Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHearings Officer Packet - 08/24/2009 Elir City of Tigard Hearings Officer — Agenda MEETING DATE: August 24,2009,7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard- Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 STAFF REPORTS: Available to the public 7 days prior to the hearing date Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on the Friday prior to the meeting. Please call 503-639-4171,ext.2438 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD- Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request,the City will also endeavor to arrange for qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments;and qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers,it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. To request such services,please notify the City of Tigard of your need(s) by 5:00 p.m.no less than one (1) week prior to the meeting date at the same phone numbers listed above so that we can make the appropriate arrangements. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 217 SELF STORAGE —PHASE II CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP) 2009-00001 VARIANCE (VAR) 2009-00005,2009-00007 &2009-00009 ADJUSTMENT(VAR) 2009-00006&2009-00008 REQUEST: The applicant requests Conditional Use Approval to build Phase II of the Hwy.217 Self-Storage project (formerly Mirage Mini Storage) on a 0.74-acre site. The project includes approximately 403 storage units, 58,518 square feet,and will be 3-stories high. With the intention of utilizing resources from Phase I,the applicant has requested three variances for minimum vehicle parking spaces,loading spaces, and buffering and screening. In addition,the applicant has requested two special adjustments for bicycle parking spaces, and for access spacing along SW Hall-Blvd. LOCATION: 11600 SW Hall Boulevard;WCIIVI 1S135DD,Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: GG: General Commercial District. The GG zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non- conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.7g0, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT HEARINGS OFFICER AGENDA- AUGUST 24, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 1 Depending on the number of people wishing to testify, the Tigard Hearing's Officer may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Hearing's Officer may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Hearing's Officer to supplement oral testimony. AGENDA ITEM NO.: 2.1 DATE: AUGUST 24, 2009 PAGE 1 OF O FILE NAME: 217 SELF-STORAGE - PHASE II CASE NOS.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2009-00001 VARIANCE AR 2009-00005, 2009-00007 & 2009-00009 ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2009-00006 & 2009-00008 IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY ON THE ITEM INDICATED ABOVE, PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME, ADDRESS & INCLUDE YOUR ZIP CODE PROPONENT OF APPLICATION OPPONENT OF APPLICATION - (Speaking In Favor or Neutral)- - (Speaking Against)- Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. ritmei Lour& /30o5 Sw i3ro nL 02 17zz3, 3*-6 3 -5 911-5(gS 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. Sft,j �v �► L - 1 `10 cs Cr U -41 L 0 Au= Pio- ) 1 - - - — — - • - - - - - Name,Address�Zi Code ands or�eNo �,7,2� Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. Doic c It<1CD ji\) ►Jje GlKZ-os7f) , lea,IJ S- 1 ?7 i_ – — — – - - — – Na� dres ,�Zi o�ad one 2 I Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. 50 -5 «d Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. 7 Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. 77 7 Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. 1 Name,Address,Zip Code and Phone No. L J RECEIVED PLANNING AUG 1 4 2009 CITY OF TIGARD • , COMMUNITY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: SPAPEIS The following will be considered by the Tigard • Hearings Officer on Monday August 24,2009 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland,OR 97222 I at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center -Town PO Box 22109 Portland OR 97269-2109 Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Phone:503-684-0360 Fax:503-620-3433 Both public oral and written testimony is invited. E-mail: legalsecommnewspapers.com l I C;A IZ D Thepublichearingonthismatterwillbeconducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code and the rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Chapter 18.390. Testimony may be submitted in writing prior to or at the public State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS I hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the depose and say that I am the Accounting hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford Manager of The Times(serving Tigard, the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure general circulation, published at Beaverton, to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an in the aforesaid county and state, as defined appeal based on that criterion. by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are City of Tigard available for inspection at no cost. A copy of the staff report will Notice of Public Hearing/217 Self-Storage be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven(7)days TT 11347 prior to the hearing,and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division A copy of which is hereto annexed, was (staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner)at 13125 published in the entire issue of said SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223,by calling 503-639-4171,or newspaper for by e-mail to garyp@tigard-or.gov. 1 week in the following issue: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP)2009-00001/ August 6, 2009 ADJUSTMENT(VAR)2009-00006/VARIANCES(VAR) 2009-00005,2009-00007,2009-00008&2009-00009 -217 SELF-STORAGE- CII 1.04k PROPOSAL: The applicant requests Conditional Use Permit 1 �,�,�- Approval on a 0.74-acre site to build Phase II of the Hwy. 217 Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Managttr) Self-Storage project(formerly Mirage Mini Storage). The project includes approximately 403 storage units, 58,000 square feet,and will be 3-stories high. With the intention of utilizing resources Subscribed and sworn to before me this from Phase I,three Variances are requested for minimum vehicle August 6, 2009. parking (VAR2009-00007), bicycle parking (VAR2009-00008), and loading(VAR2009-00009). In addition,a Variance for buffers (VAR2009-00005),and a special Adj ustment(VAR2009-00006)for access spacing along SW Hall Blvd.are requested. LOCATION: Qljt.�J 11600 SW Hall Boulevard;Washington County Tax Assessor's Map NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREG -- -tYfT�vfi�••"�•.�... - - -- . My commission expires Acct#10093001 Attn: Patty Lunsford City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Size: 2x11 Amount Due$183.70* 'Please remit to address above. BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application by Saj Jivanjee for a conditional ) FINAL ORDER use permit for Phase II of a 3-story mini storage facility and ) variances to the parking,loading and buffer requirements at ) CUP 2009-000011 11600 SW Hall Boulevard in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (217 Self-Storage, Phase II) A. SUMMARY 1. The applicant, Saj Jivanjee,requests approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) to construct and operate a 58,518 square foot,403-unit,three-story mini storage facility with a full-time attendant. This application is proposed as Phase II of the previously approved Highway 217 Self-Storage project,formerly Mirage Mini Storage. The City approved Phase I in 2006. See CUP 2005-00001(Mirage Mini Storage). The 0.74-acre site is located at 11600 SW Hall Boulevard; also known as tax lot 00100,WCTM 1S135DD (the "site"). The site and surrounding properties are zoned CG (General Commercial). The applicant also requests approval of adjustments/variances to: a.Modify the buffering and screening requirements on the north and west boundaries of the site. VAR2009-00005 b. Reduce the access spacing requirements on Hall Boulevard for the proposed emergency access.VAR2009-00006. c.Reduce the required on-site vehicle parking from 169 spaces to 13 spaces (for Phases I and II combined). VAR2009-00007; d. Reduce the required on-site bicycle parking from 11 spaces to 5 spaces (for Phase II only). VAR2009-00008;and e.Reduce the number of loading spaces from two to one (for Phases I and II combined). VAR2009-00009. 