 27 � �' — -- --- �-- -- --- i � -
N� _ __ r� i� � f�, � b4 WATER VALVE
-----� , 1 \ � �
I_� o �� , ^ � � �,� � I
�, i Zi ; '� _ __252- � �, ;, � ' � I � CATCH BASIN
\ �� x �
I i �-- � � -' � � � �� �, -,'`-�" I ss SANITARY MANHOLE �
---- �--- --�----__----- -- -- --� __ S
, . �. i
� � I - `, ,` � �� ,�� ' I � � FLOW ARROW
�I N � � � i � � _ �
�n � __ _ -, �', I �
; Y � _ - - _--''�-,�.— - - —;.-'' - - �- =-��- N88 5�,�5„WA _192.00�� � ��_�\ �%�`'�� �
L 0 T 1 � � � � .� J =- � �a. P ,.>•r,� �t� --�� - - ��- - - ''�.,� _ �
I ; ' ��'�' �� � �li� I �%,'�✓ .=,�. � ���
� , ; �;,. ., ,;,�_�
i � ,
, � - �
v .
I__----____� -;�_ �/ '/ \� �'%� TL 11615 '
---_
. �
�
I \ _ \ _. � i
`\ �� \ ``.-- / ( o N Z
I \ \\ \ \` U Q �
�
I I � � / i o � �
L 0 T 2 ' ��\ \ ~� /� on� �, s/z��oe
� �
\ \ DESIGNED i J PECK
�� � 1 ( ENqNEER�
� �, � 1 �HECXEA,
--_-__.----..._.---._ . .
SHEET 71TtE
� —___ __'_ EXHIBIT
i i � SHEET NUMBER
- C1
n
Ili �I(�/) I Z a
�, i �
O � �J II � � J � � k
o W I � � I �' �
� ; �
� � ! + '� �__ W �
i EXISTING CENT=RLINE ��� p �
� � �� !� ��'' �
; o ��`— ��o � �
I � . � I ��
I' II � ��� �� E �
; ! � ^ � � � N� _
�
I � :, � � i � j � �� � �
EXISTING CENTERLINE i � � ~ m � a
j � � SCALE: 1"=70"
' � ' ' � BARRICADE SET 2' OFF P/L ,0 5 D ,o �
___� - - ; - - �`' �I ;% I ��P�
_ ______--,_.____.___.___; ��___ _. � � _ 15 WIDE DRIVEWAY �\�
;- �' �� Q��
_._ _... ;;` ,' Q SS �AT
_
___. _--.
_. ___.. � ._...
, _ , �
X X � � �
/ � . - :
�_X__� % � - ,
_ __ -. / /:
._ _ . ..._ - -- -- _:- -- -
----- __..__._ �..___ _.
-- ,.
_. ---... — -- �—=a..�iiei�� ��
_ I _ __
,�
_.__ , � _�
.
54' R�W .- � 3 �� � � � ��; , �, � �-, � x x x — X- ��— _--�
, �� �,, .
_ _.._ �y " � PROP. TR�E-- ^ ,,
� - . __ -- -__------ -M-_--
, �-_
5 � ;°5 � 1:�„ _ 352. 1.9' � � —�� SD LAT � 20' ACCESS I TREE
� 20� PROTECTION ��� k Z
' � � �� �� '` UTIL ESMT. PROTECTION -�� � Q
�::�_�: _ _— -_-�� SD SD � ,� � FENCING c�� �
„ „ �' �,<�� _/ _ _ / FENCING , .�.. O z J
,.,
� A STREET � ". �j- -� - - - - - - — — — — a � Z J
,, _ __ ___ __ w
_ -----.�__ —_".-,� ;' � / � � � ❑ .« ' '° x J Q o
---
a w a
— � 3 j � ��� I � � � � �
��. � SS LAT � VISION CLEARANCE _ ,� � � � � s
����,., /� LINE 48' �.� I Q Q ^ ° <
,;,
; — ; � Z � �
,, — �;� y� w � 5�8 x 3�4� � ��� � � W � � �
,..:��
, _� __ _ / � _
u � `�i���� � 3 �
_ _..�.., �F, WATER ►v�.� R � ��/'` J � ; �
�` -_--- _- � \ � Q / ��, ��'•�. WQ � o
,
� ;,� �
;� /— 1� \ � __ ' , � ' � o �� � �
� i�i / - __ , — SD LAT ��/' � �
�� �RACT L- / LOT 2 �
; � — — 5�8„ X 3�4„ �� � - ��
— ' �,, =;
_ _ WATER METER/ L O T � 8,500 SF f � � „
, — — - 8,7 8 0 SF f I I G�� , �`
_ /
_._ _ � � � � � � 23 _ a
,— -
,_.
_ ,�� 'y - .
__ ; � TL 11030 sr�, I 10' I o `"��
; :n
,� POSSIBLE h,i,� � �_.
--, �=_.l<< ,r
r�i� �f�__—�-----._..—__._, r_` (; � ,�i� 5' �- TREE UNIT �p J POSSIBLE —� ,x�� � . �
�, �o� �
'I I PROTECTION BUILDABLE '`-;� I ��� �
FOOTPRINT � j ,� `�' o
---___ _
___
(TYP�NG / �s, I — E._�T c��;
; ---- , 1
� — —1 — — — _/ I 15' TREE TO -'-=� �
�---- �� — — —
____ , '
_ _„ �, � 6 BE REMOVED ��
, , ,
_ � ���- � . ., �. ,� e �. �/ � �
� � _ �,
i , _
'
� . _�_....__ _.'� L . , , 1 '� �' .�.' , `� .; _--',
,;
,
• ' � X' -�—x—,�=-��F N o
. X �.-X• __-
, -, . .
, .,__ >�.�--�
� �_ / � � ,;�.,� ��� , _. � , z � i
- - �� . \. l.�` r X:_ W
1 {� � �- ���. � 0 J
�
� - � U �
.. � � ��- �
. .�. . ,. ,,_. ,._ a � �
. ._ �..._..._..._._ �----_.,�I DATE � 6/09/08
� - I DESIGNED� J PECK
I ENCiNEERi
; � , CHECKED i
_..__.__� � _.__-- � --_. __.__ ..
� I SHEET TITLE
� ; I � � -r � �,, I
' r / `� i, LAYOUT
� ) �
� � SHEET NUMBER
�--._.+ _'__._..._...__._I ,
. � ��. � 'y I �` /
1
� � �
�
. '
� �
MEMORANDUM
TO: FILE: WHITE �AK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION SUB2006-00010, PDR2006-00001,
ZON2007-00001
FROM: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner
DATE: May 8, 2008
The face page of this Decision should have included the R-4.5, Low Density Residential Zone, which is applicable to
the parcel described as WM 1S136DB02300.The parcel was mistakenly identified as zoned R-12.
In addition, because this parcel was included in the application fox a planned development, the parcel was rezoned
with a PD ovexlay. However, only a small portion o£ the parcel was used for a nght-of-way dedication for the
extension of SW 74`� Avenue to provide access to the other two parcels on which the proposed development was
sited. Ta� Lot 2300 is flat, approxunately .44-acres in size with an existing single-family dwelling. Because of the
small size of the parcel and lack of any significant natuzal resources, application fox a planned development for
future development of the site would not be appropriate.
Therefore, for future develo�ment of Tax Lot 2300, a planned development application will not be necessary.
Ho�ve�-ei, any land use decision shall pxovide findings under the planned development secrion of the code that
idenrifies this deternvnation.
_ ����� Fidelity National Title Company
... , ,
The Closing Company
Pr:p�u-�d For: Prepared By: Michelle Austin
Information Services Department
1001 SW Fi$h Avenue Suite 400 - Portland, Oregon 97204
Phone: (503)227-LIST (5478) Fax: (503)274-5472
E-rnail: csr uestc�fi�fcom
OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
Owner : White Oal: Village Llc Ref Parcel Number : 15136DB 02300
CoOwner . T: O1 S R: 01 W S: 36 Q: 2�1
Site Address : l 1030 SW 74th Ave Tigard 97223 Parcel Number : R0285159
Mail Add�•ess : 7955 SW I-Iall Blvd Beaverton Or 97008 ,11ap Nun:ber .
Telephone : Oivner: Tenant: County : Washington (OR)
SALES AND LOAN INFORMATION
Transferred : 07/03/2007 Loan Amount : $1,645,000
Document � : 73847 Lender : Sterling Savings Bank
Sale Price . Loan Type : Construction
Deed Tipe : Bargain& Sale Interest Rate : Fixed
% Owned : 100 i�"esting Type : Corporation
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ASSESSIV�NT AND TAX INFORIVIATION
Map Page& Grid : 655 G2 Mkt Land : $201,350
Census : Tract: 306.00 Block: 1 Mkt Structure : $68,370
Subdivision/Plat . Other .
Neighborizood Cd : WSMZ Mkt Total : $269,720
Land Use : 1014 Res,Improved % Improved : 25
Legal : ACRES .44 07-08 Taxes : $2,077.11
. F,xempt.4mount :
. Exempt Type .
Class Code : F LevyCode : 0238]
Millage Rate : 16.4706
M�0 Assd Yalue : $125,150
PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS
Bedrooms : 2 Lot Acres : .44 }'ear Built : 195?
Bathrooms : 1.00 Lot SqFt : 19,166 EffYearBlt : 1952
Heat Method : Cable Bsm Fin SqFt . Floor Cover : Carpet
Pool . Bsm Unfin SqFt : Foundation : Concrete Ftg
Appliances . Bsm Low SqF1 . Roof Shape .
Dishwasher . Bldg SqFt : 1,082 Roof Matl : Comp Shingle
Hood Fan . ]st Flr SqFt : 1,082 InteriorMat : Drywal]
Deck . Upper Flr SqFt : Paving Matl .
Garage Type : Attached Porch SqFt . Const Type : Wd Stud\shtg
Garage SF : 440 Attic SqFt . Fxt Finish : 245
Deck SqFt .
This title information has been furnished,withoul charge,in conformance with the g�ridelines appro�ed bythe State of Oregon Insurance
Corrrrissioner. The Insurance Division cautions intermediaries that this seruce is desigr�ed to benefit the�6mate insureds. Indiscriminate use
ontybenefiting ir�termediaries will not be perrrvtted. Said seruices maybe discontinued. No liabilityis assumed for arryerrors i n this report.
= IIIII Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon N
�.—. � �
W E
Map # 1 S 136DB 02300 S
The drawing below is copied from the public records and is provided solely for the purpose of assisting
in locating the premises. Fideliry NaUOnal Tide assum es no liabiliry for variations,if any,in dimensions,
area or location of the prem ises or the]ocation of improvemenis ascertained by actual survey.
' .�� �c � � � �,e . �
`y 'i6�.�Q o f�8�$Q
1��.�[� •
�5 � 1��C� ^
r � I�� �
., ,�� A� ,�$A� ,�
, `�-�,
16�r�t? �' a y 6�,2t�
�4 176.�4
* � ���� ����
.�e n� ��'� ,�$ �� �
. �6��G
� 1��' y 7�.�0
19�r �0_3Q _
4 �
9
r
� � � ���� � I
. �
, �44 AC I
M1I yQ�' r
� 'I Qt�Q , I
� �
,� � 1�0�AC °ry° �
I . ��� �
.
y 1.�{}�C ��
� ����S 27�7h0�
7�Q' t
� I.
1�q� � 76.4 T I
,
4
� � - . � . � �. � � - • �
��
. • • � 1 : I 11
� . . , .. �. . - . . . . . . . . . .. � ,
. . . , . .. . . . - .
. . . . . . � . , . . . . - �, . -
_... _.._
-� '` T �• A� R��,,c.��t!� ��� r�' 1� �#i `3�,1. +: *- ' .�
v�'���., � � � �.-�,4� !e':�k,�;*,.w�,4�#��r: #�t .r#+ *�**���!Y` ����,�� "
p � � . ��f�.. M1� }'�'.
T i � �. �+I�t�*#��i�ff � ��..
�.��-- * •�. i±+.•-•► t'`# �* v
'.�. ; ': � A4,�fi' �,#�� �•
'i'` �� '+t,�*:�a''+�`��+"; �"'-
�'�;�'�"�'t -� � � � - �.�#a*#`_�t v,� ��is�
;=�*�:�'; '�� ,E; ' �',� �-
� � �`. Y J �
' .���
' �i �'-- ,
--^���� .ar� .
i � ` - � � -�� ,.:���; '?�•'-�,�,�
*�'� i '� �� � ' �:• __��};;#�#�y�,il .9
�:
*fi�,1-; �_ � = f �'��'��I+�� ,
4� * i rt �' �� . l��+����.I� . ..
# ' +� %f#''•��t�� �s�ii; � :'-"� , . �,..
*''j••��r*� �•►��y *, �a � ��i-",.�`� ;�
'1 ��+ l+ f:r'•fY ��#- 3'�? �y}u��{�¢�c"'•:r.
w r,t ♦-# +} ,ri�-w.�;6'���!•
� � ���*• �#•�� �# h ����• 7 Yr w i•r!' �Y
T {f � f.iCC�'.."�'.'?`��l:�.
���#��} }��� f� {�I�� * f # 4�tF!JCf+C�f'O'C f�7
� r'7� i`� . �.� � * 6r.J:f f.i��C�.•r.
� Q��F{#*##'#'���} ::f`��}+��.��1** �tf�� �����fi'.iXx:y
+!.��* ��r� ��` '�*'*i� 5.�� " ��� �i i�r`+{��'�`:?;:
_:� 'ti�� ` *! �##;.�+�-�*} � �• .r,f s�, •�v
���y� �`' �'- � ,�C,.irkl►� � •����• :�:.R�cSc.1."'utva4��'::i
�}'. �*'+�� �+�{*�++,����i���k#��*- , ��� ti��vY':'�'flv:�:::
**��4�_�� - � . �"*�Ri���'a������#i �r�� .y�p�,r�-�,,
�• i�*`F r�:���� . ' 1�it��**�F a .�*+iiti� :. i`�`,�+P'� �`y�.'�{[�`�.a
� t��• -f � t'�f� �s � ��'�i�i;' 1 :':•: r:r:t�.:�!��-�
���f��.'���i �„rh. 5'f�� iN i� *t � ♦ ** �,�.`•�r.:ifir:.
.#� �*�;?!�*� _- �:7`��' :#���#*,'}+,���� � ��.���#' ' ;��, ,t�`��L����
♦� ��t��"� ,�•*}�J�t�'�*y.�jF�� ��1,,f�+��y►f}►�ii��.+}� �� ¢ tir _�. r.
#�'t'+�:���# :.. ►' ir���'.�l,*+• �r.'����Yf�*+F�ir �1+�:y�drr�\�'r�
� �} � �
♦�P I" � h��y�T� i��.i-��� � w���*'+K '?,.:•c• �+tj: Y�
L ,�:r 1R �lF#i�J,'4rt+r+�+�y��+�♦ tf ,,c��•,�G�,�.
* * rT � �T}� T } ���l��;+� �� i!%���ar4�J��
� � � � �• p�'#'�i}�f► .�,*���►+r+�#**�
-` � '.�*�;�I� +� - :��s,��,;�►#���r ��.�lt�;:���
��!� ��� �� �' F �r' �;�► t#' "1�f�R ♦ 'f '
{,�. ���� .����y ����'' �. ��������p+
�����1/ 1 �'��F~� �� �� � +*�F'
��,� F• W�� ��#� �,�*t�4�'�� r
#t .-• ��� . fa��� �'�.#. y�*
# �F�
„�/w _• �#,i,a�.; t��i�i���#t#�#'}I����
*
.�.: �� - _�` �►���.�' ���� * := �
����---1 ���` - ����51 ♦ � �-..:. II" •- ' == 'ii 11
+�rt+'L4'r � ��t�`.t�'+#.:i�1 +tw�'�+�i� � �`':��
:#�`":.�,+'.�,�a.�, ;� ; �ry,����r*t+•����•►�R.#� #*�.��a��+'�
y�� ��f'4 �f �. i f •f+���i;i��,11��`�� �f� #�
",r.�; ��� •���*� - ��t*�+*�+►*a#i� .hr}T��` �'- ''' 'V .
dF�rl� �,iFy� ��� .`y!'�.�t�.
.: `.�,f � ,�r i#1#��I� � j�4,���� w' .##*F= f���+k�#��. � �, � ►
�`l� �y� �i*Y t�' �*�'� # .i�"� _ ���#��►ts+• .�'�✓�
�� - . � ► �,�.�« ���, �,'�►�
+��+t� �*�*��', -i �. , r� . • �r t � ��� Y�+�.#:� � ..� �
.. -
. �:
.� . - - - - -
s . ' . Wuh�Cc epon 2007-073847
" ,,, 07l03/2007 10:o....a AM
, o•oes cM.� sm»a o NorFnuN
� L70.00 55.00 511.00•Totel=f20.a0
��\ RECOR�ING REQVESTED BY: IIIIIIIIIIII I�II I�I IIIII�IIII11 I�II�II�II�III III
� 011385162007007�6470020024
Fidelity National TiUe Company of Oregon ; ,,ru«.b w,,.m��„,,o���t�,er�...�.m.���,a
ru■�ienv+ee.-aneiacou�nyci.n�rorw..ni��� �>.
� I ceuerty,onpen,aon�neye.ntryM.tth•with�n .,
Imtruenmt ef w���p w��nnlwtl�nd n erd�d In ch�,=
GRANTOR'SNAME: °o°`°�`•`°�'•°r••"`� �n�cF
The Dalton Company,LLC w"�"�T��tie:cninece�ei;n�"s.�e"�
/� GRANTEE'S NAME:
White Oak Village,LLC
SEND TAX STATEMENTS TO:
White Oak Village,LLC
7955 SW Hall Blvd.
Beaverton,OR 97008
Escrow No: 1118641-FTPOR01
SPACE A80VE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
j BARGAIN AND SALE DEED
\
� THE DALTON COMPANY,LLC(GRANTOR),for and in consideralion of No�oltars and 0�/100($)in
hand paid,bargains,sells,and conveys to WHITE OAK VIILAGE,LLC(GRANTEE)the following
\ described real estate,situated in the County of Washington,State of Oregon:
� SEE LEGAL DESCRIPTION ATTACHED HERETO
1
O The Grantor(s)for himself/herself/themselves and for his/her/their successors in interest do(es)by these
presents expressly limii the covenants of the deed to those herein expressed,and exclude all covenants
arising or to arise by statutory or other implication,and do(es)hereby covenant that against all persons
whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim by,through or under said Grantor(s)and not otherwise,
� he/shelthey will forever warrant and defend the said described real estate.
V
� Dated:July 2,2007
QTHE DALTON COMP Y,LLC
� �
o BY�v^?��
� St en D.Datton,Member
2
� State of OREGON
J
� Countyof Multnomah
a
�
This instrument was acknowledged before me on July Z,2007 by Steven D.Dalton
�, as Mem ber of The Dalton Company,LLC.
�
Kathe n R.Smith,Notary Public-State of Oregon
My commission expires: 01/23/09
OFF1ClAl SEAL
OT R�fluBLC•ORE ON
COMM18610N N0.387582
MY COMMl6BI0N EXPIRf6 JANUAAV 23,2008
__._�_..._ __ �_ —. ._ . __ _ _ .__ _ . ..-- - ---
,
Order Na, 10-1118641-28
EXHIBIT "ONE"
� . . .
I
�' PARCEL II:
f� Beginning at the stone with a cross at the Northeast corner of the George Richardson Donation
! Land Claim No, 55,in Section 36,Townshi 1 South,Ran e 1 West,Willamette Meritlian, in
� P 9
� the City of Tigard,Washington County,Oregon;thence North 89°00'West 816.7 feet along
the North line of said Donation Land Claim to an iron;thence South 0°29'West 450.6 feet,
more or less,to an iron pipe in the fence line;thence South 89°00'East 160.0 feet to an iron
pipe at the irue point of beginning of the tract herein described, said true point of beginning
aiso the Northwest corner of that certain tract of land described in Deed to E.S, Goatlell, et
al,recorded in Book 347,Page 667,Deed Records,Washington County,Oregon;thence from
saitl true point of beginning South 0°29'West 100.0 feet to a point; thence South 89°00'
East parallel to the North line�f said Goodell Tract, 192.0 feet, more ar less,to a point on the
, East line ihereof;ihence North 0°29'East 100.0 feet to the Northeast corner of said Goodell
Tract; thence North 89°00'West 192 feet to the true point of beginning,
" May, 1. 2008 4:49PM No, 1944 P, 1/1
,- �
� j�.� ---�-� ^1
�
� �� ��; ��� � �,� ;�, �
�� (I �AY n � Z�oB '
CI���1�c�tC'.1" SCl'V1CC'S � f
Vnf CUL10d11uL�n1 i3 C�eGL � CW9FlIeNumOer
,
r��ensifi�r.�A_rea Pre� creening ` _ o�`��- (
Site Assess�n�nt
Jurisdiction;Cify of Tipard
I'roperbr Informatlon: (example 1S234ABOl400} Owner Information: ,
7axlot ID(s): 151-36DB Lot 2300 Name:The Dalton Company
Company:
Address:�955 5W Nall Blvd •
Sits Address; '�'�030 SW 74th Avenue-Tigard eeaverton, OR 97008
, Phone/Fax:503-626-8483 �
Nearest Cross Street;SW 74th Ave&SW Spruce St E-mall:
Development Activfty: Check all that apply , ' Appifcant informaflon:
Addition to S(ngls Family Residence (rooms, deck,garaqe} ❑ Name:Jeff Caines
Lot Line Adjuslment ❑ Mlnor Land ParliBon � Company;SR Design LLC
Residentiai Condominium ❑ Commerclal Condominfum ❑ Address: e196 SW Hall Blvd.Ste.�232
Residential Subdivisioh ❑ Commercial Subd�visfon ❑ � Beave�ton,OR 97008
S)ngle Lot Commarclal ❑ Mu�ti Lot Commerclal ❑ PhonelFax; 503-469-1293 �603-469-8653
Other besign Review and add additi�nal parking to effc srdllc,com
the northern port►on of the lot. �-��ail:1 @ ,
�
Will the proJect lnvolve any off-slte work: YES❑ NO Q Unknown Q Locatlon and description oF off•site work: j
I
Addltlonal commenfe or]nformatlon thaf may be needed to undereEand your project:
The development Is a Nvo parcel parlitlon
Thts applltallon does NOT replace lhe naed for Grading ehd E�osion Cantral Permita,Connection Permlfe,Buliding Permlts,Slte DBVelopment
Permite,�EG11200-C Permlt or other permlls ss Issued 6y tha Department of Envlronmontal Ouallty,Departmont of Stato Lands and/or DapartmenE of
1he Army COE. All I'equlrad parmlts and approvalb mubt be obtained and compleled�nder applicable looel,slaEe,and federel law.
� By signing lhis form,the Owner or ownar'e aulhorized apent or repreeenlal�ve,acknowledge5 and ae�eea lhal employeCS of Clean Water 3enlCes have authorily
lo en�er Ihe project slte at all reasonable pmes for the purpose oi Inspecling proJect site conalllons and ga�nerng inrormeiion related Io lhe projscl eite. I ceruty
Ihaf I em FdmiNarwilh tha intormelion confeined in ihia dxumenl,and to(he be91 of my knowled8e 9nd belief,lhig in[ofmaUon Is true,CompJe�e, and accurale.
print/Type Name: �eff Caines,AICP PrinVType Tit�e: Lsnd Use Planner
Signature: Date: 'I! �d
FOR DISTRICT USE ONLY
n Sensitive areas poEentiaily ex(s[on slte or withln 200'of the site. THE APPLICAN7 MUST PERFQRM A SITE ASS�SS ENT
PRIOR TO 13SUANCE 0�A SERVICE pROVIDER LETTER. If Sensftive Areas e�dst on the sfte or wiEhin 260 feet on
adjacent pr�pertfes,a Naturai Resources Assessment Report may also be required.
Based on revlew of the submltted materials and best available informaEion Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on slte or
withir,200'of the site. Thfs Sensitive Area Pre-Sereenfng Site Asseasment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluata and
pratect water quality senstUve areas If they are subsequently discovered. Thts document w111 serve as your Service Provlder
lefter as requlred by Resolutfon and Order 07-20,Section 3.02,1, •All required permits and approvals must be obtained and
completed under appllca6le local,State,and federal law.
❑ sased on revfew of the submitted materlals and best avalleble informalfon the above referenced proJect w111 noE significantly
� impact the exisfing or potanfiafly sensf�ivo aroa(s)found near lhe site.This fiensitive Area Pre-3creening Slte Assessment
does NOT eilminate the need to evaluate end protect�dditional water quality sensitive are�$if they are subsequently
discovered. Thls dooument wlll serve as your Service Provider letler as requlred by Resolution and Order 07-z0, Section
3.02,1, All•required permita and approvals must be obtained and cornpleted under appliaeble local,state,and federal lew.
❑ This Service Provider Letter Is not valid untess CWS approved site plan(s)are�atfached.
❑ The proposed activily does not meet the definitlon of development or the lot was piatted after 9/9/95 OfiS 92.040(2). NO SITE
ASSESSMENT OR f�V E PRO _ER..LEfTER IS REQUIRED, •
Revlewed By: bate; S��z��
2550 5W Hillsboro HiBhw .Hllloboro,Orepon 87123
PAone: (503)681-Si00 Fax: (S��)49t-4499•wanv.eleamveterservtce�.ora
Rerlee�Mar a,z007 �
�� � � __.�,�
�� C .
CleanWater� �er��ices � � �
Our commitment is clear. �
August 1, 2oas
Len Dalton
1226�0 SW 124th��ve�ue .. _: . _- ._. � -
� Tigard, Oregon 97223
. Melinda Smith
De�elopment Services Review _ �
�3'131 SE 125th Avenue
Clackamas, Oregon 97015
Re: 1S136DB-01U00, U2300, and 15136CA01700
___Service Provider Letter, CWS File No.°06-U018S2 .. _._______ , . ._
Ciean Water Services has reviewed your proposai for the above referenced
activity on your site. Staff has conducted a pre-screen review and requested
completion of a "Sensitive Areas Certification Forrn. Following review of
su'bmitted materiafs it appears that 'Sensitive Areas do not exist an-site or within
200' from your project. ln light:of this result, fMiis document wi11 serve :as your
� Service Provider letter as required by Resofu6on and Order Q4-.S;��ectio�;.�..02:.1.
� AI( required permits and approva}s must be obtained and completed'under
applieable local, state, and federal law:
This concurrence letter does NOT efiminate the need to pratect Sensitiue Areas if „_,_
�� tfiey are sub��quer�tly identified �n your site: �--� � - ,-• - � . - •:"`:��
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 503-s81-3613.
S in cerely, �
-- _ r�^
�`.��,V,�' ����'"'-� j��"�"�-,� .
' � t.�% - _ ^ .. �- .
� Julie Wirth Y��`� "�'.:K�,`-
- :.,;:.- . .
Environmental Plan Review � '
i �
E:1Developmcnt Svcs1SP 00.71SPR Leteers\1S136DB-OIOUO,2300,lS136CA01700No 5A SPL D8-Ol-O6(06-001852).doc
2550 SW Hillsboro Highway•Hiltsboro,Oregon 97123 .
• Phone: (503)681•3600•Fax:(503)681-3603 •www.CleanWater5ervices.org
� �
C�le�1�lW�te� Se�-vic�s
�1ur connnitrncnl is cicar, CWSFileNumber
Sensitive Area Pre-Screening
5ite Assessment
Jurisdiction: Citv of Tiqard
Property Information: (example 1S234A801400) Owner Information:
Taxlot ID(s): 1 S1-36QB Lot 2300 Name:The Dalton Company
Company:
Address: 7955 SW Hall Blvd
Site Address: 11030 SW 74th Avenue-Tigard Beaverton, OR 97008
Phone/Fax: 503-626-8483 �
Nearest Cross Street: SW 74th Ave & SW Spruce St E-mail:
Development Activity: Check all that apply Applicant Information:
Addition to Single Family Residence (rooms, deck,garage) ❑ Name: Jeff Caines
Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Minor Land Partition � Company: SR Design LLC
Residential Condominium ❑ Commercial Condominium ❑ Address: $196 SW Hall Bivd. Ste.232
Residential Subdivision ❑ Commercial Subdivision ❑ Beaverton, OR 97008
Single Lot Commercial ❑ Multi Lot Commercial ❑ phone/Fax: 503-469-1213 �503-469-8553
Other Design Review and add additional parking to effc srdlfc.com
the northern portion of the lot. E-mail:l @
Will the project involve any off-site work: YES❑ NO ✓� Unknown ❑ Location and description of off-site work:
Additional comments or information that may be needed to understand your project:
The development is a two parcel partition
This application does NOT replace the need for Grading and Erosion Control Permits,Connection Permits,Building Permits,Site Development
Permits,DEQ 1200-C Permit or other permits as issued by the Department of Environmental Quality,Department of State Lands and/or Department of
the Army COE. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed under applicable local,state,and federal law.
By signing this form,the Owner or Owner's authorized agent or representative,acknowledges and agrees that employees of Clean Water Services have authority
to enter the project site at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting project site conditions and gathering information related to the project site. I certify
that I am familiar with the infortnation contained in this document,and to the best of my knowledge and belief,this information is true,complete,and accurate.
PrintlType Name: �efF Caines, AICP Print/Type Title: Land Use Planner
Signature: ,�,/,��Cy-� —'� r c7
Date: S f l Cr?'
FOR DISTRICT USE ONLY
❑ Sensitive areas potentially exist on site or within 200'of the site. THE APPLICANT MUST PERFORM A SITE ASSESSMENT
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER. If Sensitive Areas exist on the site or within 200 feet on
adjacent properties, a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required.
❑ Based on review of the submitted materials and best available information Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or
within 200'of the site. This Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and
protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered. This document will serve as your Service Provider
letter as required by Resolution and Order 07-20, Section 3.02.1. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and
completed under applicabie local,State, and federal law.
❑ Based on review of the submitted materials and best available information the above referenced project will not significantly
impact the existing or potentially sensitive area(s)found near the site.This Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment
does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect additional water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently
discovered. This document will serve as your Service Provider letter as required by Resolution and Order 07-20, Section
3.02.1. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed under applicable local, state,and federal law.
❑ This Service Provider Letter is not valid unless CWS approved site plan(s)are attached.
❑ The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development or the lot was platted after 9/9195 ORS 92.040(2). NO SITE
ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED.
Reviewed By: Date:
2550 SW Hillsboro Highway.Hillsboro,Oregon 97123
PhonE: (503)681-5100•Fax: (503)681-4439•www.cleanwaterservices.ore
ReviaeC:Mey E,2007
HA LSTEA✓ �7 "Specralists in the Care and
Preservation of Trees"
ARBORiCULTURE
CONSULTANTS
�; www.halsteadsarbor.com
May 28, 2008
P.O.Box 1182•Tualatin,OR 97062
♦ (503)245-1383
�
,
The LF Dalton Gang, LLC
Attn: Mr. Len Dalton
7955 SW Hall Boulevard
. Beaverton, OR 97008
� � TEL: (503) 209-8869
Reference: Tree Assessment for Construction Development Project
� Location: White Oak Village Partition
� 11030 SW 74"' Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Tree Assessment Report
With your approval on May 16"', 2008, I inspected the trees and existing conditions
, site plan for the proposed construction development project White Oak Village
� � " Partition located at 11030 SW 74�'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon.
~ The purpose of this inspection was to evaluate the preservation potential of all trees
„ . having a trunk diameter of finrelve inches and larger measured at fifty-four inches
� above ground level that could potentially be affected by construction. This study was
completed in accordance with the City of Tigard's Development Code— Chapter 18,
�� ` Section 790, and the new Directors Interpretation dated February 26, 2008, which
-, i describe pertormance requirements and plan review, tree preservation and removal
criteria, tree mitigation and replacement measures, and tree protection for the
� E� maximum amount of existing, viable trees (i.e. healthy and sustainable individuals or
� stands) as a condition for land development construction.
"� TREE ASSESSMENT
tsd.. 4
I have individually inspected, tagged, and numbered all trees measuring six inches in
� trunk diameter and larger on-site (as required per ordinance), in this report, and on
4�, {� the included Tree Assessment Site Plan using R47001 through R47018 series tags
for easy identification. I have also inspected all trees on neighboring properties that
could be impacted from the construction and ident�ed those trees using the letter
"N"followed by the numbers 1 th�ough 10. For the purposes of this report, only the
� last two digits of the tags for on-site trees and numbers 1 through 10 for neighboring
trees will be used to reference and identify the evaluated trees.
� The first numbered tree is located in the southeast corner of the project and
' numbering continues in sequential order toward the no�th, then to the west, moving
� in a counter-clockwise pattern around the site. The last tree is located near the
!' southeast corner of the project.
`� For each tree, I have included an "Individuaf Tree Assessment Sheet" field report
that will explain in detail the species, tree measurements, and health and structural
conditions.
CCB# 0068646 Keep America Green-Printed on Recycled Paper
Page 2
May 28, 2008
Reference: Tree Assessment for Construction Development Project
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74�'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Tree Assessment Report
Tree inspection criteria included: tree species and tree measurements, canopy
structure and development, storm damage, insect and disease problems, overall
structural integrity and tree health, root crown and root system development, wind
throw potential, and construction trauma resistance. In addition, the tree trunk
diameters were also measured at ground level (DGL) in order to provide a more
accurate reflection of tree trunk sizes where construction excavation occurs.
INSPECTION RESULTS
I have identified twenty-eight (28)total trees both on-site and on adjacent
neighboring properties in accordance with the City of Tigard's Development Code.
-Four(4) of the total trees are located on-site within project boundaries and have
trunk diameters of six inches and larger, but less than twelve inches in diameter
measured at 54 inches above ground. These trees are identified as existin
trees not requirinq mitiqation and can be exempt from mitigation calculations (if
desired) within the Tree Plan Requirement, Chapter 18, Section 790.030.
-Fourteen (14) of the total trees are located on-site within project boundaries and
have trunk diameters of twelve inches and larger.
-All fourteen (14) of these trees are identified as viable trees and are
recommended for preservation, provided they receive professional
pruning and therapeutic care before, during, and after project construction
activities. All of these trees are relatively healthy and structuralty stable.
-The remaining ten (10) trees identified within this report are located on adjacent
neighboring properties and will need to be protected from construction damage
throughout the entire development project. Tree protection fencing will need to
be installed as outlined in the Tree Care and Preservation Guidelines.
Existing Trees Not Requiring Mitigation:
All of the fotlowing trees (located on-site within project boundaries) have trunk
diameters of six inches and larger, but less than twelve inches in diameter measured
at 54 inches above ground. These trees are required to be identified within the Tree
Preservation Plan, but are not required to be part of the mitigation per city ordinance.
Existinq trees not requirinq mitiqation are listed as follows:
Tree Numbers: 01, 06, 13 and 14.
Page 3
May 28, 2008
Reference: Tree Assessment for Construction Development Project
Location: White Oak Viilage Partition
11030 SW 74�'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Tree Assessment Report
Viable Trees z 12" Trunk Diameter:
All of the following trees (located on-site within project boundaries) have trunk
diameters of finrelve inches and larger and are listed as viable trees recommended
for preservation. These trees are relatively healthy and structurally stable. All of
these trees have the ability to survive construction trauma provided their root zones
are protected and they receive professional pruning and therapeutic care before,
during, and after all construction project activities have been completed.
Viable trees located on-site within proiect boundaries are listed as follows:
Tree Numbers: 02, 03, 04, 05, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17 and 18.
It is my recommendation that all fourteen (14) of these trees be protected under the
attached Tree Care and Preservation guidelines.
Neighboring Trees on Adjacent Properties:
All of the following trees (located off-site) having root zones that encroach within
project boundaries will need to be protected during the entire project. Tree
protection fencing will need to be installed as outlined in the attached Tree Care and
Preservation guidelines.
Neiphborinq trees located on adiacent proqerties are listed as follows:
Tree Numbers: N1, N2, N3, N4, N5, N6, N7, N8, N9 and N10.