2. City Hearings Officer Joe Turner(the "hearings officer") held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the application. City staff recommended that the hearings officer approve the CUP application and four of the five variances ,subject to conditions. Staff recommended the hearings officer deny the variance to the landscape and screening requirements. See the Staff Report to the Hearings Officer dated August 17,2009 (the "Staff Report"). The applicant accepted the findings and conditions of approval recommended by City staff with certain exceptions. Other than public service providers and agencies, no one else testified orally or in writing. The principal disputed issues in this case include the following: I This Final Order also addresses VAR2009-00005, VAR2009-00006,VAR2009-00007,VAR2009-00008 and VAR2009-00009. a. Whether the proposed variance to the parking requirements complies with the criteria of TDC 18.370.010.C(2); b. Whether the proposed variance to the landscape and screening requirements complies with the criteria of TDC 18.370.010.C(2); c. Whether the proposed landscaping and screening can be approved as an alternative buffer pursuant to TDC 18.745.050.A(3); and d.Whether exterior lights on the north end of the building will adversely affect the adjoining residential use. 3.For the reasons stated herein,the hearings officer approves the proposed use, subject to the conditions at the end of this final order. B. HEARING AND RECORD HIGHLIGHTS 1. The hearings officer received testimony at the public hearing about this application on August 24, 2009. All exhibits and records of testimony are filed with the Tigard Department of Community Development.At the beginning of the hearing,the hearings officer made the declaration required by ORS 197.763. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parte contacts, bias or conflicts of interest. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected testimony offered at the public hearing in this matter. 2. City planner Gary Pagenstecher summarized the Staff Report. He recommended the hearings officer approve the conditional use permit and four of the five variance requests. He recommended the hearings officer deny the request to reduce the screening and buffer requirements.The proposed building design maximizes the building coverage on the site. The applicant can comply with the screening and buffering requirements by reducing the size of the proposed building.Although the abutting properties are zoned commercial and listed for sale,they are currently used for residential purposes. There is no substantial evidence in the record that the residential use is likely to cease in the foreseeable future. Therefore the applicant should be required to provide a buffer between this commercial use and the abutting residents. A substantial vegetative buffer is necessary on the north boundary of the site to screen the proposed three-story building and reduce its visual mass, given its location in close proximity to the abutting apartments. 3. City planning director Dick Bewersdorff requested the hearings officer modify condition of approval 22 in the staff report,to require that the applicant demonstrate that lights on the site will not exceed 0.3-foot candles,measured at the boundary of the abutting residential properties. a. He noted that the Code requires that applicants dedicate right of way and construct frontage improvements on all streets abutting the site.In this case,the site has a narrow frontage on Hall Boulevard. However it is not feasible to construct frontage improvements on this narrow street frontage. Therefore the applicant must pay a fee in lieu of constructing the improvements. The findings in the Staff Report demonstrate that the CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase II) Page 2 amount of the fee in lieu of improvements is roughly proportional to the impact of the development. 4. Architects Saj Jivanjee and Doug Circosta testified in support of the proposed development. a. Mr. Circosta summarized the design of the proposed development. i. He argued that the 13 parking spaces the applicant proposed to provide are more than adequate to accommodate parking demand at this facility, based on observations of parking demand at the existing facility,other storage facilities in the region and the Institute of Traffic Engineers Parking Generation Manual ("ITE Manual"). ii. He testified that the applicant will use different light fixtures on the north end of the building.Lights in this area are only needed to illuminate the emergency exit. The applicant's lighting plan is in error. It shows brighter lights in this area. He agreed to a condition of approval to limit lighting to 0.3-foot candles at the north boundary of the site. The existing and proposed fences will prevent lights on the site from shining onto the abutting properties to the west. iii. He argued that the proposed development will adequately buffer the adjacent properties. (A) There is an existing eight-foot high solid wood fence along the east boundary of one of the abutting single-family residential properties. Exhibit 1. The applicant proposed to continue the same fence design along the east boundary of the other abutting property,the west boundary of the site,providing a consistent,continuous barrier between the site and the abutting properties to the west. In addition,the applicant will provide a ten-foot wide vegetated buffer on the east side of the fence. The existing/proposed fence is taller than the six-foot high wall required by the Code. He agreed to a condition of approval requiring that the applicant replace the existing fence if the owner of the abutting property chooses to remove it while the abutting property continues to be used for residential purposes. (B) The Fire District required that the applicant provide an emergency access drive on the north end of the site during the pre-application process. Although the Fire District did not mention this requirement in its comments on the application,the District did not waive the requirement. The emergency access drive is intended to serve both the site and the abutting apartment development to the north. Landscaping and screening on the north end of the site would conflict with the emergency access drive. (C) He argued that a wall on the north end of the site would create a hazard for the residents of the abutting apartment development. He introduced a photo of the buffer wall in Phase I of the project.Exhibit 2. The area between the wall and the building is a "no man's land" where homeless people sleep. A similar"dead zone" near the apartment buildings could pose a hazard for the apartment residents. A wall in this area CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage,Phase II) Page 3 would do nothing to screen the abutting property from lights and noise occurring on the west side of the building. (D) The abutting properties to the north and west were recently rezoned CG and they are listed for sale. These properties are likely to redevelop with commercial uses, eliminating the need for screening and buffering in this area. b.Mr.Jivanjee argued that a wall is unnecessary to screen and buffer the site from abutting residential properties. The building itself is a wall.He spent$50,000 and removed three existing trees in order to build a wall in Phase I of the project that is located ten feet from the wall of the building.Homeless people sleep in the ten-foot area between the buffer wall and the building, creating a security hazard. Now the abutting property is being used for commercial purposes,eliminating the need for a buffer in that area. He argued that the facility will generate little noise and activity, based on his experience with Phase I of the project. The overhead doors are used an average of once per week. Tenants bring their belongings to the site and leave them. They do not access the storage units very often. He proposed to construct a "good neighbor fence" along the north boundary of the site rather than a masonry wall. A fence would be more consistent with the residential use of the abutting property. The applicant could install a gate in the fence to facilitate use of the emergency access drive.The proposed emergency access road also provides a buffer between the building and the adjacent apartments.The emergency access road will be landscaped;with grass growing between concrete pavers. i. He argued that the site provides more than enough bicycle parking. He has not seen anyone use the bicycle parking spaces provided in Phase I. ii.He questioned why the applicant is required to pay$22,000 for half-street improvements on Hall Boulevard,when the development will not generate any traffic on that street. Access to Hall Boulevard is limited to emergency vehicles only. iii. He waived his right to submit a final written argument. 