Sincerely,
Philip C. Hickey, BS
Project Consulting Arborist
ISA Board Cerffied MasterArfiorisf PN-16046
ISA Member/ ISA-PNW Member
ASCA Member
Page 4
May 28, 2008
Reference: Tree Assessment for Construction Development Project
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Tree Assessment Report
TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION
Meetings:
Before any construction activities begin, a pre-construction tree presenration
conference wilf be held on site with the general contractor in charge of project, the
Project Consultinq Arborist and all officia! representatives who have interest in the
trees.
Purpose:
The purpose of the on site meeting will be to introduce all parties involved to the
spec�cations and sensitivity needed in the protection of the preserved trees, their
environment, and their root zone areas.
PreparationlTree Protection Fencing:
Before�construction or excavation work begins on-site, it is vital that a Tree
Protection Zone be created to protect and safeguard the root systems of all
preserved trees. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) is established by having the
Proiect Consultinq Arborist install tree protection fencing around the critical root
zones of all preserved trees. The tree protection fencing will help to ensure that the
tree root systems are not accidentally compacted or damaged from construction
personnel, equipment and machinery.
The type of fencing required must be five (5) or six(6)foot tall, galvanized steel
chain-link fencing securely anchored to the ground using two (2) inch diameter
galvanized steel posts, driven into the ground to a depth of at least finro (2) feet, and
spaced every six (6) to eight (8)feet on center forming a protective line around the
preserved trees. Fencing needs to be installed around the perimeter of the critical
root zone, which is generally understood as the canopy dripline of the preserved
trees. Once the approved location of the fence has been established, it cannot be
adjusted, moved, or removed without the consent and supervision of the Proiect
Consultinq Arborist.
Tree Removals:
Those trees that are structurally unsound, unhealthy, or removed within the
preservation areas, will need to be removed under the direct supervision of the
Proiect Consuttinq Arborist.
Page 5
May 28, 2008
Reference: Tree Assessment for Construction Development Project
L�cation: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Tree Assessment Report
Tree removal will be done in such a way so as not to damage the preserved trees
and their root zones. Removal of these trees may require climbing the trees and
taking them down in small pieces. Stumps from removed trees, which are less than
fifteen (15) feet from a preserved tree, will need to be ground-out using a stump
grinder.
Construction Activities Within the Tree Protectfon Zone:
Before any construction work is completed within the established Tree Protection
Zone, the Proiect Consultinq Arborist is required to submit to the City Forester, a
proposal detailing the needed construction activities and likely impacts to the
preserved trees. The City Forester shall then review the proposal and if approved as
described, the work can proceed as planned. The City Forester may also require
changes to described work prior to the approval of the submitted proposal.
Once the work is approved, the Proiect Consulting Arborist is required to be present
on site whi�e the work is occurring within the Tree Protection Zone. Once the
construction activities have been completed, the Prolect Consultinq Arborist is
required to submit a summary report certifying that the work occurred per the
proposal and the work did not significantly impact the health or structural stability of
the preserved trees.
Root Pruning:
Excavation when using backhoe, trackhoe, or other mechanical device will be
completed outside of the Tree Protection Zone and will be completed facing the tree
(perpendicular to the roots) rather than along side of the tree (across the roots).
Furthermore, before excavation begins, "Air Spade" bridging and tunneling will be
considered, especially if tree roots are found to be in excess of 2 inches in diameter.
Therapeutic Care:
Therapeutic care is described as those treatments that are needed to increase the
preserved trees chances for survival. Treatments can include watering, therapeutic
fertilization, soil aeration, mulching, and soil pH adjustments in order to provide the
highest level of care from construction trauma.
Treatments are based on individual tree needs, their root zones, and structural
conditions and heafth. Factors will be taken into consideration, such as the tree
species, soil composition and compaction, season in which construction is done,
percentage of root zone affected by construction, losses of surrounding native
plantings and changes in surface and sub-surface water.
Page 6
May 28, 2008
Reference: Tree Assessment for Construction Development Project
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Tree Assessment Report
ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct.
Any titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and
marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any
and all property is evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible
ownership and competent management.
2. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data
has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant can neither
guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of informaiion provided by
others, especially regarding property line determinations and project
boundaries.
3. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or attend cou�t by
reason of this report unless subsequent cantractual arrangements are made,
including payment of an additional fee for such services.
4. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.
5. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication
or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed,
without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant.
6. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall
be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising,
public relations, news, sales or other media, without the prior expressed
written or verbal consent of the consultant; particularly as to value
conclusions, identity of the consultant, or any reference to any professional
society or institute or to any initialed designation conferred upon the
consultant as stated in his qualifications.
7. This report and values expressed herein represent the opinion of the
consultant, and the consultant's fee is in no way contingent upon the
repo�ting of a specified value, a stipulated results, the occurrence of a
subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.
8. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended
as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as
engineering or architectural reports or surveys.
9. Unless expressed otherwise; (1) information contained in this report covers
only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items
at the time of inspection; and (2) the inspection is limited to visual
examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or
conng. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that
problems or deficiencies of the plants or prope�ty in question may not arise in
the future.
Page 7
May 28, 2008
Reference: Tree Assessment for Construction Development Project
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Tree Assessment Repo�t
CERTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE
I, Phi►ip C. Hickey, certify:
• I have personally inspected the trees and property referred to in this report
and have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation is
stated in the attached report.
• I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that
is the subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect
to the parties involved.
• The analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has
been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices.
• No one provided significant professional assistance to me, except as
indicated within the report.
• My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined
conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party nor upon the
results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the
occurrence of any subsequent events.
I further certify that I am a member in good standing of the International Society of
Arboricutture and the American Society of Consulting Arborists. I have been
involved in the field of Arboriculture and the care and study of trees for a period of
more than 13 years.
Signed.� �
Date: '� �'.y ���
, --�.1,r t"„�°'�°��°�,, tY` .-4.
;��' ! ..----�.,� �� �
c`,' � r,� � `�='�„ >
�`"� ' c �`� �����;�
Philip C. Hickey ��}` '`�R� �
t �.,
c : `"`€�~ ; r ^T
Project Consulting Arborist -' �� ���.�.�- j
Halstead's Arbonculture Consultants, Inc. f� rh'-'��'�``�'��°
����``---_�-��'�
�
Individual Tree Characteristics Form
Project White Oak Partition — 11030 SW 74�' Avenue, Tigard Inspection Date 5/16/08
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 01 Common Name spruce Preservation Not-Recommended
DGL 1 FT DBH 6 IN Height 25 FT Canopy Spread 15 FT
RATING: Health 40 % Structure 30 % (0-40% Haz Tree 1 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Top of tree has dogleg defect at 15ft. Only live growth is on NW side of canopy.
Very unbalanced canopy and very poor structure. Severe storm
damage/deadwood.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------•------
Tree Number 02 Common Name Douglas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 3 FT DBH 26 IN Height 80 FT Canopy Spread 25 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Limited canopy growth on north side of trunk due to close proximity of adjoining
trees. Tree needs pruning to correct moderate storm damage and remove
deadwood. Must be preserved as a group.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 03 Common Name Douplas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 1 1/2 FT DBH 13 IN Height 60 FT Canopy Spread 20 F"T
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Limited canopy growth on north and south side of canopy due to close proximity of
adjoining trees. Tree needs pruning to correct moderate storm damage and remove
deadwood. Must be preserved as a group.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 04 Common Name_ Douglas-fir_ Preservation Recommended
DGL 2 FT DBH 16 IN Height 70 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree/ 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as #03, requires pruning.
Ir�ciividual Tree Characteristics Form
Project White Oak Partition — 11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Ti acLrd! Inspection Date 5/16/08
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number OS Common Name Douqlas-fir Preservation Recommended �
DGL 2 1/2 FT DBH 18 IN Height 60 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Similar to tree #03, but has a severe bark inclusion between codominant stems. To
preserve, tree requires multiple cable support systems installed within canopy to
reduce hazardous defect to an acceptable limit.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 06 Common Name Douqlas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 1 FT DBH 8 IN Height 40 FT Canopy Spread 15 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as #03, requires pruning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 07 Common Name Douqlas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 1 1/2 FT DBH 13 IN Height 60 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree/ 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as#03, requires pruning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
T�ee Number 08 Common Name Douglas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 3 FT DBH 22 IN Height 80 FT Canopy Spread 25 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as#03, requires pruning.
Individual Tree Characteristics Form
Project White Oak Partition — 11030 SW 74"' Avenue, Tiqard Inspection Date 5/16/08
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 09 Common Name Douqlas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 1 1/2 FT DBH 13 IN Height 60 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as #03, requires pruning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 10 Common Name Douglas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 2 FT DBH 16 IN Height 70 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as#03, requires pruning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 11 Common Name Douglas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 2 1/2 FT DBH 18 lN Height 70 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as #03, requires pruning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
T�ee Number 12 Common Name DouQlas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 2 1/2 FT DBH 21 IN Height 80 FT Canopy Spread 25 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as #03, requires pruning.
Individual Tree Characteristics Form
Project White Oak Partition — 11030 SW 74�'Avenue, Tiqard Inspection Date 5/16/OS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 13 Common Name Dou lac� s-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 1 FT DBH 11 IN Height 40 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as #03, requires pruning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 14 Common Name Douqlas-fir Preservation Not-Recommended
DGL 1/2 FT DBH 6 IN Height 30 FT Canopy Spread 15 FT
RATING: Health 30 % Structure 40 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Very poor health and structure. Growing suppressed from adjoining trees.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 15 Common Name Douglas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 1 1/2 FT DBH 15 IN Height 70 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 °� Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as #03, requires pruning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 16 Common Name Douqlas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 1 1/2 FT DBH 16 IN Height 70 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 °!o Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as#03, requires pruning.
individual Tree Characteristics Form
Project White Oak Partition — 11030 SW 74�' Avenue, TiQard Inspection Date 5/16/08
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 17 Common Name Douplas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 1 1/2 FT DBH 13 IN Height 60 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Same as #03, requires pruning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number 18 Common Name Douqlas-fir Preservation Recommended
DGL 2 FT DBH 22 IN Height 80 FT Canopy Spread 25 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree/ 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Limited canopy growth on south side of trunk due to close proximity of adjoining
trees. Tree needs pruning to correct moderate storm damage and remove
deadwood. Must be preserved as a group.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N1 Common Name_ spruce_, Preservation Adioinin4 Site Tree
DGL 2 FT DBH 15 IN Height 50 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 70 % Structure 30 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Multiple codominant stems at 20 feet and 40 feet with very severe bark inclusions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N2 Common Name sqruce Preservation_Adjoininq Site Tree
DGL 1 FT DBH 8 IN Height 40 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 70 % Structure 60 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Minor structural defects
Ir�aividual Tree Characteristics Form
Project White Oak Partition — 11030 SW 74"' Avenue, Ti.arc�d! Inspection Date 5/16/08
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N3 Common Name spruce Preservation Adjoininq Site Tree
DGL 2 FT DBH 16 IN Height 50 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 60 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Minor structural defects
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N4 Common Name scotch qine Preservation Adjoininq Site Tree
DGL 2 1/2 FT DBH 17 IN Height 35 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 60 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Minor structural defects
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N5 Common Name_ scotch pine _ Preservation Adjoininq Site Tree
DGL 2 FT DBH 13 IN Height 30 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 40 % (0-40% Ha2 Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Lean to south 25 degrees
-----------------------------------------------•-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N6 Common Name shore pine Preservation Adioininq Site Tree
DGL 1 FT DBH 7 IN Height 25 FT Canopy Spread 15 FT
RATING: Health 60 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Minor structural defects
I,...ividual Tree Characteristics rorm
Project White Oak Partition — 11030 SW 74�' Avenue, TiQard Inspection Date 5/16/08
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N7 Common Name scotch pine Preservation Adjoininq Site Tree
DGL 2 1/2 FT DBH 17 IN Height 40 FT Canopy Spread 25 FT
RATING: Health 60 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care}
Comments: Lean to south 10 degrees
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N8 Common Name_shore pine_ Preservation Adioining Site Tree
DGL 1 FT DBH 7 IN Height 25 FT Canopy Spread 15 FT
RATING: Health 60 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree ! 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Minor structural defects
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N9 Common Name_shore pine_ Preservation Adioininq Site Tree
DGL 1 FT DBH 9 IN Height 30 FT Canopy Spread 20 FT
RATING: Health 50 % Structure 50 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Lean to north 10 degrees
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Number N10 Common Name scotch pine Preservation Adioining Site Tree
DGL 1 FT DBH 12 IN Height 30 FT Canopy Spread 15 FT
RATING: Health 20 % Structure 40 % (0-40% Haz Tree / 50-70% Requires Pro. Care)
Comments: Very poor health and structure. In decline.
i , ,
r , tLl[0 PI1�OOrt
� ! "' ' TREE ASSESSMENT
.. � .�/ E t'J'N=:J�.�1
; � � � �� ,� SITE PLAN
i r�. � � � � j�i TL 1t000
,' � i � Conditions as of N
- � ��- May 16, 2008
.p.. .:;v,....���.. . .� -
----- _
-- ---------
I �•�w -- - --- _ _ _
��� ,�a'a-r in.p.ocwn comp.c.a by � i
- . �.��� AEF�n-tb' Md�twE'�ArDalqrltur�Cansultmta. Inc. �[E�s- � �
� -. `E �� I �.
`SI�I dMN UTAA '
� . - Q O�c7EUau Trw/-091(FM�w) T1lE�17-1Y � ;
r------- � j ;
�¢µ-�r
. J �E~,°--�Tn..-°°K.,°�-, �
\ �_ . SINGRI' WERJIL �� ��1�116'� ,
\ ' .. , aMr r�ow�b �
a�o.rp wr r��oo� 1fF/11-P �
� - ,, o.'�w r�wr�r.�ow�►v arr�uc
/ l
�. N� �Ay
_ /.. �Y��Da#E N1R IE1E11
`, �F�n. � I I
� I (� ���_�r � ;
� I ` E'XISTING BUILDING I �� i .
�smr ww umu� TO BE RE)AOVED � I .
� �
/ � .��o-K ��
� � ,��,r � i
---- % - / �
��� , I
- - - nEC rm-ir \ i
I __. . I aet p-r ` I
— _-� J ��� � t
n noao �. � .
_ - n�a�w-+r � ;
)
�B P}�.T
wFF MhIY ��� 1FE�-Y � .
.¢ r .�'n-Tr �/w-r ae[w-�' �[[M�a�r ` �
ae �rc Im�- ,
. . - ' 7EF 111o�EC1o�N�OIa
_. n i�s�s
����.�, �-Qz A p �
�� � �
, , -
, � ,�I ,
, � ' � __
� � , � ' " � ' ' ii':�
$ , � `I ; � • � _ ' '�,�
� ,`J W
� /.� PN-78048 �� o
� I � � ( a "°�%j'• G�� I 1a�
� � � � o '� �:. � � i a��t��
i � � :� I i � � f {�y
I � � � �wb ` �
� y 6ARRICADE SET 2'OFF P/L �� ¢�
-- - -- -----� ��P
� � I � 15'1MDE a21VEWAY i Q4wJ�
_ � Q SS lAT �
_X X X r-�_ y
`.... 3 I - — - x _ X _�'
�� ~ f M - y� � r PROP. TREE--� �
� ., . , !� '. 2l}' ACCESS/ � � 2Q� PROIECTIOM
,•,� �•�a„ » r�� UTIL ESIAT. I FEN NG110N FENCING `,+ fn � � �
A SIREET ,� ` ��_�`-j—_— ----- _ _- �-- _ _ r... � S a��
, 3 �,.. , /' r �_ __ a , n.
�w�o�+ a�nHC� 1 �,:r, � ��
� , /� �U� IJNE I ��,i—� � ' � ��k
: �
/ I �
� WATER I I �
� 6�4- �o MEiER � � I r • I �
/ �i i � / � � � .
/ _ —�� sn u�T I I � � I
� wa� LOT 2 �) � � ,.
� u� .= � L 0 T 1 I � I a.soo sF f `°�
� � 8.780 SF t 1
I I '�,
� � 1 71 J fO130 �p. 10' I I o .
� � i 5�-- 7� ��U°�.�lE � J �---� P��--� , h ; :�
PROlEC110N �
s. I - - --FOOTPRINi . I ?
' I � � ' FENCNJG � — —
!'' I {TYP) � � r�r`,
�, - — _ TREE TO ,,,
� i ' / 15' 8E RfA10VE� ' k
i, ' 6
» ---�-----x x— x —x�. _ �� Y
� ' . , �
dR .�ro
' eraaa�,.mr
I e�am��
omo.
I fQi tR[
uvour
� �� . ' I sQ,�a.�ae
I + ; C2
PRELIMINARY SIGHT DISTANCE CERTIFICATION
May 29, 2008
City of Tigard
CD - Development Engineering
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
503-639-4171 Fax: 503-624-0752
http://vwvw.tiqard-or.qov
Attn: Kim McMillan, P.E.
RE: White Oak Partition— SW 74`h Avenue
The access for this proposal is located along the the eastern portion of the eyebrow corner
that is being constructed with both parcels taking access to SW 74th Avenue via a singular
driveway. The speed limit along SW 74�h Avenue is 25 M.P.H., based upon the street
classification of a local street, requiring 250 feet of sight distance, in accord with Code
Section 501-8.5.F.
As required by Code Sections 501-8.5.F (2), sight distance from the access point to SW 74tn
Avenue was measured to be in excess of 250 feet to the north of the access in one direction.
The sight distance to the west (Street"A" in the White Oak PD) is not full constructed;
however the location of the driveway it directly in front of Street"A", where drivers will take
access to the street system and will be able to see to the end of the street. These
measurements were based on an eye height of 3.5 feet and an object height of 4.25 feet
above the road; and be assumed to be 10 feet from the near edge of pavement to the front of
a stopped vehicle.
Therefore, the driveway location /placement will achieve maximum possible sight distance
without modificatin.�._
�`�_
Design LC
�-
!
.�
Steve Roper, PE �
.
`b�" r
� �.d���6'f'.�,�:
PRE-APPLICATION � � �������
=
�� CONFERENCE REQUEST
City of Ti�ard Permit Center 13125 SIk'Hall Blvd., Ti�ard, OR 97223
� � � Phone: 503.639.4171 Fax:503.598.1960
GENERAI.INFORMATION
Applicant:�eff Caines, AICP-SR Design LLC
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
1lddress:8196 SW Hall Blvd. #232 Phone:503-469-1213
Beaverton, OR 97008 Case No.: r� ���� �v`��
City: Zip:
Jeff Caines, AICP 503-469-1213 Receipt No.: ����� ��
Contact Person: Phone:
rlpplication ticcepted By: 5 T(Fi��
Property Owner/Deed Holder(s): White Oak Village, LLC Date: 5 r�"���
DATE OF PRE-APP.: J�'S�1OY
7955 SW Hall Blvd LV
Address: Phone: TIME OF PRE-APP.:_ �� ��
Beaverton, OR 97008
City: Zip: PRE-APP.HELD WITH:
11030 SW 74th Avenue Rev.7/1/07
PYOP2fCy A(iC1iCSS�I..00IUOII�S�: i:\cucpin\masters�land use applications\Pre-App Request App.doc
REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS
Tax Map&Tax Lot#(s):
1 S1-36D6 lOt 2300 (Note: applicarions will not be accepted
R-4.5 (PUD) without the required submittal elements)
Zoning: � Pre-Application Conf.Request Form
.44 acres(19,253 sf)
Site Size: S�OPIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING:
� BrieE Description of the Proposal and any
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE INFORMATION site-specific questions/issues that you would
like to have staff research prior to the
r1ll of the information identified on this form are required to be submitted by meeting.
the applicant and received by the Planning Division a tni�riimum of one (11 � Site Plan. The site plan must show the
week prior to officially scheduling a pre-application conference date/time to proposed lots and/or building layouts drawn
allow staff ample time to prepare for the meeting. to scale. Also, show the location of the
subject property in relation to the nearest
r1 pre-application conference can usually be scheduled within 1-2 weeks of the streets;and the locations of driveways on the
Planning Division's receipt of the request for either Tuesday or Thursda� subject property and across the street.
morni�s. Pre-application conferences are one ,11 hour long and are rypically � ��icinity Map.
held between the hours of 9:00-11:00 r1M.
� The Proposed Uses.
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCES MUST BE SCHEDULED IN � Topographic Information. Include Contour
PERSON AT THE COMMiJNITY DEVELOPMENT COLJNTER Lines if Possible.
FROM 8:00-4:00/MONDAY-FRIDAY.
❑ If the Pre-Application Conference is for a
IF MORE THAN 4 PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND THE MONOPOLE project, the applicant must
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IN YOUR GROUP, PLEASE attach a copy of the letter and proof in the
INFORM THE CITY IN ADVANCE SO THAT ALTERNATE ROOM form of an affidavit of mailing, that the
ARRANGEMENTS Ct1N BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE collocation protocol was completed (see
GROUP. Section 18.798.080 of the Tigard Community
Development Code).
� Filing Fee$370.00
May 2, 2008
Request for
Pre-Application Meeting
TW� PARCEL PARTITION
Map # 1S1-36DB Lot 2300
City of Tigard, Oregon
AGENT:
SR Design LLc
Contact: Jeff Caines, AICP
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
Office (503) 469-1213
Fax (503) 469-8553
APPLICANT:
White Oak Village LLC
7955 SW Hall Blvd
Beaverton, OR 97008
REQUEST FOR PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE
Project Name: White Oak Partition
Address: 11030 SW 74� Avenue
Legal: Map # 1S1-36DB Lot 2300
Area: Approximately .44 acres (19,253 sf)
Current
Zoning: R-4.5 (7,500 sf)
Request: Two Parcel Partition
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Applicant is requesting a Pre-Application meeting with City of Tigard staff to review the
possibility of a two parcel partition on the property listed above. The use of the site would be
single- family, detached residential. The applicant is proposing to partition the one lot into two
legal lots of record. The size of each lot will conform to the appropriate zoning designation and
setbacks. A public street (eyebrow corner) is already constructed due to the subdivision to the
west. The property for which this partition is requested would like to construct up to two
driveways fronting the eyebrow corner in order to have separate driveways for each dwelling unit.
There is an existing dwelling unit that will be removed in order for this project to develop. The
current dwelling unit is served by public utilities and the proposed dwelling will be served by
pubic utilities.
Questions
1. How many driveways can be constructed off of the eyebrow corner?
2. If an access easement was to be used to give access to Parcel2, how wide would an access
easement need to be? Would I need to take the easement area out of the lot requirement
from Parcell?
3. There is only one tree that would need to be removed due to the development. Meaning
that it is located in the building envelope. The trees to the east are not scheduled for
� removal. The project does not expect to pay for mitigation since only one tree over 12 inches
will be removed. Would an arborist report be required?
Map Output Page 1 of 1
y� 11030 SW 74th Ave
� i
�� ,� Legend
t �?
[ aa war L_____, 3 ,.. �° � �,.W3.e aBCN"S
�'
reeikvays
' _ _ _ 1 P6eepi9a9
tL,
,� ���*, M, �d9Mary
IL
� � . u� ,�,» +,,, r i , �,�rye
C
_' tr _ ,h«a streets
_ �� I
., Streams
Boundary wth
z
' "' gp m.', Stream shading
parks
rYw
( 2006 aerial p#i�6u
, , 'II. ) '
.1 ;....-
_______r_
.., .,....„ ,,,,,,,,....
1'411
- *` erg S
Vi'_. .rt ' "y.4... , - � r„ V g yamt z, w� ,, +
P ` r _;� ,fir
_ p I}
1 I
Cramer ML"'”'
I t !@tlfl.3 d3CYUw a Cent* N16U°IA —
1' aP.w,vw.arx�tro-regwrt..we�,'etsrc 4 �
http://mica.metro-region.org/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=metromap plan&ClientVersion=4.0&Form=True... 5/2/2008
Map Output Page 1 of 1 - �
11030 SW 74th Ave
, � � r ;/, , � L� end
�.�_y-r/-----� �-!�f ; � :� � � ��`���~ �
�
-r � �- = 'r . 1 •.., Pla[es
--,� � .— -- :,__ .,�.__; , } , ^ • �`
,�� �� � � i 4.---- -- �i � �- Ci[y 1pa11
� — h — ;f ' � rf ' ``1' ---------- ---- — ?� !fire 5uuon
-_ _� �—, -_, .�(a I � . ( i �
-- Ir�— —'1 __ L I ---! -------I—_( ���� ��_. + afoapilal
� � I � � �
O �? ,� 7.dbravy
C� �, -- f--
� � j i �t-n � . Sclrord
i
/Jr-� =l ' i �/�
'f �` .�' '�- �� I -- � � /�I F�CCW:1]r5
... i ( - --� I i---'--- + C�'�
� �-�—; — � � � I f � $til'CL5
t J
- -5---- - -- —�L�=�� � ! i _ Taxlots
� �_� � 'k � 5treams
,�•
, � , — � J Contaurs
�� �.
Lfrban Growth
� �1---- -- I �� 1� euvndary
� --------�-� �
� � �` '' � Strcam shading
� � '� �-r
� , __ ' -.,� F*arks
� � � ___,_- �
5 � + � � � � '�.\
�� ' �`� �` �
� �..
��, j -- -� — �.- ,
� , �°
r–�
�__ __ ' .
, ; -� - -�� � - �,� -_ :, �-,, -
� ��� � � ' �� _ �� � ���� �
���� -- - � -- �. -
� , - �� .� __
; '��A --, ' _ -~�`—�, �"��_
� � � .; �, Q
�
`�~- - ,� -- ; i � 1-- � I� ``�'r �'`- '�` �___
j � ( i:-� ��� �L � , ` I r� '�
i J. i
� I �..r4��4� � ��� '
��f�
�_, i \
' ,^Y.� _. . ��� r �� ti �_r��,
'':_ "_
Cr:�tecl M'Uetra Qata Resourcc Cemei s�Ic�rn���p,�ti.�•N.mNra-reg'v�n.eryld�c �"r~ 0 199ft��y�
http://mica.metro-region.org/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=metromap�lan&ClientVersion=4.0&Form=True... 5/2/2008
� w s
� � �
� � �
� �
. N N
.--� V� � p
N z C/�
O
O
�j 0�
�
169.20' (25)
�-.
�
T
�i L.{' �
� N N �/ /
� o o � ; yo
�
� �
� �
179.20' (179.2')
79'
S 88°52'25" E
20.60' (3)(11)(14)
ACCESS EASEMENT
�
10,189 SF �,500 SF �O� �^``'
o D�
0 0o OU•o0
0
� ° � � �L
T
v � 117' 75'
� �
� N 192.31 ' (192.00')
� � FND, 5/8" I.R./Y.P.i
�n
"PELSER PLS 280�
o � (4), FND. 31/4" I.P, I
o � N 79 28 55 W 0.7�
0 0
o �,
� T
�i
� �
�
T
O �i
��
� O
T
�1^
u�}J
V
�/
V
N 88°52'25" W 119.98' �!
(120.00') (4)(8) �
� �
� _
r
Th u rsday April 2008 May 2008 June 2008
O� 1 2 3 4 1 2 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 5 6 7 8 9 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 12 13 14 15 16 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 19 20 21 22 23 23 24 25 26 27
M a y 2 0 0 8 28 29 30 26 27 28 29 30 30
. d_ -� Day 129,237 Left Week 19
Appointments
8 00
30
9 00 Pre-App Jeff Caines 503-469-1213 11030 SW 74th Ave 2 lot MLP I
Conf. Rm#1
30
10°°
30
11 °°
30
12��
PM so
� o0
30
2 00
30
3 ��
30
4 ��
30
5 ��
30
519/9h(1A 19�7Q P�A 1/1 Nohainrk Coniircc
`
:�
�_�
PRE-APPLICATION CONFEREHCE NOTES s '
➢ EHGINEERIHG SECTION \ CRy�filgard,Oregen
�'ommunity�DeveCopment
5�ia � A�BetterCommun'
PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map[sl: 1S136DB
Tax lot[sl: 2300
Use Tme: MLP
The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant
will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be
no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned
commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on
the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements
that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project.
RiAht-of-way dedication:
The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public:
(1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification
right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or
(2.) For the creation of new streets.
Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for:
� SW 74th Avenue to ???' feet to provide for cul-de-sac bulb
❑ SW to feet
❑ SW to feet
❑ SW to feet
Street improvements:
� Half street improvements will be necessary along SW 74�"Avenue, to include:
� feet of pavement
� concrete curb
� storm sewers and other underground utilities
� 5-foot concrete sidewalk (curb tight with adjustment to planter strip code)
� street trees sized and spaced per TDC
� street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a finro-year streetlight fee.
❑ Other:
CITY OF T16ARD Pre-Applicatlen Co�erence Notes Page 1 ef 6
Ene�nserin9 laouu��nt Sectleo
❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include:
❑ feet of pavement
❑ concrete curb
❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities
❑ -foot concrete sidewalk
❑ street trees
❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee.
❑ Other:
❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include:
❑ feet of pavement
❑ concrete curb
❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities
❑ -foot concrete sidewalk
❑ street trees
❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee.
❑ Other:
❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include:
❑ feet of pavement
❑ concrete curb
❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities
❑ -foot concrete sidewalk
❑ street trees
❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee.
❑ Other:
❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include:
❑ feet of pavement
❑ concrete curb
❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities
❑ -foot concrete sidewalk
❑ street trees
❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a finro-year streetlight fee.
CITY OF TI6ARU Pro-Applicatlon Conference Netes Page 2 of 6
Enginaerin!Uepar[menl SecUon
❑ Other:
Aqreement for Future Street Improvements:
In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently
practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval
may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee.
The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may
be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee:
(1.)
�2.)
Overhead Utility Lines:
❑ Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines
adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, if approved by the City Engineer, a
fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines
are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is approved, it is equal to
$ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines.
There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW
Prior to , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-
lieu described above.
Sanitary Sewers:
The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is iocated in SW 74th Avenue.
The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's
responsibility to extend the sewer to serve the development.
Water Supply:
The Tualatin Valley Water District (Phone:(503) 642-1511) provides public water senrice in the area of
this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your
proposed development.
Fire Protection:
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: John Dalby, (503) 356-4723]
provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for
information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other
questions related to fire protection.
Storm Sewer Improvements:
All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed
to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm
CITY OF TI6ARD Pre-Applicadon Com�rence Not�s Page 3 af 6
E�glaeerlag 9e�artment SecUeo
drainage plan for the site, ar �ay be required to prepare a sub �n drainage analysis to ensure
that the proposed system will G_..ommodate runoff from upstream p�_,�erties when fully developed.
Must connect private, on-site sform sewer to an approved public sysfem. A fee-in-lieu of detention wil!
be allowed.
Storm Water Quality:
The City has agreed to enforce SurFace Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the
Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of
on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus
contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The
resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-
site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not
the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious
surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof. Please contact the Building Division
for the current fee. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be
submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require:
❑ Construction of an on-site water quality facility.
� Payment of the fee in-lieu.
Other Comments:
All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City
maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance
access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily
accessible.
The half-street improvements will be required if ineets the rough proportionality test.
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES
In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic
Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected
impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon
the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of
the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee
category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of buildinq permit issuance. In limited
circumstances, payment of the TIF inay be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy
permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible o� when the TIF is greater than
$5,000.00.
Pay the T/F
CITY OF TI6ARD Pre-Applicatlon Conference Metes Page 4 ef 6
Engloeering Oepartmeat Sectlon
. .
PERMITS
Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit:
Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering
Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City Hall.
For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or
subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for
review and approval.
The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A
deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the
permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases
where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for
any final design-re�ated assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI
permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit.
The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security.
Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer
Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public
improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows:
NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicani must obtain that
permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Diuision.
Building Division Permits:
The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more
detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at
503-639-4171, ext. 304.
Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial,
industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot
grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading
and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in
cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation
excavation material is not to be hauled from the site.
Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued
after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit.
Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all
work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This
permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially
complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City.
For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a
mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit.
Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing
that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information.
CITY OF TI6ARU Pre-Applicatlon Conference Notes Page 5 af 6
Eaglneering Ospartment SecUon
, • � .
GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS
All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The
engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20°/o, as
well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in
determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer
will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each
homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall
include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall
also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building.
PREPARED BY: � • 8 •v
ENGINEERINC DEPARTME STAFF DATE
Phone: [5031639-4171
Fax: [50316240152
document4
Revised: September 2,2003
CITY OF TI6ARD Pr�-Applicatlon Comer�nce Notes Page 6�f 6
Englneering Departmen[Sectlon
CITY OF TIGARD ,,
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES °
(Pre-.�lpplication I�leeting Notes are Z'alid for Six (6) i�tonths) � � �
'PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: �tC� � C,c)� , I
STAFF AT PRE-APP.: � Z.GY�
�-� RESIDENTIAL
APPLICANT:White Oak Village, LLC AGENT: Jeff Caines/SR Desiqn
Phone: � � - Phone: (503) 469-1213
PROPERTY LOCATION:
.�v�ss/c�.NER�.LOC.��o�: 11030 SW 74th Avenue
Tl���P�s�/LOT#�s�: 1 S136DB02300
NECESSARYAPPLICATIONS: MLP - Minor Land Partition
PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: To divide one (1) lot into two (2) for new sinqle-family detached
homes. Remove existing single-family home.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
MAP DESIGNATION: Low-Density Residential
ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: R-4.5 ('PD))�� S� C ir�►v►tic�t.r'
ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.510)
MINIMUM LOT SIZE: 7,500 sq. ft. r'�verage Min. lot width: 50 ft. Max. building height: 30 ft.
Secbacks: Front: 20 ft. Side: 5 ft. Rear: 15 ft. Corner: 15 ft. from street.
MA_YIMUM SITE COVERAGE: NA%. Minimum landscaped or natural vegetarion area: NA%.
G�ItAGES: 20 ft.
❑ NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout)
TIIL 1'�PPLICANT SIIIII.I. NOTIF�' 1'1LL PROPERTY OV6'NERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTF,K�:STED
PARTIES, AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. r� minimum of two
(2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land lise Notification
handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting�our a�lication
or the a�lication will not be acce�ted.
* NOTE: In otder to also pteliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is
encouraged prior to sabmittal of a land use applicarion.
� NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18.390)
'I'he APPLICANT SH�LL SUBMIT A NARRA'I'IVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval
srandards. Failure to provide a narrarive or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application
incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9
Residen6al ApplicationlPlanning Division Section
� IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050)
.�s a part of the r1PPLICATION SUBMITTr1L REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE
I1�IPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quanrify the effect of the development on
public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways,
the drainage system,the parks system,the water system,the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development.
For each public facility system and type of unpact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City
standards, and to minunize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and
affected private property users. In situarions where the Community Development Code requires the dedicarion of
real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with thc dcdication requirement, or provide
evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly propornonal to
the projected impacts of the development.
� ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.765)
Minimum number of accesses: 1. Minimum access width: 15 ft.
Minimum pavement width: 10 ft.
❑ WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.705)
Within all�'ITACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and mulu-family developments,each residential
dwelling SF IAI.I,BE CONNECTED BY Wr1LKWAY TO THE VEHICUI.AR PARKING AREA, COMMON
OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES.
� RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION (Refer to Code Chapter 18.715) -SEE EXAMPLE BELOW.
The NET RESIDENTIr�L UNITS r�LLOW'ED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net area of
the developable land by the micvmum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the
applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from
the gross site area:
All sensitive lands areas 'includin�:
► Land within the 100-year floodplain;
► Slopes exceeding 25%;
► Drainageways;and
► Wedands for the R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts.
Public right-of-way dedication:
s Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public faciliries;or
► Multi-family allocate 15% of gross acres for public faciliries;or
► I f available, the actual public facility square footage can be used for deduction.