5. At the end of the hearing,the hearings officer closed the public record and announced his intention to approve the application subject generally to the conditions of approval in the Staff Report. The hearings officer took the buffer and screening variance issue under advisement. C. DISCUSSION 1. City staff provided basic facts about the site and its vicinity and existing and proposed uses in the Staff Report and recommended that the hearings officer approve the application for the conditional use permit and variances,subject to conditions of approval. The applicant accepted most of the findings and recommended conditions with the exceptions described more below. The hearings officer adopts the findings and conclusions in the Staff Report as his own except to the extent they are inconsistent with the findings and discussion in this final order. CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase II) Page 4 2. TDC 18.765.080.H and Table 18.7652 require that the applicant provide a minimum 173 on-site parking spaces for this use. (1 parking space per 4 storage units, 691 units in Phases I and II combined). The applicant requested a variance to reduce the number of required parking spaces to 13 for Phases I and II combined. The hearings officer finds that the proposed variance complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2) based on the following: a. The hearings officer finds that the proposed design is consistent with the purpose of the parking standards2 and will not generate overflow parking on adjacent properties because it provides a sufficient number of parking spaces.Based on the applicant's parking demand survey,this size of mini-storage facility requires an average weekday parking demand of ten to seventeen parking spaces.3 This is consistent with observations by the applicant's traffic engineer of the parking demand in Phase I of this facility and at other similar storage facilities in the region. Therefore the hearings officer finds that the proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title,to any other applicable policies and standards and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(a). b. The hearings officer finds that there are "special circumstances which are peculiar to the lot size or shape... over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district." TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(b). The site is relatively long,narrow and oddly shaped,making it difficult to provide adequate area for parking and the proposed building. As the applicant noted,there is not enough room on the site to accommodate 173 parking spaces on this site even without the proposed building. c. The proposed variance will not change the use of the facility. The use will comply with all other applicable standards. Therefore the modification request complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(c). d. The proposed modification will not impact the "existing physical and natural systems... any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in this title. TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(d). e. The hardship is not self-imposed. The hardship, and the need for the variance, results from the size and shape of the site and the reduced parking demand created by the type of use proposed. The requested adjustment is the minimum necessary to alleviate the hardship and allow the applicant to develop the site with the proposed use. Therefore the application complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(e). 2 TDC 18.765.010 sets out the Purpose of the off-street parking and loading requirements: A. Insure adequate vehicle parking.These parking requirements are intended to provide sufficient vehicle parking in close proximity to the various uses for residents,customers and employees,and to establish standards which will maintain the traffic carrying-capacity of nearby streets. B. Adequate capacity.These regulations are also intended to establish vehicle parking areas which have adequate capacity and which are appropriately located and designed to minimize any hazardous conditions on the site and at access points. 3 The ITE manual estimates average parking demand of 0.16 vehicles per 1,000 square feet and 1.39 spaces per 100 storage units.Therefore this 103,488 square foot,691-unit facility will generate demand for between 9.6 and 16.6 parking spaces. (103,4888 square feet x 0.16 vehicles per 1,000 square feet= 16.56 vehicles). (403 storage units x 1.39 spaces per 100 storage units=9.6 vehicles). CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage,Phase II) Page 5 3.TDC Table 18.745.1 requires that the applicant provide a Type D buffer along the north and east boundaries of the site,between the site and the abutting single-family and multi-family residential uses.TDC Table 18.745.2 provides three options for achieving a Type D buffer: a 20-foot landscaped buffer and six foot hedge, a 15-foot landscaped buffer and six foot fence or a 10-foot landscaped buffer and six foot wall. a. The applicant requested a variance to modify the buffer requirements. The applicant initially proposed to provide: i.A ten-foot landscape strip and an eight-foot fence along the west boundary of the site, abutting the single-family homes;and ii. A variable width (five to fifteen foot wide) landscape strip with no hedge, fence or wall along the north boundary of the site,abutting the apartment development. The applicant argued that the proposed building will serve the purpose of the wall. b.At the hearing the applicant proposed to provide a six-foot high fence along the north boundary of the site to provide a visual screen between the site and the apartments,with a gate for emergency vehicle access. c. The hearings officer finds that the proposed buffer on the west boundary of the site complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2). i. The hearings officer finds that the proposed design is consistent with the purpose of the landscaping and screening standards.4 Continuation of the existing eight-foot high fence across the remainder of the west boundary of the site will provide a visual screen between the site and the abutting homes,maintaining the privacy of these homes. The proposed landscaping will soften the visual impact of the tall fence and further screen offsite views of the proposed building. The hearings officer finds that the taller fence will provide a more effective visual screen than a six-foot wall. A wall may provide more effective noise mitigation. However, as noted at the hearing,the homes on the abutting properties are located near the center of the properties, roughly fifty feet from the site boundary. The existing landscaping in the eastern, back yard,portion of these lots will also buffer and screen the homes from the proposed development.Therefore the hearings officer finds that the proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this 4 TDC 18.745.010.A sets out the Purpose of the Landscaping and Screening requirements: Purpose.The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards for landscaping,buffering,and screening of land use within Tigard in order to enhance the aesthetic environmental quality of the City: 1. By protecting existing street trees and requiring the planting of street trees in new developments; 2. By using plant materials as a unifying element; 3. By using planting materials to define spaces and articulate the uses of specific areas;and 4. By using trees and other landscaping materials to mitigate the effects of the sun,wind,noise and lack of privacy by the provision of buffering and screening. CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase 11) Page 6 title,to any other applicable policies and standards and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(a). (A) The existing fence on the southern property,tax lot 01300,WCIM 1S135DD,is not under the applicant's control. The owner of the adjacent property has the right to remove it in the future. The applicant agreed to maintain or replace the existing fence to ensure adequate screening so long as the adjacent property is used for residential purposes. A condition of approval is warranted to that effect. (B) A building permit is required for fences greater than six feet in height. '11)C 18.745.030.C(4). A condition of approval is warranted to that effect. ii. The hearings officer finds that there are "special circumstances which are peculiar to the lot size or shape... over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district." TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(b). The east-west dimension of the site is relatively long and narrow, reducing the area available for a wider landscape strip along the west boundary of the site. The applicant could comply with TDC Table 18.745.2 by constructing a six-foot high wall along the west boundary of the site.However this would create a dead space between the wall and the existing eight-foot fence on the adjacent property.In addition,the hearings officer finds that continuation of the existing eight-foot fence would provide a more effective visual buffer while maintaining a consistent design along the entire western boundary. iii. The proposed variance will not change the use of the facility. The use will comply with all other applicable standards. Therefore the modification request complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(c). iv. The proposed modification will not impact the "existing physical and natural systems... any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in this title. TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(d). v. The hardship is not self-imposed. The hardship, and the need for the variance, results from the size and shape of the site and the location of the existing fence on the abutting property. The requested adjustment is the minimum necessary to alleviate the hardship and allow the applicant to develop the site with the proposed use. Therefore the application complies with'1UC 18.370.010.C(2)(e). d. The hearings officer finds that the proposed buffer on the emergency access road, as modified at the hearing,complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2). The applicant proposed to provide a six-foot high sight-obscuring fence along both sides of the emergency access drive,with an eight-foot wide landscape strip on the south side of the access road. See Plan Sheet L-100, as amended at the hearing. i. The hearings officer finds that the proposed design is consistent with the purpose of the landscaping and screening standards. The proposed fences and landscaping on the south will maintaining the privacy of the abutting residential uses by providing a visual screen between the emergency access road and the abutting properties. In CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase II) Page 7 addition,the applicant proposed to surface the access with"grasscrete" pavers,which will serve as an extension of the landscape buffer. This portion of the site will only be used for emergency vehicle access. Given the infrequent use of the access,the proposed fence is adequate to screen the abutting properties from any impacts caused by use of the emergency access. Therefore the hearings officer finds that the proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title,to any other applicable policies and standards and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity.TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(a). ii. The hearings officer finds that there are "special circumstances which are peculiar to the lot size or shape... over which the applicant has no control,and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district." TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(b).The abutting properties to the north and south of the flagpole are both used for residential purposes. However it is not feasible to provide both emergency access and a Type D buffer on both sides of this narrow flagpole area. The emergency access drive is located in the existing 30-foot wide"flagpole" portion of the site. The emergency access drive will consume 20 feet of the flagpole,leaving ten feet available for landscaping,which is inadequate to accommodate two Type D buffers. iii.The hearings officer finds that the proposed variance will not change the use of the facility. The use will comply with all other applicable standards. Therefore the modification request complies with TDC 18.370.010.g2)(c). iv. The hearings officer finds that the proposed modification will not impact the "existing physical and natural systems... any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in this title.TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(d). v. The hearings officer finds that the hardship is not self-imposed. The hardship, and the need for the variance, results from the size and shape of this flagpole portion of the site. The requested adjustment is the minimum necessary to alleviate the hardship and allow the applicant to develop the site with the proposed use. The applicant proposed to maximize the amount of landscaping and screening within the available space. Therefore the application complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(e). e. The hearings officer finds that the applicant failed to sustain the burden of proof that the proposed buffer on the northeast boundary of the site, abutting the north end of the building, complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2).The applicant proposed to provide a variable width (between five and twenty-foot wide) landscape strip abutting the north end of the building and six-foot high sight-obscuring fence either abutting the north edge of the landscape strip or in an easement on the abutting property,on the north side of the emergency access drive. i.The hearings officer finds that the proposed design is consistent with the purpose of the landscaping and screening standards.The north end of the site will be used for an emergency vehicle access drive and an emergency exit door.These facilities generate little or no noise,activity or other impacts on a daily basis.The primary impact in this area is limited to the visual mass of the three-story building.The proposed fence and landscaping will mitigate that impact by creating visual breaks and softening the overall visual impact of the continuous building wall. The fence will clearly define and articulate the CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase 11) Page 8 boundary between the site and the abutting apartment complex. Therefore the hearings officer finds that the proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title,to any other applicable policies and standards and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(a). ii. However,the hearings officer finds that the applicant failed to sustain the burden of proof that there are "special circumstances which are peculiar to the lot size or shape... over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district." TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(b). The applicant failed to identify any unusual circumstances on the site that preclude compliance with the buffer requirements in this area.The applicant could comply with the landscape requirements by reducing the north-south dimension of the building,increasing the area available for landscaping and screening.Instead,the applicant proposed a building with the maximum footprint allowed by the Code. The applicant's desire to maximize development on the site, while understandable,is not a special circumstance peculiar to the lot size or shape, over which the applicant has no control. iii. The hearings officer finds that the proposed variance will not change the use of the facility. The use will comply with all other applicable standards. Therefore the modification request complies with TUC 18.370.010.C(2)(c). iv. The hearings officer finds that the proposed modification will not impact the "existing physical and natural systems... any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in this title. TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(d). v. The hearings officer finds that the hardship is self-imposed. The hardship results from the design of the building. As discussed above,the applicant could avoid the hardship and comply with the buffer and screening requirements of the Code in this area of the site by reducing the north-south dimension of the building. Therefore the applicant failed to sustain the burden of proof that the application complies with TDC 18.370.010.C(2)(e). 4. The hearings officer further finds that a variance to the landscape and screening requirements along the northeast boundary of the site is unnecessary, because the proposed landscaping and screening affords the same degree of buffering and screening as required by the code. Therefore the applicant's landscape plan can be approved as an alternative buffer pursuant to TDC 18.745.050.A(3). a.As discussed above,little or no noise or activity will occur near the north end of the site. Use of this area is limited to an emergency vehicle access drive and an emergency exit door. The primary impact of in this area is limited to the visual mass of the three-story building. The proposed fence and landscaping will mitigate that impact by creating visual breaks and softening the overall visual impact of the continuous building wall. The fence will also define the boundary of the site and limit access between the site and the abutting apartment complex.The hearings officer finds that the proposed alternative buffer is more than adequate to mitigate the limited impacts of this portion of the development and it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as required by this code, given the limited impacts of this portion of the development. CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage.Phase II) Page 9 b. The applicant should be required to extend the sight-obscuring fence the entire length of the north boundary of the site,connecting to the fence on the north side of the emergency access drive within the flagpole portion of the site.This is necessary to mitigate impacts from noise,lights and activity associated with the overhead doors on the west side of the building. The applicant may install a gate in the fence if necessary to allow emergency vehicle access, but the gate must be designed to comply with the sight obscuring fence requirements of TDC 18.745.050.B. A condition of approval is warranted to that effect. 