E�iAMPLE OF RESIDENTIi�L DENSITY Ci'�LCULr,TIONS: (USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE
(3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE)WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS)
Single-Family Multi-Family
43,560 sq. ft.of gross site area 43,560 sq. ft.of gross site area
8.712 sq. ft. (20%) for public right-of-wa� 6 534 sc�.ft. (15%) for�ublic right-of-wa��
NET: 34,848 square feet tiET: 37,026 square feet
- _O50 minimutn lot areal - ��minimum lot areal
= 11.4 Units Per Acre = 12.1 Units Per Acre
Note: The Development Code requites that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit. NO ROUNDING UP IS
PERMITTED.
Note: Minimum Project Density is 80%of the maximum allowed density. TO DETERMINE THIS STANDARD,MULTIPLY
THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS BY.S.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9
Residential AppticationlPlanning Division Section
� SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Section 18J30)
► STREETS: feet from the centerline of
► FI.AG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE Yr1RD SETBACK applies to all primary structures.
► ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: r� minimum of a ten (10)-foot separarion shall be maintained between each
dwelling unit or garage.
► MULTI-FANIILY K�:S1ll�;NT1r1L building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential
developments.
ACCESSORY STRUCTLJRES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in
size. Five (5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines.
��CCESSORY STRL'CTLJRE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size.
(Note: See applicable zoning district for the primary structures' setback requirements.)
� FLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730)
IVI��XIMUM HEIGHT OF 1'/z STORIES or 25 feet,whichever is less in most zones;2Yz stories,or 35 feet in R-7,
R-12,R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.C.2 are satisfied.
� BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.745)
In order TO INCREASE PRIVI�CY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR
VISUAL IMPr�CTS between adjacent developments,especially between different land uses,the CITY REQLTIRES
LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code
in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mucture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and
must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be
required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may � be
occupied by vegetarion, fences, utiliries, and walkways. r�dditional information on required buffer area materials
and sizes may be found in the Development Code.
The ESTIMr�TED REOUIRED BUFFERS a�licable to your�roposal area is:
Buffer Level N/A along north boundary. Buffer Level N/A along east boundary.
Buffer Level N/A along north boundary. Buffer Level N/A along east boundary.
IN r1DDITTON, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQ UIRED ALONG: the flag pole, if the paved
drivewav is within 10 feet of the neiqborinq lot (see 18.420.050.A.4.fl .
� LANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745, 18.765 and 18.705)
STREET 1REES �RE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PL'BLIC OR
PRIVATE S'IREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either
within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees
must have a minunum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees
should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturiry.
Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division.
A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) '1'REE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) Pr'�RKING SPAC�S MUST BE PI.�,NTED in
and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetarive canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include
special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view.
❑ RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755)
Applicant should CONTr1CT FRr�NCHISE Hr1ULER FOR REVIEV�' r1ND APPROV��L OF SITE
SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locaring a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the
intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's
Service area. Pride Disposal can be reached at (503) 625-6177.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9
Residential ApplicationlPlanning Division Section
� PARKING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 & 18.705)
ALL Pr1RKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED.
► Single-family............Requires: One (1) off-street parking space per dwelling unit;and
One (1) space per unit less than 500 square feet.
► Mulriple-family.........Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom;
1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms;and
1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms.
Mulri-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall
consist of 15% of the total required parking.
NO MORE THAN 50%OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED r�ND/OR DIMENSIONED AS
COMPr1CT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows:
► Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet,6 inches x 18 feet,6 inches.
► Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet,6 inches x 16 feet,6 inches.
► Handicapped parking: :'�ll parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled
person parking spaces. The trnnimum number of disabled person parktng spaces to be provided,as well as
the parking stall dunensions, is mandated by the Americans with Disabiliues Act (ADr�). r� handout is
available upon request. r� handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface
and an appropriate sign shall be posted.
❑ BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.765)
BICYCLE Rr1CKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIi'1L r'1ND INDUSTRIr'1L
DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient
locations.
❑ SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.775)
The Code provides REGL"L..�TIONS FOR LANDS �X�'HICH 1�RE POTENTI�'�LLY UNSUITABLE FOR
DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS �x'ITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPI.AIN, NAT`L,TRAL
DR�INAGEWAYS,WETLAND AREAS,ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT,OR ON L?NSTr�BLE
GROUND. Staff will attempt to prelinunary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based
on available information. HOWEVER, the res�onsibility to �recisely identify sensitive land areas, and their
boundaries, is the res,ponsibilit�of the a,��licant. Areas meeting the definirions of sensitive lands must be clearl�
indicated on�lans submitted with the develo�ment a�lication.
Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas.
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPI��NT IS PROF-IIBIT�D V�TTHIN TLOODPLAINS.
❑ STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.775.070.C)
VG'hen STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which
addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Secrion 18.775.U80.C. "1'he report
shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving
the requirements of Secrion 18.775.080.C.
� CLEAN WATER SERVICES (CWS� BUFFER STANDARDS (Reter co CWS Rs�o 07-2o/USA xeg��uons-Chapcer 3)
L.r�ND DEVELOPMENT r1DJr�CENT TO SENSITIVE �REt1S shall preserve and maintain or create a
vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area.
Design Criteria:
The VEGETATED CORRIDOR��'IDTH is dependent on the sensirive area. The following table identifies the
required widths:
(See Table 3.1 on following page)
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9
Residential ApplicationlPlanning Division Section
TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS
SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION & ORDER 07-20
SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTH OF VEGETATED
TO SENSITIVE AREA' CORRIDOR PER SIDEz
♦ Streams with intermittent tlow draining: <2�°�0
� 10 to <SO acres 15 feet
� >50 to <100 acres 25 feet
♦ Eicisting or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet
♦ E�sting or created wedands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet
♦ Rivers,streams,and springs with year-round flow
� Streams with intemuttent flow draining>100 acres
♦ Natural lakes and onds
♦ Streams with intermittent flow drauung: >25%
� 10 to <50 acres 30 feet
� >50 to <100 acres 50 feet
♦ E�sting or created wedands >25% �'ariable from 50-200 feet. :�leasure in 25-
♦ Rivers,streams,and springs with��ear-round flow foot increments from the starting point to
♦ Streams with intermittent flow drauung>100 acres the top of ravine (break in<25%slope),
♦ Natural lakes and ponds add 35 feet ast the to of ravine3
�Starting point for mcasurcment=cdp,e of the dcfined channcl(banl:fu] flow) for strcamti/m�crs,delineated wcdand bnundan,dclincatcd spring boundan,and/or a�•eragc
hi�;h water for lakes or ponds,whiche��er offers�,�reatest resource protcction. Inte:mittent sprin�,located a minimum of 15 fect within the ri�•cr/stream or wetland cegetated
corridor,shall not sen�e as a starting point for mcasurement.
ZVegetated corridor at-erat;ing or reduction is allowed only when the�•eg,etated comdor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition.
�'['hc�•cgctateJ eomdor estcnds 35 fect Erom the top of thc ra��inc and sets thc outcr boundan of the�-egctatcd corridor. '1'hc 35 feet rruzy be reduccd to 75 feet,if a stamped
�;rotechnical rc�ort confimis slope staMlity shall be maintained w�ith the reduced setback frcxn the top of ra��ine.
Restricrions in the Vegetate Corridor:
NO structures, development, construcrion acriviries, gardens, lawns, applicarion of chemicals, dumping of any
materials of any kind, or other acrivities shall be pemzitted which otherwise detract from the water quality
protecrion provided by the ve�etated corridor, exc•ept as pmvided for in the USfI Design and Constrzrction Standards.
Location of Vegetated Corridor:
IN riNY RESIDEN'IZAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREAT'ES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for
separate ownership, such as a subdivision,the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract,and shall not
be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit.
C�'S Sen�ice Provider Letter:
PRIOR "1 O SUBMITTAL of any land use applicarions, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter
which will outline the condirions necessary to comply with the C�'S R&O 07-20 sensitive area requirements. If
there are no sensitive areas,CWS must still issue a letter stating a C�'S Senrice Provider Letter is not required.
❑ SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780)
SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTr1LLr�TION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard.
�� "Guidelines for Sign Pernzits" handout is available upon request. Addirional sign area or height beyond Code
standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application.
Alternarively,a Sign Code Fxceprion applicauon may be filed for Director's review.
� TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.0 and the "Tree Plan
Requirements Handout" included in your pre-application conference packet)
A "I'REE PLAN FOR THE PLr�NTING,REMOVAL 1�ND PROTECTION OF"1'REES prepared by a certified
arborist shall be provided for any lot,parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application
for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or CUIl(�1LLUI1� use is filed.
PROTECTION IS PREFERRED OVER REMOVAL WHEREVER POSSIBLE (r�ddress all items in the Ciry's
Tree Plan Requirements Handout).
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9
RCSidential Applica6onlPlanning Division Section
THE'1'REE PLr�N S�IAI.L II�..L,L DE the following:
► Identification of the location,size,species,and condition of all existing trees greater than 6-inch caliper.
■ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper.
Mirigauon must follow the replacement guidelines of Secrion 18.790.060.D according to the following
standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping,
streets and parking lots:
• Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program
according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees;
• Retainage of from 25 to 50% of e7cisring trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of
the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.;
• Retainage of from 50 to 75% of exisung trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the
trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.OGO.D.;
• Retainage of 75% or greater of e�cisting trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation;
► Idenrificauon of all trees which are proposed to be removed;and
► A protecrion program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees
during and after construcrion.
TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YFAR PRIOR TO r1 DEVELOPMENT
APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced
according to Section 18.790.060.D.
� MITIGATION (Refer to Code Section 18.790.OGO.E.)
RI:PLr,CEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines:
► A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characterisrics.
► If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the
Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value.
s If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable,
the Director shall require replacement with more than one uee in accordance with the following fornzula:
♦ The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by di��iding the estimated caliper size of
the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees.
If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one
(1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city,either public property or,
with the consent of the owner,private property.
► The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to
maturiry.
IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this secrion, a party may,with the consent of the
Director,elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement.
� CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.795)
The Ciry requires that CLEAR VISION AREr�S BE Mr1INTAINED BE'I�X'LEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8)
FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear
vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear
vision area. The applicant shall sh�w the clear vision areas on the site plan, and idenrify any obstructions in these
areas.
❑ FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREETS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.030.F.)
A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall:
r Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall
show the pattern of exisring and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land ciivision
and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 200 feet
surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division.
► Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian
faciliries on or within 500 feet of the site.
Where necessary to give access or pemut a sausfactory future division of adjoining land,streets shall be extended to
the boundary lines of the tract to be developed.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9
Residential Application/Planning Division Section
� ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.0G0)
MINIML'1�1 LOT FRONT��GE: 25 fect unless lot is created through the minor land parririon process.
Lots created as part of a partition must have a miiumum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide
access easement.
The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SF IALL NOT EXCEED 2'/z TIMES THE AVERr1GE�'IDTH,unless the parcel
is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district.
❑ BLOCKS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.090)
1'he perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED BY S"I'REETS SI-I��LL NOT EYCEED 1,800 FEET measured along the
right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography, wedands or other bodies
of water or,pre-existing development.
V�'hen block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted,pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block.
CODE CHAP'I'ERS
❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ �$.6ZO(Tigard Triangle Desgn Standards) ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming Situations)
❑ 1 H.34O(Directors Interpretation) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regiona�Center) � 18,765{off-Street Parking2oading Requirements)
� 18.350(P�anned Deve�opment) ❑ 1 H.E4O(Durham quarry Design Standards) ❑ 18.775(Sensi�ve�ands Review)
❑ 18.360(Site Development Review) � 18.705(AccesslEgrasslCirculation) ❑ 18.780(Sgns)
❑ 18.370(varianceslAdjustrnents) ❑ �8.7�O(Accessory Residential Un�s) ❑ 18.785 Remporary Use Permits)
❑ �H.3HO(Zoning Map/T'ext Amendments) � 1 H.715(Densiry Compuhations) � 18.790(7ree Remova�)
❑ 18.385(Misceuaneous Permits) ❑ 'I 8.720(Design Compatibility Standards) � 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas)
� 'I$.390(Deasion Making Proceduresllmpact Study) ❑ �5.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.798(Wire�ess Communication Faa�ities)
❑ �8.4�O(Lot Line Adjustrnents) � 'I S.73O(Exceptions To Development Standards) � 18.81 O(Street�utility Improvement Standards)
� �H.42O(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay)
❑ 18.430(Subdivisions) ❑ �H.�4Z(Home Occupa6on Permits)
� �H.S�O(Residential Zoning Districis) � �8.745(Landsqping&Screening Standards)
❑ 18.520(Commeraal Zoning Districis) ❑ �H.TSO(ManufacturedlMobil Home Regulations)
❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districis) ❑ �8.755(Maed Solid WastelRecyding Storage)
ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS:
Answers to Applicant's Questions:
I) If access easement used to Qive access to Parcel 2, how wide? Take easement area out of lot area for
Parcel 1? Ans: Easement (flaq pole) needs to be 15 feet wide; Yes, vou would have to remove it from the
density calcs and lot area.
2) Arborist report required even thouqh onlv removing 1 tree and no mitiqation? Yes, you need to provide
an inventory for all the trees over 6 caliper inches, includinq a protection program for the ones not beinq
removed and a removal "plan" for the tree beinq removed.
AI�-
� P n de.�i��U r��v►�, h�c��t v� c�- a��(v� Stu�� w�1 c� .��./',.�„t-,� ,
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9
Residential Application/Planning Division Sec6on
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9
Residential ApplicationlPlanning Division Section
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 makin� a recommendation on the
proposal to the City Council. ?�n additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS
,�11 r�PPLICATInNS I�'IL?ST BE r�CCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STr,FF MEMBER of the
Community De�-elopment Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted
bv mail or dro�ed off at the countet without Planrung Division acce�tance may be returned. The
Planning counter closes at 5:00 PM.
Ma�s submitted with an a�lication shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8'/2" x 11". One, 8'/2" x 11" ma� of
a proposed �roject shall also be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision.
A�plications with unfolded maps shall not be accepted.
The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will
determine whether an applicarion is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will norif�� the
applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required.
The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur appro�rnately 45 to 60 days after an application is
accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involvuig difficult or protracted issues or
requinng review by other jurisdicrions may take additional time to review. Written recommendarions from the
Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land
use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard Hearings Officet. r�basic flow chart which
illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request.
Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less
than 10 days prior to the public hearing.
This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE 1�ND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE
INTENDED TO INFORM the prospecrive applicant of the primary Community Development Code
requirements applicable to the potenrial development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospecrive
applicant to discuss the opportuniries and constraints affecring development of the site.
SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION (Washington Counry Surveyor's Office: 503-648-8884)
PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the Ciry of Tigard, applicants
are re�uired to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office
in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete
until the City receives the faxed confirmarion of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservauon.
BUILDING PERMITS
PI.ANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER REI.AT'ED PERI�IITS�'ILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIE�x'
UNTIL A I.,-1ND USE :�PPROV?�L Hr�S BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building
Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These
pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or
modifications to e�cisting buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to
determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as
proposed.
r�ddirionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Parririons where any structure to be demolished has
system development charge (SDC) credits and the underl}'ing parcel for that structure will be eliminated when
the new plat is recorded, the City's �olicv is to a�l�� those s��stem develo�ment credits to the first building
ernzit issued in the develo ment (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT
HE TIME THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED).
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9
Residential ApplicationlPlanning Division Section
PLEASE NOTE:
The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to site planning
that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide informarion
required by the Code shall not consritute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is
recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development
Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an
application.
AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN
APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A
PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as
unnecessary by the Planning Di�-ision).
PREPARED BY: Emil�Eng,Assistant Planner
CIT1'OF TTGARD PLANNING DIVISION
PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-624-3681 DIRECT: 503-718-2712
EMAIL: emil�@tigard-or.gov
TITLE 18 (CITY OF T'IG:�RD'S C0:��IUNIT'I'DE�'EI,OPI��NT CODE) INTERNET ADDRESS: www.tigard-or.gov
H:\patty\masters\Pre-.�pp Notes Residential.doc Updated: 27-Feb-08
(Engineering section:preapp.en�
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 10 of 9
Residential Application/Planning Division Section
MEMOR.ANDUM
TO: FILE: WHITE O11IL VILLAGE SUBDNISION SliB2006-00010, PDR2006-00001,
ZON2007-00001
FR�M: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner
DATE: �1ay 8, 2008
The face page of this Decision should have included the R-4.5, Low Density Residenrial Zone, which is applicable to
the parceidescribed as WM 1S136DB02300. The parcel was mistakenly idennfied as zoned R-12.
In addition, because this parcel was included in the ap lication for a planned development, the parcel was rezoned
with a PD overlay. However, only a small porrion o�the parcel was used for a nght-of-way dedicarion for the
extension of SW 74`h Avenue to provide access to the other two parcels on which the proposed development was
sited. Tax Lot 2300 is flat, approxunately .44-acres in size with an existing single-family dwelling. Because of the
small size of the parcel and lack of any significant natural resources, application for a planned development for
future development of the site would not be appropriate.
Therefore, for future develo�ment of Tax Lot 2300, a planned development applicarion will not be necessary.
However, any land use decision shall provide findings under the planned development secrion of the code that
idenrifies this determuiarion.
Albert Shields
From: Todd Prager
Sent: Wednesday, March 31 , 2010 10:1 8 AM
To: Albert Shields
Subject: FW: White Oak Subdivision - 4/1/10 TPZ Reporting
Albert,
Could you please set this up as an individual property(11026 SW 74th Avenue) under that White Oak Partition in the
arborist monitoring spreadsheet.
Thanks,
Todd
From: Phil Hickey [mailto:ph@halsteadsarbor.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 10:06 AM
To: Todd Prager; Albert Shields
Cc: Len Dalton
Subject: White Oak Subdivision - 4/1/10 TPZ Reporting
Reference: Site Inspection & TPZ Report
Location: White Oak Subdivision Property - 11026 SW 74th Avenue, Tigard
Subject: Apri12010 - lst Period Reporting
Developer: Dalton Gang Homes, LLC
Contact: Mr. Len Dalton (503) 209-8869
Todd,
The Tree Protection Zones have been inspected on 3/31/10 and the tree protection fencing is intact for the
preserved trees as required.
Reporting Activity:
None - no on-site construction activities have occurred since the last report.
Thank you,
Phil Hickey
Project Consulting Arborist
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-1604B
Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants, Inc.
P.O. Box 1182
Tualatin, OR 97062
i
Albert Shields
From: Todd Prager
Sent: Thursday, April 1 5, 2010 1 1 :27 AM
To: Albert Shields
Subject: FW: White Oak Subdivision - TPZ Reporting
Albert,
Could you please set this up as an individual property (11026 SW 74th Avenue) under the White Oak Partition in the
arborist monitoring spreadsheet.
Thanks,
Todd
From: Phil Hickey [mailto:ph@halsteadsarbor.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 10:36 AM
To: Todd Prager
Cc: Len Dalton; Albert Shields
Subject: White Oak Subdivision - TPZ Reporting
Reference: Site Inspection & TPZ Report
Location: White Oak Subdivision Propeny - 11026 SW 74th Avenue, Tigard
Subject: Construction Work Temporarily Suspended
Developer: Dalton Gang Homes, LLC
Contact: Mr. Len Dalton (503) 209-8869
Todd,
I was contacted by Mr. Len Dalton regarding the White Oak Subdivision project and was informed that
construction activities have been put on hold until further notice and not to continue with the TPZ reporting. I
will resume TPZ inspections/reporting when contacted again by Len.
Thank you,
Phil Hickey
Project Consulting Arborist
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-1604B
Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants, Inc.
P.O. Box 1182
Tualatin, OR 97062
TEL (503) 245-1383
FAX (503) 691-6539
i
1
Todd Prager
From: Todd Prager
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 10:10 AM
To: 'ph@halsteadsarbor.com'; Albert Shields
Cc: Len Dalton; Susan Hartnett; Shirley Treat; Kristie Peerman; Mark VanDomelen; Dan Nelson;
Debbie Adamski
Subject: RE: Plant Appraisal
Dear Phil:
This email is in response to your client's proposal to remove tree N2 (8 inch diameter spruce) that was required to
be preserved as part of the White Oak Partirion (�1LP2008-00006) at 11026 SW 74th �lvenue in Tigard. '1'his
proposal is not in compliance with the condirions of approval for the White Oak Parution and Chapter 18.790 of
the Tigard Development Code.
Secrion 18.790.060.0 specifies that fines for tree violauons include subjecting the offending parn� to a ci�-il penalry
of up to�500 for each infraction and requires remeciiation of damage caused by the violarion. The Ciry is willing to
waive the $500 in civil penalties if your client chooses to comply with the terms in this agreement. Howe�rer,
remediation of damage will still be required and shall include a mirigation payment of�1000 (8 diameter inches
illegally removed x�125/inch mitigauon fee) and payment of an addirional penalty of$960 (vour appraised value of
tree N2).
SUMMr1RY OF FINES DUE
TYPE OF FINE AMOUNT
Civil Penaln- SO (��v'ait-ed if compliance with terms of
this a reement)
Miti ation $1,000
Ttee r� raisal $9C0
TOTAL DUE: $1,9G0
If tree N2 is removed, y�our client will be required to remit payment of�1,960 into the Ciry's Tree Replacement
Fund. A hold will be placed on this lot until this issue is resolved.
Do not hesitate to contact me at (503) 718-2700 if you ha�re any questions or concerns regarding this
correspondence.
Sincerely,
Todd Prager
r�ssociate Planner/��rborist
c: SUB2005-00012 Land use file
From: Phil Hickey [mailto:ph@halsteadsarbor.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 9:17 AM
To: Todd Prager; Albert Shields
�
Cc: Len Da,lton
Su6ject: Plant Appraisal
Hello Todd,
As requested by Mr. Len Dalton, I have prepared the Plant Appraisal for the spruce tree (N2) at White Oak
Village Partition. Please find the appraisal attached to this email for your review.
If you have any questions, please contact me at your convenience.
Thank you,
Phil Hickey
Project Consulting Arborist
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-1604B
z
HA LSTEA D�S "Specialists in the Care and
AR B O R IC U LTU R E Preservarion of Trees"
CONSULTANTS �u�y ,z, Zo�o
`�� www.halsteadsarbor.com
P.O.Box 1182•Tualatin OR 97p62
1503)245-1383
�
.
Daiton Gang Homes
Attn: Len F. Dalton
TEL(503)209-8869
�
• Reference: Eight Inch DBH Spruce Tree on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74�'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
� Subjed: Plant Appraisal Report—On-site Inspection Completed 7/9h0
_ At your request, I have inspeCted the spn�ce tree(Tree#N2)located on the north side
of the White Oak Vllage Partition construction project in Tigard, Oregon. The purpose
of the inspection was to complete a plant appraisaUmonetary valuati�on prior to your
expected removal of the tree.
� ' _
This plarrt appraisal was oompleted in acoordance with the Intemational Society of
Arboriculture(ISA) Guide fnrPlant Appraisal, 9"'Editi�on authored by the Counal of Tree
• 8 Landscape Appraisers. Appraisal values were ca�ulated using the Trunk Formula
� Method based on the Cast Approach prooedure for valuation.
" OBSERVATIONS AND APPRAISAL
�
Tree#N2
� � Saecies: Spruce(Picea spp.)
Location: The tree is located approximately 3 feet south of the north property fine and
� ' S0 feet east of the existing curb cut for SW 74�'Avenue.
Plant Measurements:The tree has a trunk diameter of 8 inches measured at 4.5 feet
above ground (DBH)and is approximately 40 feet in overall height. Canopy limb
spread measures approximately 20 feet in diameter.
I Condition: The tree is currently rated as average to above average in heatth, but
' � � stn�cturally is rated as moderate to poor as the root system is beooming
obstruct�mpacted due to severe soil compaction from the neighboring
driveway/house foundation to the north.
Site: The tree is growing within an average to low average market value property and
neighbofiood for Tigard. It contributes as a privacy screen between the properties,
, helps to deflne property space, and creates a transpirational cooling effect for the
neighbonng property to the north. The placement of the tree in relation to property line
is very low as it is planted too close to the property line and to the neighbars .
homeldri�way for optimum growth to maturity.
� Value: Using the Tnmk Formula Method, the total appraised value for the S-inch
i diameter spruce tree based an my visual observations,tree measurements, and
professional experience would be$960.00. Please see the attached Tiunk Fomtula
� Mebhod calculation sheet for further information.
CCB#0�68646 Keep Amenca Green-Pnnted on Recycled Paper
Page 2
July 12, 2010
Reference: Eight Inch DBH Spruce Tree on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, �regon 97223
Subject: Plant Appraisal Report—On-site Inspeciion Completed 7/9/10
ASSUMPTIONS � LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. A�y legal description provided to the consuftant is assumed to be correct. Any
titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and marketable.
No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property
is evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and
competent management.
2. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has
been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant can neither guarantee
nor be responsible fo�the accuracy of information provided by others, especially
regarding property line determinations and project boundaries.
� 3. The consuitant shall not be required to give testimony or attend court by reason
of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, inGuding
payment of an additional fee for such ser�ices.
4. Loss��alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.
5. Possession of this repoR or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or
use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed,
without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consuftant.
6. Neither all nor any paR of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be
conveyed by anyone, inGuding the dient, to the public through advertising,
public relations, news, sales or other media, without the prior expressed written
or verbal consent of the consuftant; particularly as to value conGusions, identity
of the consultant, or any reference to any professional society or institute or to
any initialed designation conferred upon the consuftant as stated in his
qualifications.
7. This report and values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant,
and the consuitanYs fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a speaFied
value, a stipulated results,the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any
finding to be reported.
8. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as
visual aids, are not necessarily to scate and should not be construed as
engineering or architectural reports or surveys.
9. Unless expressed otherwise: (1) information contained in this report covers only
those items that were examined and refleets the condition of those items at the
time of inspection; and (2)the inspection is limited to visual examination of
aacessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. fhete is no
warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied,that problems or deflciencies of the
plants or property in question may not arise in the future.
Page 3
July 12, 2010
Reference: Eight Inch DBH Spruce Tree on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subjeci: Plant Appraisal Report—On-site Inspection Completed 7/9/10
CERTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE
I, Philip C. Hickey, certify:
. I have personally inspected the above referenced tree and have stated my
findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation is described in the attached
report.
. I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is
the subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect to
the parties involved.
. . The analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has
been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices.
• No one provided sign�cant professional assistance to me, except as indicated
within the report.
• My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined
conGusion that favors the cause of the Gient or any other party nor upon the
resufts of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence
of any subsequent events.
. I certify that all of the statements of fad in this appraisal are true, complete, and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that they are made in good
faith.
I further certify that I am a member in good standing of the International Society of
Arboriculture and the American Society of Consulting Arborists. I have been involved in
the field of Arboriculture and the care and study of trees for a period of more than 15
years.
Signed.� , �.
Date: ��ZI,/y� ��
�
�
Philip C. Hickey �
Projed Consulting Arborist
ISA 8oard Cerfified MasterArborist PN-16048 � P"-'�+e �
ISA Member/ISA-PNW Member/ASCA Member � �C, �
.
Trunk Formula Method*
Appraised Value =
Basic Tree Cost x Species%x Condition%x Location%
Basic Tree Cost='Trunk Area Increase(of appraised tree)
x Unit Tree Cost+Installed Tree Cost
Case�/Assignment White Oak Partition Date �/�/io
Property White Oak Partidon
Appraiser Phil Hickey,ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-i6o4B
Field Obseruations
i. Species Spruce
2. Condilion � %
3. Trunk Circumfercnce inches or Diameter 8 inches
� 4. Location 96= [Site 70 % + Contribution �0 96 + Placement�O 96] �3
= 60 %
Regional P(ant t�praisaf Committee and/or Appraiser-Deueloped or-Modified Information
5. Species Rating� 70 9�6
6. Replacement Tree Size(diameter) 2 inches
(Trunk Area) 3 in�TAR
�. Replacement Tree Cost = $ 175
8. Installadon Cost =� �80
g. Installed Tree Cost(��+�8) _� 455
io. Unit Tree Cost(per in2) _$ 58
Calculations by Appraiser Using Field and/or Regional lnformation
ii. Appraised Trunit Area:
TAA(if<=3o inch Diameter) ATAA(if>3o inch Diameter,
c 2(�3) x o.08 use Tables 4•4-4•7) = 5o in�
or d'(+�3) �b _x o.785
�2- APPraised'lY�ee 1�unlc Increase(TA�xca)_
TAA or ATAA 5o inZ(�u) -TAR 3 in2(�6) = 4� in2
i3. Basic Trce Cost =TA�xcR(�12) 47 in'x Unit'Tree Cost(�rio)
$ 58 per in' +Installed'IYee Cost(�r9) $ 455 per in2 =$ 3.i8i
�,4. Appratsed Value =Basic Tree Cost(�tig) S 3,i8i x Species Rating
(�5) �o % x Condition(�2) � 96 x Location(#4) 60 96 = $ q6o
�5. If the Appraised Value(�i4)is$5,000 or more,round
it to the nearest$ioo;if it is less,mund to nearest$io.
i6. Appraised Value =$ g6o
"Sheet formetting and cskvletion method from the Guide for Plant qpp�(qth Edition,2000).
Council of 7t+ee&Isndscape Appraieers-[ntcrnational Sociey of Arboricuhure.Champaign,ll.
H A L ST E A D�S "Specialrsts in the Care and
AR B O R I C U LTU R E Preservation of Tiees"
CONSULTANTS July 12, 20,0
�� www.halsteadsarbor.com
P.O.Box 1182•Tualatm OR 970fi2
1503)245-1383
�
.
Dalton Gang Homes
Attn: Len F. Dafton
TEL(503)209-8869
� • Reference: Eight Inch DBH Spruce Tree on North Side of Property
� Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
� Subject: Plant Appraisal Report-On-site Inspection Completed 7/9/10
_ At your request, I have inspeded the spruce tree(Tree#N2) located on the north side
of the White Oak Village Partition construction projed in Tigard, Oregon. The purpose
of the inspection was to complete a plant appraisal/monetary valuation prior to your
expected removal of the tree.
� This plar�t appraisal was completed in acoordance with the Intemational Society of
Arboriculture(ISA) Guide 1forPlant Appraisal, 9"'Edition authored by the Counal of Tree
& Landscape Appraisers. Appraisal values were ca�ulated using the Trunk Formula
� Method based on the Cost Approach prooedure for valuation.
OBSERVATIONS AND APPRAISAL
� Tree#N2
� 'es: Spruce(Picea spp.)
` Location:The tree is located approximately 3 f�eet south of the north property line and
i 50 feet east of the existing curb cut for SW 74 Avenue.
Piant Measurements:The tree has a trunk diameter of 8 inches measured at 4.5 feet
above ground (DBH)and is approximately 40 feet in overall height. Canopy limb
spread measures appro�amately 20 feet in diameter.
ondition: The tree is curreMly rated as average to above average in health, but
� � � structurally is rated as moderate to poor as the root system is beooming
obstrud�mpacted due to severe soil compaction from the neighboring
driveway/house foundation to the north.
Site: The tree is growing within an average to low average market value property and
neighborhood for TigaM. It contributes as a privacy screen between the properties,
, helps to define property spaoe, and creates a transpirational cooling effect for the
neighboring property to the no�th. The placement of the tree in relation to property line
is very low as it is planted too close to the property line and to the neighbor's .
homeldriV�way for optimum growth to maturity.
� Value: Using the Trunk Formula Method, the total appraised value for the 8-inch
diameter spruce tree based on my visual observations,tree measurements, and
professional experience would be a960.00. Please see the attached Trunk Formu/a
� Method calcula6on shee�fa further information.
CCBM 0068646 KeepAmenca Green-Pnnted on Recyc:led Pape►
Page 2
July 12, 2010
Reference: Eight Inch DBH Spruce Tree on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, �regon 97223
Subject: Plant Appraisal Report—On-site Inspection Completed 7l9/10
ASSUMPTIONS 8 LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any
titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and marketable.
No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property
is evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and
competent management.
2. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has
been verified insofar as possible; however,the consultant can neither guarantee
nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others, especially
regarding property line determinations and project boundaries.
� 3. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or attend court by reason
of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including
payment of an additional fee for such services.
4. Loss-or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.
5. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or
use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed,
without the prior expressed written or vefial consent of the consultant.
6. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be
conveyed by anyone, inGuding the dient, to the public through advertising,
public relations, news, sales or other media, without the prior expressed written
or verbal consent of the consultant; particularly as to value conGusions, identity
of the consultant, or any reference to any professional society or institute or to
any initialed designation conferred upon the consuRant as stated in his
qualifications.
7. This report and values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consuRant,
and the consultanYs fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified
value, a stipulated results,the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any
finding to be reported.
8. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as
visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as
engineering or architectural repo�ts or suroeys.
9. Unless expressed otherwise: {1) information contained in this report covers only
those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the
time of inspection;and (2)the inspection is limited to visual examination of
aacessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. �'her�e is no
wa�ranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the
plants or property in question may not arise in the future.
Page 3
July 12, 2010
Reference: Eight Inch DBH Spruce Tree on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Plant Appraisal Report—On-site Inspection Completed 7/9/10
CERTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE
1, Philip C. Hickey, certify:
• I have personally inspected the above referenced tree and have stated my
findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation is descnbed in the attached
report.
. I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is
the subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect to
the parties involved.
_ . The analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has
been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultu�al practices.
• No one provided sign�cant professional assistance to me, except as indicated
within the report.
• My compemsation is not oontingent upon the repoRing of a predeteRnined
conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party no�upon the
results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated resufts, or the occurrenoe
of any subsequent events.
. I certify that all of the statements of fact in this appraisal are true, complete, and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that they are made in good
faith.
I further certify that I am a member in good standing of the International Society of
Arboriculture and the American Society of Consulting Arborists. I have been involved in
the field of Arboriculture and the care and study of trees for a period of more than 15
years.
Signed.� , �.
Date: ��I/v� ��
�
�
Philip C. Hickey �
Project Consulting Arborist
!SA Boarrf Certified MasterArtio►isf PN-16048 � P"-'�s �
ISA Member!ISA-PNW Member/ASCA Member � �C. � �
. -
Trunk Formula Method*
Appraised Value=
Basic'IY�ee Cost x Spedes%x Condition 96 x Location%
Basic'IYee Cost=T�unk Area Increase(of appraised tree)
x Unit Tree Cost+ Installed Tree Cost
Case s/Assignment white Oak Partition Date 7/�/io
Property White Oak Partition
Appraiser Phil Hickey,ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-i6o4B
Field Obse�vations
i. Species 3pruce
z. Condidon Tj 9i6
g. 'I�unk Circumference inches or Diameter 8 inches
� 4. Location%_ [Site 70 9�6 + Contribution �o % + Placement�0 96] =3
= 60 96
Regiona!P1antAppraisal Committee and/orAppraiser-Deueloped or-Mod{f�ed Information
5. Species Rati�� 70 %
6. Replacement Tree Size(diameter) 2 inches
('['runk Area) g in'TAR
�. ILeplacement Tree Cost = $ 175
8. Installadon Cost =$ s8o
9. Installed Tree Cost(��+a8) =S 455
io. Unit T�ee Cost(per in2) =S 58
Calculations byAppraiser UsingFYefd and/orRegionallnformation
ii. Appraised Trunk Area:
TAA(if<=3o inch Diameter) ATAA(if>3o inch Diameter,
c 2(*3) x o.08 use Tables 4•4-4•7) = 5o in2
or d'(#g) �x o.785
i2. Appraised'I�ee Trunlc Increase(T?yxcR)_
TAA or ATAA 5o inz(#u) -TAR g in2(#6) = 4� in2
i3. Basic Tree Cost =TA�NCR(�12} 47 in�x Unit Tree Cost(#io)
$ 58 per in� +Installed Tree Cost(+rg) $ 4� per in2 =$ �,i8i
i,4. Appratsed Value =Basic 7'ree Cost(�ig) $ 3,i8i x Species Rating
(a�5) �o % x Condition(#2) 72 % x I.ocation(#4) 60 96 = $ 4bo
�5. If ihe Appraised Value(�i4)is$5,000 or more,round
it to the nearest$ioo;if it is less,round to nearest$io.
i6. Appraised Value =$ q6o
"Sbeet formetting and cakulation method from the Guide for Plant qpprai.4al(gth Edition,2000).
Council of Tree&Isndscape Appraisers-International Society of Arboriculture,Champeign,11.
Todd Prager
From: Todd Prager
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 9:36 AM
To: 'Phil Hickey'
Cc: 'Ifdalton@thedaltonco.com'; Albert Shields
Subject: Tree removal permit for trees N1 and N3 of the White Oak Partition
Phil,
Please accept this email as written permission to remove trees N1 and N3 that were preserved
as part of the White Oak Partition (MLP2008-00006) at 11026 SW 74th Avenue in Tigard.
Because these trees have been documented to be hazardous by a certified arborist, their
removal is permitted by the conditions of approval for the White oak Partition and the Tigard
Development Code. Permission to remove these trees has been recorded in the City records as
permit number TRE2010-00019.
Please note that you are solely responsible for obtaining permission from the property owner
for any activity associated with this permits.
Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this correspondence.
Sincerely,
Todd Prager
Associate Planner/Arborist
City of Tigard
503.718.2700
1
�. � HALSTEI�.��S �Spec�alrsts in the Care and
A R B 4 R I C U LT U R E Preservatron ol Trees��
CONSULTANTS
�� www.halsteadsarbor.com April 16, 2009
?O Box i i82•Tuaiatin,OR 97062
• (50312a5-1383
�
� The LF Daiton Gang, LLC
� Attn: Mr. Len Dalton
� 7955 SW Hall Boulevard
Beaverton, OR 97008
+� TEL: (503) 209-8869
/
Reference: Three Spruce Trees on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Visual Tree Inspection ! Hazard Evaluation
� � _
At your request, I have completed a Visual Tree Inspection on the three spruce trees
(now-post suniey) located along the north side of the property for White Oak Village
Partition— 11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon. The purpose of the inspection
� was to evaluate the hazard patential of the trees and to provide a rating for their
�
current level of estimated risk to surrounding persons and property.
, � VISUAL TREE INSPECTION RESULTS
� �l f_ ��,�376� � _ 6S�I�� ,-�'
Tree Number: N1 '
Location: The tree is located approximately 3 feet south of the north property
� ';� line and 60 feet east of the existing curb cut for SW 74"'Avenue.
�� Description: The subject tree is characteristic of a spruce species (Picea spp.)
and is approximately 50 feet in overall height. It has one primary trunk with a
I trunk diameter(DBH)of 14 inches measured at 4.5 feet above ground level
' � t+ and has a canopy limb spread of approximately 20 feet in diameter.
� Evaluation: The health of the subject tree is rated as average as determined by
annual shoot growth measurements of befinreen 6 and 8 inches of elongation
ifrom last years growth. The canopy structure of the tree is rated as poor to
� , very poor as determined from the structural defect of multiple
tops/codominant stems with severe bark inclusions observed in the upper
canopy located at 30 feet above ground. The root system of the tree has also
� been signficantly impacted by the neighboring ha�dpan gravel driveway that
encompasses 50 percent of the total root zone. The driveway gets frequent
� use from heavy trucks and machinery stored in the back yard of the
neighboring property and has severely compacted the soil within the root
'� zone. The tree does not appear to have had any formal pruning care in the
past and there are moderate amounts of deadwood, hanging limbs, and
storm damage found throughout the tree canopy.
r�g# pn�gFa� 7(on�?dmnrir�r_.nAn . Orinio�,7n qo,,,,�tgn Pa�or
IV
� Page 2
April 16, 2009
Reference: Three Spruce Trees on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Visual Tree Inspection /Hazard Evaluation
Results: The tree is located within striking distance of multiple targets including
the neighbor's home, driveway, parked vehicles, vanous hardscape features,
and the new development to the south. Due to the structural defects found in
the upper canopy,the tree does have an elevated risk for failure and the
potential for sign�cant damage to suROUnding persons and property is high.
My Hazard Rating finding for this tree is an 8 out of a maximum of 12. Please
see the aftached Tree Hazard Evaluadon Form for further informaaon.
TreeNumber: N2 � 1�a3��� y� �5� 7,�� i�'
Location: The tree is located approximately 3 feet south of the north property
line and 50 feet east of the existing curb cut for SW 74"'Avenue.
Description: The subject tree is charactenstic of a spruce species (Picea spp.)
and is approximately 40 feet in overall height. It has one primary trunk with a
trunk diameter(DBH) of 8 inches measured at 4.5 feet above ground level
and has a canopy limb spread of approximately 20 feet in diameter.
Evaluation: The health of the subject tree is rated as average as determined by
annual shoot growth measurements of between 6 and 8 inches of elongation
from last years growth. The canopy structure of the tree is rated as moderate
to good as there are only minor d�ciencies observed within the canopy. The
root system of the tree has also been sign�cantly impacted by the
neighboring hardpan gravel driveway that encompasses 50 percent of the
total root zone. The driveway gets frequent use from heavy trucks and
machinery stored in the back yard of the neighboring property and has
severely compacted the soil within the root zone. The tree does not appear
to have had any formal pruning care in the past and there are minor amounts
of deadwood, hanging limbs, and storm damage found throughout the tree
canopy.
Results: The tree is of average health, good structure, and currently presents a
low risk for tree failure. My Hazard Rating finding for this tree is a 5 out of a
maximum of 12. Please see the attached Ti�e Hazard Evalua6on Fam for
further information.
Tree Number: N3 � � 76�3 �01 y - � S'� 7�7
Location: The tree is located approximately 3 feet south of the north property
line and 20 feet east of the existing curb cut for SW 74"'Avenue.
Description: The subject tree is characteristic of a spn�ce species (Picea spp.)
and is approximately 60 feet in overall height. It has one primary trunk with a
trunk diameter(DBH) of 16 inches measu�ed at 4.5 feet above ground level
and has a canopy limb sp�ead of approximately 25 feet in diameter.
I
� Page 3
April 16, 2009
Reference: Three Spruce Trees on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Visual Tree Inspection / Hazard Evaluation
Evafuation: The health of the subject tree is rated as poor as determined by the
chlorosis seen within foliage and the sparseness of foliage density. The
canopy structure of the tree is also rated as poor as determined from the
multiple top structural defect observed in the upper canopy located at 30 feet
above ground. The neighboring driveway (as listed above) has also impacted
the root system of the tree due to soil compaction. The tree does not appear
to have had any formal pruning care in the past and there are moderate
amounts of deadwood, hanging limbs, and storm damage found throughout
the tree canopy.
Resutts: The tree is located within striking dista�ce of multiple targets including
tfie neighbors home, driveway, parked vehicles, street and traffic, various
hardscape features and the new development to the south. Due to the
structural defect found in the upper canopy, the tree does have an elevated
risk for failure and the potential for sign�cant damage to sur�ounding persons
and property is high. My Hazard Rating finding for this tree is an 8 out of a
maximum of 12. Please see the attached T�e Hazarrl Evaluadon Form for
further informa6on.
• Page 4
April 16, 2009
Reference: Three Spruce Trees on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
1103U SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Visual Tree Inspection / Hazard Evaluation
ASSUMPTIONS � LIMITING C4NDITIDNS
1. Any legal description provided to the consuttant is assumed to be correct.
Any titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and
marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any
and all property is evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible
ownership and competent management.
2. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data
has been ve�ed insofar as possible; however, the consuftant can neither
guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by
others, especially regarding property line determinations and p�oject
boundanes.
3. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or attend court by
reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made,
inGuding payment of an additional fee for such services.
4. Loss or afteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.
5. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication
or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed,
without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant.
6. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall
be conveyed by anyone, inGuding the client,to the public through advertising,
public relations, news, sales or other media, without the prior expressed
writte� or verbal consent of the consultant; particularly as to value
conclusions, identity of the consultant, or any reference to any professional
society o�institute or ta any initialed designation conferred upon the
consultant as stated in his qual�cations.
7. This report and values expressed herein represent the opinion of the
consultant, and the consultanYs fee is in no way contingent upon the
repo�ting of a specified value, a stipulated results, the occuRence of a
subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.
8. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended
as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as
engineering or architectural reports or surveys.
9. Unless expressed othervvise: (1) information contained in this report covers
only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items
at the time af inspection; and (2)the inspection is limited to visual
examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or
coring. There is no waRanty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that
problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not anse in
the future.
• Page 5
April 16, 2009
Reference: Three Spruce T�ees on North Side of Property
Location: White Oak Village Partition
11030 SW 74"'Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Visual T�ee Inspection / Hazard Evaluation
CERTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE
I, Philip C. Hickey, certify:
• I have personally inspected the trees and property refeRed to in this repo�t
and have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation is
stated in the attached repvrt.
• I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that
is the subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect
to the parties involved.
• The analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has
been p�epared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices.
• No one p�ovided significant professional assistance to me, except as
indicated within the report.
• My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a p�edetermined
conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party nor upon the
results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated resufts, or the
occurrence of any subsequent events.
I further certify that I am a member in good standing of the Intemationat Society of
Arboriculture and the American Society of Consulting Arborists. I have been
involved in the field of Arboriculture and the care and study of trees for a period of
more than 14 years.
Signed: J �( �'-- =�- .
�� �
�ate: G'I � !�I4�' ;���� �,�
+��, � �I
'f',�. _ ' -
� .s %.
S�ncerelY, ��, '`:.'
� ��icK9� _
Philip C. Hickey _
Project Consulting Arbarist
ISA Board Certi�ied Master Anborist PN-16048 �
ISA Member/ ISA-PNW Member/ASCA Member
'" A Ph� ��aphic Guide to the Evaluation of Ha� ' Trees in Urban Areas
. ,
� � �. . TRtr HAZARD FVALUATIUId FORM 2nd Edition
.
sio��dre5s: l ���G (��,�—�r�:�-v..� f+�zaRn wcra�c:
�: ���30 �� 7y� ,4,�F, ��'�n �� � � � + _� _—�
owner: �/ u*nown � � F� . � . �
Target Miazard
P�K P� P� ��9 �g
Daee:
� �nspe�: ` � �mrtied�oe actia,r�ded
Dat�af I�st inspection: �����
Dead vee
������
Tree F 1�L_��as: J ��G2.
om�: � �o�w�r� 1 �,C ,�. • sp� –���
Fam: ❑ generaNy symrt�tric �mir►or asymrr�Y �rt�ejtx asymmebY ��P� ��9-��
Crown dass: ❑ dominant �co-dominant ❑imamedia0e ❑st{�p�sed
Live aown ratio: q�96 Age dass: O yaaig �d(semi-mawre ❑maaue ❑over-mau�►elsenescent
PNnin9 iiistory: O aown cle�ned ❑excessively thirx�ed ❑tapped ❑aown raised O pollarded ❑crown reduced O flush arts 0 cab�dl6raced
�rane O mullti�ple Prunin9� APP�'�•da0es:
speaa�valu� O�rt�en 0 t�eritageJFrismric ❑wi��'fe �unuwal ❑street tree �saeen ❑� �indigeraus D proteaed by 9a+•a9�Y
��TM
Fa-iage color. �norma� o chlorodc ❑necrotic Epioomwcs? v Q c�ro�An o�:
Fof'wge density: �namel ❑sparse Leaf size: (l�normel ❑SmaN ❑5�kes 0 wirehies ❑sign5 ❑cables
Arn�ual shoot gro�llt: 0 exceqent �average ❑poa Twig Diebacl�l Y � ❑cublpavert�eru ❑gu�s
Wou�dwood developrr�� �ezcellera �average ❑poor O none J�I othe� _ f 1l1CWhN o l
Vga class: ❑excelent �average ❑fair ❑poor
Majar pestsldiscases:
S���n�
sioe cn�: �resid�ce ❑comme� ❑i�l 0 partc o�r,sp�e ❑n�r� ❑wooa�ndl�rest
Landscape type: ❑paricwrayr ❑raised bed ❑cartainer O mamd ,��awn �slaub border ❑wind nreak
irrigatio� �none ❑adequ�e ❑insdequate ❑ac�ive ❑tru�c wettled
Recmu site�abana? �N �consm�an ❑soi d�rbance O grade change O line cle�n9 ���9
96 dripline paved: 096 10-2596 C�;�p96�5(�75% 75-10096 Psremert IiRed? Y N
°6 dripline wl fill sal: 096 10-25 5-5096 50-75% 75-10096
°k dripline grade lowere� 10-Z596 25-5096 547596 75-10096
Soil prob{ara: �,�airrage ❑stwlbow umpacted O droughty ❑sal'me ❑alkaNne O acidic ❑srt�all volume O�sease� ❑hisocxy d fad
O clay ❑expansive O slope • aspect:
Obstructia�: ❑lights O signage ❑line-of-sight ❑view ❑overt�ead lines ❑underground utilities ❑traffic �adjacent veg. O
Exposwe m wind: ❑single vee 0 below canopy ❑abwe canopy ❑recently exposed �windward,carropy edge 0 area prone to windtivow
Prevailing wind directian: .S Occurrence of snowfice stortns ❑neve� ❑seldom �regularlY
TARGET
Use Under Tree: �,buildin parkirig ❑�affic ❑pedestrian ❑recreatian �lar�dscape �hardscape �small fea¢�es O utiliry lir�es
Can target be rtared? Y N Can use be restriaed? Y� .
Oca�panry: O occasional use ❑i�itter�use �frequent use O constant use
The Irnemational 5aiety of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendaGons derived from use of this form.
TREE DEFECTS
ROOT�FECTS:
Suspectroolrot• Y I� NlusFsoa�NcorYd6racketpresent Y Q IQ:
Exposed roatr: ❑severe 0 moderate �low Undermined: ❑severe f�moderaoe ❑low
Rooc pru�ed: distance trom tru�c Raot�ea atfected: 96 BuCress wd�rided: Y N 1M�en:
Re�mot aea: O sevae �moderate D low Potential Far root tailve: ❑seirere ❑moderate �low
LEMt deg.from vertical 0 natliral ❑�aG� ❑self-r.orrecUed Soil heaving Y N
Decay in plane M lean: Y N Roo�s broken Y N Soil asd�irg; Y N
�OmP°��^9� i.ean Sa�iry: ❑severe ❑moderate ❑iow
CROWNDEFfCTS: Indicate preserxe of individual defects aM rate their seuerity(s=severe,m=modera�oe,I=low)
DEFECT R00T CROMIN TRUNK SCAFFOIDS BRANCF�S
Paor
Bow.
Cadornments/forks f'
Multi auachmen6
Ir�ded bartc
Excessive end '
Cracksl lits
Gird'
wbunds/sear" �- L
Conkslrtn�shr�
flow
Looselcradced baAc
N ' holdbee hive
Deadwoodlswlu
Borersltermitesla�
Cankers/ I!slburls
Previous failure
HAZARD RATING
Tree part most licely W fail: � Fa�ure pooe�rtial: 1-low;2-rr�edium;3-high:4-severe
Inspection period: arrwal biarxxial dher Sine d part 1 -�6"(15 cm):2-6-18'(15-45 an):
Failure Poteno�l+Si7E of PaR+Target RaGng=Hazard Rsting 3•1&30"(45-75 tmj:4->30"(75 tm)
�+ 2 +�—_ � Target ra6ng: 1-occasio�al use;2 ir�rtnitterx use:
3-frequent use;4-constant use
HAZARD ABATEMENT
Prunt ❑remove dHective part ❑re�ce end weic,�lu ❑croMm clean ❑thin O raise canopy ❑crown reduce 0 restruarue ❑shape
CabI�JBrace: InspeC firtl�er. O root crown ❑decay ❑aerial ❑monitot
Remove tree: Q N Replace? Y N Move tarc,Jet�. Y �7 Otl�er.
Etfect an�a�errt trees: ❑none ❑eva�te
Notification: ❑owner O manager ❑goveming agenry Date:
COMMENTS
r . ''' A Phr� �raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Ha� i Trees in Urban Areas
- - M = . TRct HAZARD EVALUATIU� FORM �E�-�,
:,. .
srodadcxe.cs: ; r �r�nnc:
t�ocation: !1 D30 .S'�,J 7�1 — aA-,�_�iG�4,e/) d2 1 + �_ • _s� •_,,�
Fail�re . S¢s + Tergec = Nazard
Ovrr�er:P�� P�� � � otl�er � Pote�ial of pa�t Radng Radng
Date:�� InSpector. �� — Imtr�iate ecxi0n needed
Oete oF last i�tion: � Z � N�ds fl�'C�er inspection
Dead U�ee
�������
T��: N Z s�: So���
neH: �. �a m.� �_ He��� sprea� ��
Form: 0 ge�aNy symrr�ric j�minor asyrtxr�xry ❑mejor asymmepY ��P� 0�9-�
Cram dass: ❑ dominant ❑w-dominarrt �irrtermedisGe ❑supp�ssed
Live oown ratio:�_% Age dass: O yamg J�semi-mawre ❑rnatixe ❑a�er-man�re/seneso�
Pnming hista�: ❑crown cleaned ❑excessively ttwrmed ❑topped ❑aown raised ❑pollarded O aown reduced o flush cuCS ❑cabledlbraced
�naie ❑mul�ple Prunin9 e�rent� Approz•d�s
Special value: 0 sp� ❑heritagelhisroric O wildlfe ❑ux�ual ❑street oree�screen ❑shade ❑indigenous ❑protected bY 9�'�•�y
��TM
Foliage color. ,�normal ❑chlorotit ❑neuotit Epiconrua? Y Ib GroMh abstructions:
Fa�age density: �normat ❑sparse l.eaf sine: f�(nom�al ❑sma8 ❑smkes ❑wrce/Ues ❑signs O cables
Amual staot groWi: O exceA� �average ❑poor Twig Diebadit Y � 0 ruNpave ent ❑guards
waundwood devebpn� O excellent J�average ❑poor ❑none �otl�er 1 I UY1.,/ � ,.,��
vgor class: ❑exce9errt C�average ❑Fair. 0 poor
Major pests/diseases•
SITE CONDITIONS
Site d�aracter: �residence ❑canmercial ❑rt�l ❑park ❑open space 0 na�ral ❑woodlandlfo�e5t
Larnc�ape type: ❑parkway ❑raised bed ❑caMnir�er ❑mouM �lawn �shrub barder ❑wind br�k
trrigatiorr �nar�e ❑adequat� ❑inad� ❑�ve O mmk wettled
Recerd site�stubance4�1 N �tonsfixtion 0 Soil d�rbance ❑grade change ❑lire q�ng ,�sibe qearing
v
x a��ine�,area: o� �az5% zs- �3% ��-wo� Paren,enc iirtee� Y N
�a����hn son: o� 1a25 z�- �5% �s-i00%
°�6 ariplinegraae�oweree: � taZS96 zs-so96 sals96 7s-1oo96
Soil problar�s:��air�age O shallaw,�compacbed O droughty ❑safire ❑alkaline ❑acidic ❑srt�all volurt�e ❑disease cerrt� ❑history of fail
❑day ❑expansive ❑slope ' aspecx:
ohstructia�s: ❑�igtar ❑signage ❑lin�of-sight �view ❑overt�ead Iines ❑unde�grax�d uGli6es O vaffic ,�adjacent veg. O
Ezpowre m wind: ❑single tree O below canopy O abare canopy O recerWly exposed !�(v�nndward.canopy edge ❑area prone to windthroN,
Prevail6g wrme direction: c�LJ Occurrence of snow�ice storrns �never O seldan J�regu�artY
TARGEi
Use Urder Tree: buildm9 parkuig �vafFc 0 pedesvi� ❑rec�eation landscape �hardscape�small feaMes ❑utiliry lines
�
Can taryet be rtared? Y � Can use be restricted7 Y �
Occ�arrc�: ❑occasional use 0 inoertniae�t use ,¢frequent use O constant use
The Irrcemadonal Saiely of Arboricultu�e assumes no rosponsibilityr for conclusions or recommendations deri�ed from use of t�is form,
TREE DEFECTS
+ aoo�nE�cr�:
Suspett ro�rot Yb Muslvoondcaddbracket present: Y � ID:
E�osed roots: ❑severe 0 moderate �low U�: ❑severe ,�mode�ate �low
Root prw�ed: disrance from tr�x►k Root ares alFeued: % Bultress wot+ided: Y N WFien:
Restricted rwR area: ❑severe �rtmderate ❑low Poterxial for root tail�re: ❑se�ere ❑modera0e ,�bw
LEAAI'� deg.from�rertical ❑na�rel 0 unnatural �selF-corrected 5al heavir� Y �
Decay in ptane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil uacking: Y N
�0^�Pa��^9�� I.ean severiry: ❑severe ❑moderate ❑low
CROWN DEFFCTS: Indcate presence of individual defec�and rate d�eir severny(S=se�e,m=mode�.I=low)
DffECT R00T CRO'WN 7i2UNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCFffS
Poor
Bow.
CodominaMS/Forks
Multi e amchments
Inckided b8rlc
Extessive end wei
Cracksls li[s
Grcd'
��" L
oeca
Conkslmustroomslbracket
Bieed' flow
Looselcradced hark
N ' holPlbee hive
Deadvvoocllsn�bs (�
Borers/termiteslar�ts
Cankers/ allslburl5
Previous Failure
HAZARD RATING
Tree paR most likely to fail: failure potential: 1-low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe
Inspection period- annual biannual oU�er S'me d part 1 -<6"(15 cm):2-6-18"(15-45 cm):
Failure Po(en0a1+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Ra6ng 3-18-30"(45-75 cm);4-�30"f75 cm)
Target raUng: 1-oaasional use;2 intermitter�t use;
�+�+ � _ ,� 3-frequent use;4-constarrt use
HAZARD ABATEMENT
Pnme: ❑rerrmve d�ective part �reduce end wei�t O aown clean ❑thin ❑raise canopy ❑aown reduce ❑ restrucwre ❑shape
cableJ&ace: I�upecc f�rthec: O root cro�wn ❑decay ❑aerial O monitor
Rernove tree: Y Q Replace? Y N More� Y� Other:
Eflect on adjacerrt trees: ❑none ❑evaluate
NodfipGon: ❑owne.r ❑managex ❑govemin9 a9�Y Date:
COMMENTS
'. `�' , A Phr �raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Ha ' Trees in Urban Areas
� - � a . TR�t HAL4RD FVALUATIDN F�RM �E�rt;a,
:, .
5���: r��;� �� ,��,�,a,� ��,�:
�«,: 1�03� sw 7��� �� c� � + � . 3 = �
Fa+kre . siaee . rargec = t�are
owr�er:pubtic piiv�_� u�cnown other Po�ntial of part R�n9 �9
Date:���p� I�: ��i� tti C.K�/ ��} �nl—I�o�B � Irtuned�a0e action needed
�����;«,: Z�/o9 ����,
o�d aee
TREE CFIARAC1Eii1S11CS
Tree/:�_Specti�s: C�ON C�
DBk: ,�� �I d trut� �_ Heig�__�O� Sprea� �
Famt ❑ 9e�alh symrr�trit f�rn�r asyrtwne�Y 0 major asyrtur�etry O swmP spr'out 0 sta9-headed
Crown dass: ❑ dominarit �co-dors�inarrt ❑ei0ertnediaoe ❑wppressed
Live aown ratio:�_�96 Age dasx ❑young ❑semi-rr�a�re �mauue 0 o�-manxPlser�e5oent
Pnming h�atory: �aown cleaned 0 excessively thimed ❑ropped o aown raisea ❑polla�ded ❑crown re�uced 0 tlusr►a,ts ❑cabledlbrac�
,�none O mulbple prunin9 eu�ts APProx•da0es:
Special Value: O�ecbnen ❑haitagelhistoric ❑wildflfee ❑� ❑�treet tree,�[screen ❑shade 0 indigenou5 ❑protected bY 9�•a9�Y
rREE �ni
Foliage color. ❑namal �chlorobc ❑necrotic Epic�rmi�s? Y � GroNAh abstruction,:
Foliage density: ❑namal Jl�sparse Leaf siz� �nom�l 0 small ❑stakes 0 wirpJdes ❑signs O cables
arrn,a�shoa g�: ❑exceA� ❑av�a� �Poo� Twi9 Dieb�t �f N �arblp�ement o guazds
waaidwood devebpmer�C ❑excell�t ❑a�erage �poor O none �other �IfL�..//M S%
Vigot class: D excelent O average ❑Fair �poor
�Pes�/t�sea�:
$ITE CONDITIONS
Site Character: �resid�e ❑comm�cial O industrial D park O open spac� O naUral ❑woodhandlfo�est
l.arx�cape hpe: �parkway ❑raised bed ❑canmi�er ❑mound ,J�lawn d(shn�eorder o wa�a treak
Irrigatiarr �nane 0 adequaoe 0 inadequaoe ❑accessive ❑trwik wettied
Ret�t site dishabance7�N (�onstruction ,A�soil d�srixbar�'.e ❑grade change ❑Gne deari�g �site cle2rirx�
%dripline paved: 696 10-2596 25- 50-7596 75-10096 Parernera li(�ed? Y �
%dripline w/fill sa'I: 096 10-2596 25-5096 75% 75-10096 .
%dripline grade lowere� 096 10-25 25-5096 5Q7596 75-10096
Soil problerr�s:�drairege O shallow�compacted O drougMy ❑�ne ❑alkaline ❑acidk ❑small vohnne ❑�isease� ❑histcxy�fail
❑ctay ❑e�i�e ❑slope ' aspect:
obstructions: ❑lights �signage O Iine-of-sight O view ❑ove�t►ead iines ❑undergraxrcf utilibes �vaffic�adjacent v�eg. ❑
Exposiae oo wmd: ❑�ngle vee 0 below canopy ❑above canopy ❑recernfy exposed J�windrrard.cano�r edge 0 area prone to ruindtlxow
Prevailing wind directian: _�,f� Occurrence of sraw(Ke siorms ❑never O seldom ,�,f regularly
TARGEf
Use Under Tree: �buildirx� �parking �vaffic �pedesUian O recreation�landstape (�hardscape R�J small feaUres ❑�Aili�r lines
Can tuget be moved? Y � Can use be ratricted? Y (�
Occupanry: ❑occasional use ❑i�mitcern use �(frequent use ❑constant use
The IMemational Society d Arboriculture assumes no responsi6ility f�condusions or recommendations deri�ed from use of this form.
.
�
TRE� DEFECTS
ROOT DEFEL75;
Sttspett raot rot Y� Nk�rooM�present: Y � ID:
E:posed mots: ❑severe �moderate �bw Undamined: ❑sevee �,rtiode�ate ❑low
Root pru�ed: dist�nce from mnk Root area� 96 Bultress wanded: Y N ViRmn:
Restrictea root area: O severe �rnoderate ❑bw Pctential fa roac faihr�e: 0 se+re�e O moderate ,�low
LEAAk_�� deg.fram vertical ❑na�ral ❑uu�aaral �sdF-carrected Soil hesvig Y �I
Oecay in piane o(leart: Y N Roots brofre� Y N Soil aaclting: Y N
�'��� ��,: ❑� o� o�
CROWIY DEFFCTS: I nd�icate p�esence of in�vidual defects and rate tt�eir severity(s=se+rer�m=moderaoe.I=low)
DffECf ROOT CRO�WN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRAN(�IES
Poor
Bow.
CodominaMSJforks
' e attachrt�ents
ft�ded bark
Excessive end wei
Cracks! IiLs
H
Gird'
Wa,ndslseam
Conkslmuslxoomslbrack�
Bleed' flaw
Looselcracked bark
N ' Fwlelbee hive
Deadwaodlstubs
Barersltermitesl2nts
Cankersl allslburls
Previous failure
HAZARD RATING
Tree part most I�Cely co fail: d �► faifure potential: 1 -low;2-medium:3-high;4-severe
Inspection period; annual biarxnial otF�r Si�af part 1 -<6'(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm);
Failure Poter�ial+5ize of Part+Target Rating=Hazard RatirKj 3-18-30"(45-75 an):4->30"(75 cm)
3 Target�ating: 1 -occasional use:2 irmerrrtitt�t use:
+�+ 3 =� 3-frequent use:4-constaM use
HAZARD ABATEMENT
Pnm� ❑remove defective p�t ❑reduce end weight ❑aown clean ❑thin ❑raise canopy ❑crovm reduce p resbUC�re ❑shape
CablelBrace: Inspect hafher: ❑root aoNm ❑decay �aerial ❑monita
Remove Vee:� N Replace? Y N Move target: Y Q Other:
Eftect on adjacent trees: ❑none ❑evaluate
Notifiption: �awner O manager ❑govemirxJ agency Date:
COMMENTS
. � U�� �� - rP
Todd Prager
From: Phil Hickey [ph@halsteadsarbor.com]
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 9:30 AM
To: Todd Prager; Albert Shields
Cc: Len Dalton
Subject: 8/1/10 TPZ Report-White Oak Partition
Reference: Required Site Inspection& TPZ Report
Location: White Oak Subdivision Partition- 11026 SW 74th Avenue, Tigard
Subject: August 2010 - 1 st Period TPZ Reporting
Developer: Dalton Gang Homes, LLC
Contact: Mr. Len Dalton (503) 209-8869
Todd,
The Tree Protection Zones have been inspected on 7/29/10 and the tree protection fencing is intact for the
preserved trees as required.
Reporting Activiry.•
Since the last report, the preserved trees numbered N1, N2, &N3 have been removed by the developer as was
previously agreed.
Also, one of the neighboring trees to the south of the project,tree numbered N7 has died of what appears to be a
combination of bark beetle damage and sapsucker damage. No construction impacts to this tree have occurred
and the Tree Protection Fencing is still in place and protecting the other neighboring trees.
Tree N7 was a large, 40 foot tall scotch pine. From what I could observe from over the fence, there are multiple
pitch tubes along the trunk of the tree near the base indicative of beetle damage, as well as multiple horizontal
rows of holes girdling the trunk at 15 feet above ground indicative of sapsucker damage. My guess is that the
beetle infestation was probably introduced from the considerable amounts of firewood (maybe 6 cord or more)
stacked up against the wall of the neighboring business building. The firewood was probably harboring
the beetles when it was delivered and the beetles needed a fresh host.
The sapsucker damage is fairly common on scotch pines (as well as other tree species) and does weaken the
tree's vascular system. If the girdling on the trunk is severe enough, it can cause blockages of
water/photosynthate/phloem movement into the lower parts of the tree resulting in very poor health and in
extreme cases, death of the host tree.
The remaining preserved trees continue to appear healthy and stable.
Thank you,
Phil Hickey
Project Consulting Arborist
i
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-1604B
Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants, Inc.
P.O. Box 1182
Tualatin, OR 97062
TEL (503) 245-1383
FAX (503) 691-6539
z
Albert Shields
From: Phil Hickey [ph@halsteadsarbor.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 12:58 PM
To: Todd Prager; Albert Shields
Cc: Len Dalton
Subject: 9/1/10 TPZ Report - White Oak Village Subdivision Partition
Reference: Required Site Inspection & TPZ Report
Location: White Oak Subdivision Partition - 11026 SW 74th Avenue, Tigard
Subject: September 2010 - lst Period TPZ Reporting
Developer: Dalton Gang Homes, LLC
Contact: Mr. Len Dalton (503) 209-8869
Todd,
The Tree Protection Zones have been inspected on 8/30/10 and the tree protection fencing is intact for the
preserved trees as required.
Reporting Activity:
None since the last TPZ report. No construction impacts to preserved trees have been observed.
Thank you,
Phil Hickey
Project Consulting Arborist
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-1604B
Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants, Inc.
P.O. Box 1182
Tualatin, OR 97062
TEL (503) 245-1383
FAX (503) 691-6539
i
_ .�
CITY OF TIGARD ' RECEIPT
� 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard OR 97223
503.639.4171
�
��. o� P ; ��.
Receipt Number: 179059 - 08/12/2010
CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID
MLP2008-00006 Tree Replacement 1003100-48101 $1,000.00
MLP2008-00006 Misc Fee 1003100-43130 $960.D0
Total: a1,960.00
PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT
Check 1859 DADAMSKI 08l12/2010 $1,960.00
Payor: Dalton Gang Homes
Total Payments: $1,960.00
Balance Due: $4,841.00
Page 1 of 1
I
.
� Albert Shields � �'
From: Phil Hickey [ph@halsteadsarbor.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:41 AM
To: Todd Prager; Albert Shields
Cc: Len Dalton
Subject: '`""`Delayed*'"' 10/1/10 TPZ Report(Final) -White Oak Village Partition
Reference: Required Site Inspection & TPZ Report
Location: White Oak Slibdivision Partition - 11026 SW 74th Avenue, Tigard
Subject: October 2010 - lst Period TPZ Reporting
I)eveloper: Dalton Gan�; Homes, LLC
Contact: Mr. Len Dalton (503) 209-8869
Todd,
The Tree Protection Zones were inspected on October 1 st as required, but there was an unauthorized entry to
the TPL by the Developer, as you have already been informed. T have reinspected the TPZ earlier today
(10/5/10) and the protection fencing on the far east side of the project (other lot partition) has been partially
restored and the protection fencing for the neighboring trees on the south side of the project is still completely
removed.
Reporting�clivity:
A ncw permanent cedar fence has been installed around the perimeter of the project and through
both TPZ's. The fence was installed on fenceposts approximately 8 feet on centers and I didn't notice any
exposed roots of the preserved trees following this construction. I was not on-site during the work, so I was
not able to observe if any large ancharing roots or feeder root masses were extensively damaged during the
installation.
The house foundation along the south side of the house has now been backfilled using a tracked machine
through the dismantled TPZ and soil compaction is evident.
Furthermore during my visit today, the landscaping crew was on-site in the process of installing a row of 10
foot tall arborvitae plants along the south side of the house through the dismantled TPZ.
Rc�sults:
I do not believe (from my visual inspection only) that the trees and their critical root zones have been
irreversibly damaged from the recent work in the TPZ's provided they are therapeutically deep root fertilized
and soil aeration occurrs following landscaping completion. The neighboring trees along the south side of the
project, as well as all preserved trees on site should be fine from impacts from landscaping, as long as no
anchoring roots larger than 3 inches in diameter are severed during any hand digging or soil excavation for
plants, and no trenching occurs within driplines of preserved trees from irrigation or other utility installations
causing damage to feeder or anchoring roots.
i
t
. The Developer has informed me t�_ .ie is in his final stages of building an. , requested that this
correspondance be the last (final) TPZ Report for the project.
If you have any questions, please contact me at your convenience.
Thank you,
Phil Hickey
Project Consulting Arborist
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-1604B
Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants, Inc.
P.O. Box 1182
Tualatin, OR 97062
TEL (503) 245-1383
FAX (503) 691-6539
z
� �� �
��`�1
After recording return to: � C� � � DD�D
White Oak Village LLC DD�-� �
7955 SW Hall Boulevard �
Beaverton, OR 97008
RECIPROCAL ACCESS 8 UTILITY EASEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the undersigned White Oak Village, LLC as owner of the tract of land in
Washington County Oregon,which tract is known as Partition Plat 2009
WHEREAS,as shown on the Partition Plat noted above a shared access 8�utilityeasement
for the benefit of both parcels.
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the parties to subject both parcels to a Maintenance
Agreement(Herein further referred to as Agreement)to provide for the maintenance and repair of
the shared access & utility sasement,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed as follows:
1. The Agreement shall be in perpetuity,or until such time as the easement is dedicated
to and accepted by City of Tigard for maintenance, and the parties hereto,their heirs,assigns and
successors in interest may not withdraw from nor dissolve this Agreement without the written
approval of City of Tigard.
2. This Agreement is equally binding upon the present and future owners of the within
described real property and shall run with the land and be a continuing charge against said land and
each and every portion thereof.
3. This Agreement affects Parcels 1 and 2 in Partition Plat 2009 , and the costs
and repair and maintenance shall be borne and shared equally by said lots, that is to say,each lot
shall pay equal costs of repair.
IN WITNESS HEREOF,the undersigned, being the Declarant herein, has hereunto set its
hand this day of , 2009.
White Oak Village LLC
State of Oregon, Counry of Washington )ss
This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2009 by
as of and does
acknowledge said instrument to be his voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public for Oregon