5.As discussed in the Staff Report the lighting plan shows that light from the fixtures on the north end of the building shine onto to the adjacent property to the north, which may adversely affect the existing multi-family development.The applicant testified that the lighting plan shows the wrong style of light on the north end of the building.The actual light fixture will be a smaller,less intense,light that will not shine onto the adjacent property. The hearings officer finds that that lighting should be limited to a maximum 0.3- foot candles,measured at the boundaries of the adjacent residential properties. Condition of approval 22 in the staff report should be modified to that effect. 6. The hearings officer finds that the application complies with all of the remaining approval criteria based on the affirmative findings in the Staff Report.Those affirmative findings were not disputed at the hearing or during the open record period. The hearings officer adopts the affirmative findings in the Staff Report as his own and incorporates them into this final order by reference,except to the extent they are inconsistent with the findings in this final order. D.CONCLUSIONS The hearings officer concludes that the proposed conditional use permit does or can comply with the applicable approval criteria and standards of the Tigard Community Development Code,provided development that occurs after this decision complies with applicable local,state,and federal laws and with conditions of approval warranted to ensure such compliance occurs.Therefore the application should be approved subject to such conditions. E. DECISION In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein,and incorporating the Staff Report and public testimony and exhibits received in this matter,the hearings officer hereby approves CUP 2009-00001,VAR2009-00005,VAR2009-00006,VAR2009- 00007,VAR2009-00008 and VAR2009-00009 (217 Self-Storage,Phase II),subject to the following conditions of approval: CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase 11) Page 10 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Department(Gary Pagenstecher, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 1. Prior to issuance of site permits,the applicant shall submit a revised site plan showing a walkway between the proposed and existing buildings, crossing the vehicular access to the common parking area of the site. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase II construction,the applicant shall provide revised plans that demonstrate compliance with the minimum standards for collection areas clearly identifying interior storage areas and exterior pick-up locations for mixed solid waste and recyclable containers and submit a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler approving the revised plan 3. Prior to the issuance of the building permits,the applicant must submit a site plan showing how the vision clearance standards will be met for the access on SW Hall Blvd. 4. Prior to commencing any site work,the applicant shall submit a cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation required.Any trees successfully planted on or off-site,in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and TDC 18.790.060.D will be credited against the assurance two years after all of the trees are planted. The Tree Mitigation Plan shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist and be due for review and approval pnor to tree planting or the issuance of building permits,whichever is first. The mitigation proposal shall show the species,location,and spacing of mitigation trees in relation to buildings,infrastructure, existing trees,street trees,and each other. After the plan is approved and the trees are planted,the project arborist shall submit a letter to the City Arborist to certify that all of the mitigation trees were properly planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan in order to set the starting point of the two year tree establishment penod.After the two year establishment period,the applicant shall provide a re-inventory of the mitigation trees conducted by a certified arborist in order to document mitigation tree survival, and compliance with the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The remaining value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in-lieu of planting from the original cash assurance. 5. Prior to commencing any site work,the existing street tree to be preserved shall be included as part of the tree protection program and be noted on the.plans and protected with 4 foot high orange plastic snow fencing. The protection specifications in sections 4.1.1 through 4.3.2 of the arborist report shall be included on the revised grading plan. In addition,the tree protection fencing dimensions and tree locations shall be transferred accurately to the grading plan and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. 6. Prior to commencing any site work,the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that includes: a. Replacement of the dead sequoias that were planted during Phase 1.The applicant shall provide planting and maintenance specifications for the two year establishment penod for the giant sequoias as recommended by the project arborist. The planting and maintenance specifications shall be included on the revised landscape plan and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase II) Page 11 b. A continuous six-foot high sight-obscuring fence along the entire north boundary of the site, between Hall Boulevard on the west and the Highway 217 right-of-way on the east. The eastern section of the fence may be located on the north side of the proposed emergency access drive,in a recorded easement on the adjacent property.If necessary,the applicant may install a gate in the fence to allow emergency vehicles to utilize the emergency access drive. However the gate must be designed to comply with the sight obscuring fence requirements of TDC 18.745.050.B. c. A continuous six-foot high sight-obscuring fence along the south edge of the section of the emergency access drive within the flagpole portion of the site, abutting the north boundary of the adjacent residential property,tax lot 01300,WC TM 1S135DD. 7. Prior to commencing any site work,the applicant shall establish fencing as directed by the project arbonst to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Forester for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. 8. A building permit is required for the proposed eight-foot fence on the west boundary o}the site. 'MC 18.745.030.04). Submit to the Engineering Department(Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 9. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover permeable paving,storm water detention and water quality facilities and any other work in the public nght-of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department.NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards,which are available at City Hall and the City's web page-((www.tigard-or.gov). 10. 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,Imited 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. 11. 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. 12. The City Engineer may determine the necessity for, and require submittal and approval of,a construction access and parking plan for the building phase.If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary,the applicant shall provide the plan prior to issuance of building permits. CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase II) Page 12 13. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Hall Boulevard to increase the right-of-way to 52 feet from centerline.The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline.The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 14. The applicant shall pay a fee in-lieu in the amount of$22,400 for half street improvements along the 32-foot frontage of SW Hall Boulevard. 15. 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. 16. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (Resolution and Order No.07- 2.0).Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit.In addition,a proposed maintenance agreement shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 17. The applicant's engineer shall provide revised water quality/detention calculations meeting CWS LIDA standards if permeable pavers will contribute towards meeting water quality and detention requirements. 18. The applicant shall provide on-site detention calculations as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (Resolution and rder No. 07-20). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. 19. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings.The plan shall conform to Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (Resolution and Order No.07-20,Chapter 2). 20. Prior to issuance of the site ermit,the applicant shall obtain approval from Tualatin Valley Fire &Rescue (TVF� for fire protection system,hydrant placement and emergency access design. 21. Prior to issuance of the site permit,the applicant shall obtain the applicable approach,miscellaneous,and drainage permits from the State of Oregon Highway Division or the proposed emergency access to SW Hall Blvd (ODOT Comment Letter,6/30/09) and for any work within the right-of-way of Highway 217.A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. 22. Prior to issuance of the Site Permit,the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. [Contact Bethany Stewart,Engineering] THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Planning Department(Gary Pagenstecher,639-4171,ext.2434) for review and approval: 23. Prior to final building inspection,the applicant shall submit a revised lighting plan that demonstrates the proposed exterior lights will not adversely affect the adjoining residential use.Light levels shall not exceed 0.3-foot candles,measured at the boundaries of the adjacent residential properties. CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Siorage, Phase II) Page 13 24. Prior to final occupancy,the applicant shall call for a final planning inspection to ensure the development was constructed as approved and conditioned. [Contact Gary Pagenstecher,718-2434] 25. Prior to placement of any signs on site,the applicant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the appropriate plans to verify compliance with TDC Chapter 18.780. Submit to the Engineering Department(Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 26. Prior to a final building inspection,the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. 27. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hall Boulevard underground as a part of this project,or they shall pay a deposit equal to 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 $35.00 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen,the amount will be $1,120 paid prior to a final building inspection. ADDITIONAL CONDITION TO BE MAINTAINED FOR THE LIFE OF BUILDING: 28. Containers for mixed solid waste and recyclables shall be removed within one hour after pick-up to insure minimal impact onpedestrian traffic in the area.Lack of compliance with this condition wiIl result in revocation of the Conditional Use. 29. The applicant shall maintain or replace the existing eight-foot high fence on the north-boundary of the adjacent residential property,tax lot 01300,WCTM 1S 135DD. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION SHALL RENDER THIS DECISION VOID. DATED this 2nd day of September 2009. 40400 DI-..0Z-17:117.--e....■ Joe Turner,Esq.,AICP City of Tigard Land Use Hearings Officer CUP 2009-00001, Hearings Officer Final Order (217 Self-Storage, Phase II) Page 14 AGENDA ITEM NO . 2 . 1 "TAB A" Testimony Received at the Public Hearing. "TAB B" Applicant's Materials &All Correspondence Filed with Hearings Officer Prior to the Public Hearing. Agenda Item: 2.1 Hearing Date: August 24,2009 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 120 DAYS = 10/01/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II CASE NOS: Conditional Use Permit(CUP) CUP2009-00001 Variance (VAR) (Buffering&Screening Requirement) VAR2009-00005 Adjustment (VAR) (Access Spacing Requirement) VAR2009-00006 Variance (VAR) (Ivfmimum Vehicle Parking Requirement) VAR2009-00007 Adjustment AR) (Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirement) VAR2009-00008 Variance (V (Minimum Loading Spaces Requirement) VAR2009-00009 OWNER He Louie APPLICANT: Doug Circosta 13665 SW 130th Place ivaniee Circosta Architecture Tigard,OR 97223 9055 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy. Portland,OR 97225 PROPOSAL: The applicant requests Conditional Use Approval to build Phase II of the Hwy. 217 Sell-Storage project (formerly Mirage Mini Stora a on a 0.74-acre site. The project includes approximately 403 storage units, 58,518 square feet and will be 3- stones high. With the intention of utilizing resources from Phase l?, the applicant has requested three variances for minimum vehicle parking spaces, loading spaces and buffering and screening. In addition, the applicant has requested two special adjustments for bicycle parking spaces, and for access spacing along SW Hall Blvd. LOCATION: 11600 SW Hall Boulevard;WCTM 1S135DD,Tax Lot 00100. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION: GG: General Commercial District. The GG zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment,and gasoline stations,are permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find that the proposed Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and substantially meets the Approval Standards for a Conditional Use. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended Conditions of Approval. As to the proposed Variances,staff recommends the Hearings Officer approve the requests for vehicle and bicycle parking, loading spaces, and access spacing variances, but DENY the applicant's request for the buffenng and screening variance or otherwise condition the use to be compatible. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE H PAGE 1 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Department(Gary Pagenstecher,639-4171,ext.2434) for review and approval: 1. Prior to issuance of site permits, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan showing a walkway between the proposed and existing buildings, crossing the vehicular access to the common parking area of the site. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase II construction, the applicant shall provide revised plans that demonstrate compliance with the minimum standards for collection areas clearly identifying interior storage areas and exterior pick-up locations for mixed solid waste and recyclable containers and submit a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler approving the revised plan 3. Prior to the issuance of the building permits, the applicant must submit a site plan showing how the vision clearance standards will be met.for the access on SW Hall Blvd. 4. Prior to commencing any site work,the applicant shall submit a cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation required.Any trees successfully planted on or off.site,in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and TDC 18.790.060D,will be credited against the assurance two years after all of the trees are planted. The Tree Mitigation Plan shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist and be due for review and approval prior to tree planting or the issuance of building permits, whichever is first. The mitigation proposal shall show the species, location, and spacing of mitigation trees in relation to builgs, infrastructure, existing trees, street trees, and each other. After the.plan is approved and the trees are planted, the project arborist shall submit a letter to the City Arbonst to certify that all of the mitigation trees were properly planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan in order to set the starting point of the two year tree establishment period. After the two year establishment period, the at pplicant shall provide a re-inventory of the mitigation trees conducted by a certified arborist in order to document mitigation tree survival, and compliance with the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The remaining value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in-lieu of planting from the original cash assurance. 5. Prior to commencing any site work,the existing street tree to be preserved shall be included as part of the tree protection program and be noted on the plans and protected with 4 foot high orange plastic snow fencing. The protection specifications in sections 4.1.1 through 4.3.2 of the arborist report shall be included on the revised grading plan. In addition,the tree protection fencing dimensions and tree locations shall be transferred accurately to the grading plan and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. 6. Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that includes replacement of the dead sequoias that were planted during Phase 1. The applicant shall provide planting and maintenance specifications for the two year establishment period for the giant sequoias as recommended by the project arborist. The planting and maintenance specifications shall be included on the revised landscape plan and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. 7. Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall establish fencing as directed by the project arborist to_protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Forester for the purpose of-monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall ix grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 2 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 8. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Public Facility Improvement (PH) permit is required for this project to cover permeable paving, storm water detention and water quality facilities and any other work in the public right of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering,Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards,which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www tigard-or.gov). 9. The PH 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 cify if the entity is a corporation limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated anti provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 10. 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. 11. The City, Engineer may determine the necessity for and require submittal and approval of a construction access and parking plan for the building.phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary,the applicant shall provide the plan prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Hall Boulevard to increase the nght-of-way to 52 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right- of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 13. The applicant shall pay a fee in-lieu in the amount of $22,400 for half street improvements along the 32-foot frontage of SW Hall Boulevard. 14. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance o}the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. 15. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (Resolution and Order No. 07-20). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance agreement shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 16. The applicant's engineer shall provide revised water quality/detention calculations meeting CWS LIDA standards if permeable pavers will contribute towards meeting water quality and detention requirements. 17. The applicant shall provide on-site detention calculations as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (Resolution and Order No. 07-20). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. 18. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PH) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (Resolution and Order No.07-20,Chapter 2). 19. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall obtain approval from Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue(TVF&R) for fire protection system,hydrant placement and emergency access design. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 3 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 20. Prior to issuance of the site permit,the applicant shall obtain the applicable approach,miscellaneous, and drainage permits from the State of Oregon Highway Division for the proposed emergency access to SW Hall Blvd (ODOT Comment Letter , 6/30/09) and for any work within the right-of- way of Highway 217. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. 21. Prior to issuance of the Site Permit, the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. [Contact Bethany Stewart,Engineering] THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Planning Department(Gary Pagenstecher,639-4171,ext.2434) for review and approval: 22. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall submit a revised lighting plan that demonstrates the proposed exterior lights will not adversely affect the adjoining residential use. 23. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall call for a final planning inspection to ensure the development was constructed as approved and conditioned.[Contact Gary Pagenstecher,718-2434] 24. Prior to placement of any signs on site,the applicant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the appropriate plans to verify compliance with TDC Chapter 18.780. Submit to the Engineering Department(Kim McMillan,639-4171,ext.2642) for review and approval: 25. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. 26. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hall Boulevard underground as a part of this project, or taey shall pay a deposit equal to 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 $35.00 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen,the amount willbe$1,120 paid pnor to a final building inspection. ADDITIONAL CONDITION TO BE MAINTAINED FOR THE LIFE OF BUILDING: 27. Containers for mixed solid waste and rec Tables shall be removed within one hour after pickup to insure minimal impact on pedestrian traffic in the area. Lack of compliance with this condition will result in revocation of the Conditional Use. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Vicinity Information: Bordered by GG zoned parcels to the north and south, Hwy 217 to the east and SW Hall Blvd to the west, the site is surrounded by a mix of multi-family, single-family and commercial uses. Most of these uses have been long established with the Phase I Hwy. 217 Self-Storage facility being the only significant re-development that has occurred in the area. Site Information and Proposal Description: The subject rectangular site slopes slightly toward the west from the 231-foot elevation on the east to the 226-foot elevation on the west. One 33-inch Douglas fir exists on the subject site and is proposed to be removed. A single-family residence exists on the site and is proposed for removal. The roperty abuts the Hwy. 217 right-of-way and is set back from the edge of the cut slope approximately 30 feet. The southern property boundary abuts the Phase I development. Current access to the site is from a flag pole to SW 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 4 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The applicant requests Conditional Use Approval to build Phase II of the Hwy 217 Self-Storage project (formerly Mirage Mini Storage). The subject 0.74-acre site is located at 11600 SW Hall Blvd. on Tax Lot 1S135DD00100. The project includes approximately 403 storage units, 58,518 square feet, and will be 3- stories high. The project will include an approximately 800 square foot apartment for a full time attendant. With the intention of utilizing resources from Phase I, the applicant has requested three variances for minimum vehicle parking spaces, loading spaces, and buffering and screening. In addition, the applicant has requested two special adjustments for bicycle parking spaces, and for access spacing along SW Hall Blvd. Site History: The subject site was lot line adjusted in 2004 (MIS2004-00017) and the subject of a zone change from R- 12 to GG in 2008 (ZON2008-00001). SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to construct a 58,518 square foot mini storage facility. This facility is defined as self-service storage within the use classification and is permitted conditionally in the GG zone. Sunumry Land Use Permits: Chapter 18.310 Defines the decision-making type to which the land-use application is assigned. The proposed use is a Conditional Use permit which is a Type III-HO (Hearings Officer) decision. The proposed variances are Type II administrative procedures. When multiple applications are reviewed concurrently for the same roperty, the highest review authority oversees the review. In this case, the review is handled by a Type-III -HO process and heard by the Tigard Hearings Officer. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this report are as follows: A. 18.330 S.ecifi Conditional Use Criteria Gene . Approv. Criteria Additional-Conditions of Approval) B. . s licable Develo.ment Code Standards 1:. 30 Con.'tio se 18.360 Site Development Review) 18.370 ariances and Adjustments) 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.705 Access,Egress &Circulation) 18.725 nvironmental Performance Standards) 18.745 . dscaping and Screening) 18.755 ed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.780 Signs 18.790 ree Removal) 18.795 isual Clearance) C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards (18.810) D. Impact Study(18.39 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 5 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. SPECIFIC CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 18.330.010.A states that the purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures under which a conditional use maybe permitted, enlarged or altered if the site is appropriate and if other appropriate conditions of approval can be met. There are certain uses which due to the nature of the impacts on surrounding land uses and public facilities require a case-by-case review and analysis. Section 18.330.020.A states that a request for approval for a new conditional use shall be processed as a Type III-HO rocedure, as regulated by Chapter 18.390.050 using approval criteria contained in Section 18.330.030A and subject to other requirements in Chapter 18330. GENERAL APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR A CONDITIONAL USE: SECTION 18.330.030 The site size and dimensions provide adequate area for the needs of the proposed use; The existing site is approximately, 32,216 square feet in size. The proposal calls for a 19,485 square foot mini building foot print, three story m storage facility and associated infrastructure. This report evaluates the proposal and necessary setbacks,landscaping,etc. As demonstrated in the application and this report,the site size is adequate for the needs of the proposed use. The characteristics of the site are suitable for the proposed use considering size, shape, location, topography,and natural features; The rectangular site slopes slightly and is immediately adjacent to the Phase I development. Street access will be from SW Warner Avenue with crossover easements provided. Variances have been requested for bicycle and vehicle parking and loading areas, buffering and screening, and access spacing. Provided these variances are obtained,the site would be suitable for the proposed development. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal;and All public facilities including streets, storm and sanitary sewers, and water have adequate capacity to serve the site as discussed in the Streets and Utilities section of this report. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter. The proposed site is located within the GG zoning district. As indicated earlier, self-service storage facilities are permitted conditionally. As discussed in the Commercial Zoning District section of this report,the project meets the applicable requirements of the zoning district. The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters of this Code including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360,Site Development Review,if applicable, are met or can be conditioned to be satisfied. The applicable review criteria in this case include the following chapters of the Community Development Code: 18.330, Conditional Use; 18.360, Site Development Review; 18.370, Variances and Adjustments• 18.390 Decision Making Procedures; 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage; 18.765,Off-Street Parking; 18.780,Signs; 18.790,Tree Removal; 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas. and 18.810, Street and Utility Improvement Standards. The development standards and requirements of these chapters are addressed further in this report. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following chapters: 18.350, Planned Development; 18.380 Zoning Map/Text Amendments; 18.410, Lot Line Adustments; 18.420, Land Partitions; 18.430, Subdivisions; 18.510, Residential Zoning Districts; 18.530, Industrial Zoning Districts; 18.620, Tigard Triangle Design Standards; 18.630, Washington Square Regional Center, 18.640 Durham Design Standards; 18710,Accessory Residential Units; 18.715 Density Computations; 18.720,Design mpatibility Standards; 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standards; 18.740 Historic Overlay; 18:742, Home Occupations; 18.750, Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations; 18.760, Nonconforming Situations; 18.775 Sensitive Lands. 18.785, Temporary Uses; and 18.798, Wireless Communications Facilities. These chapters are,therefore,found to be inapplicable as approval standards. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 6 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The use will comply with the applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is implemented by the Community Development Code. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan policies are,therefore,assured by satisfaction of the applicable development standards of the development code as addressed within this report. FINDING: As indicated in the analysis above, variances have been requested for bicycle and vehicle parking and loading areas, buffering and screening, and access spacing as part of Phase II of the existing abutting Phase I development. Provided these variances are obtained, the site would be suitable ft:1r the proposed development and the General Approval Criteria for a Conditional Use would be satisfied. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE. Section 18.330.030.8 states that the Hearings Authority may impose conditions on the approval of a conditional use, which are found necessary to ensure the use is compatible with other uses in the vicinity, and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimized. These conditions may include,but are not limited to the following: Limiting the hours,days,place and/or manner of operation; The applicant has not indicated hours, days, or manner of operation, however it can be expected that storage units would be accessible all hours of the day. A full-time caretaker will reside on the property. There is no evidence in the record to suggest that there is a need to limit the hours, days, place and or manner of operation. If information was submitted indicating concern with the hours of operation, the Hearings Officer could condition the approval as appropriate. Requiring design features which minimize environmental impacts such as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare, odor and/or dust; The proposed site is adjacent on the north and west to noise sensitive residential units as defined in TMC Cha ter 7.40.150.A. The proposal would not likely generate any vibration air pollution,odor,glare,noise, or dust that would be considered out of character for the use. The noise from the adjacent State Hi hway can be expected to generate more noise than the proposed use. The applicant has proposed a landscape plan that incorporates new screening that should assist in mitigating any adverse impacts from vehicles accessing the site. Requiring additional setback areas, lot area,and/or lot depth or width; Although the proposed footprint meets or exceeds the building setbacks of the underlying zone, the proposed building may be too large to be accommodated by the subject lot. Because the applicant is requesting bicycle and vehicle parking, loading area and buffering and screening variances there is a question whether the site can accommodate the size of the proposed building. In particular additional setbacks areas may be required along the north boundary to accommodate sufficient buffering and screening.Discussion of this issue is addressed in the Variance section of this report. Limiting the building height,size or lot coverage,and/or location on the site; According to the applicant's narrative,the proposed development will cover 84.4% of the site,consistent with the maximum of 85°k of the underlying zoning regulations. The applicant has indicated that the height of the building will be 35 feet, consistent with the underbing underlying zone maximum of 45 feet. However1 as discussed above, the size of the proposed building may conflict with the required buffering and screeniig.standards, depending on whether the proposed variances are granted and what conditions may apply. Discussion of this issue is addressed in the Variance section of this report. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 7 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Designating the size,number,location and/or design of vehicle access points; The proposed access to the site is from the SW Warner Avenue cul-de-sac with a crossover easement provided from Phase I for the benefit of Phase IL The total number of units pro_posed in both Phases is 675.Pursuant to 18.765, 169 parking spaces would be required and a minimum ofptwo access points at 30 feet in width or one access at 50 feet in width would be required. If the variance is granted requiring only 13 total parking spaces, the size, location, and design of the proposed vehicle access would be sufficient for the use. Requiring street right-of-way to be dedicated and street(s) to be improved; The applicant has proposed dedicating the flag pole frontage on SW Hall Blvd pursuant to the standards required by the Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) The specifics of the improvements are discussed in more detail in the Streets and Utility section of this report. Requiring landscaping,screening,drainage and/or surfacing of parking and loading areas; These items are addressed later in this report. As conditioned, the proposal will meet the prescribed requirements of the TDC Limiting the number, size, location, height and/or lighting of signs; Compliance with the sign requirements for the underlying zone will be considered once a design is reviewed. The applicant will be required to indicate the location and type of sign proposed for this site prior to sign permit issuance. Limiting or setting standards for the location and/or intensity of outdoor lighting; The applicant has addressed the roposed lighting under the Site Development Review(Crime Prevention) section of the narrative and in Sheet 09-27 44948. According to the narrative, exterior lighting will be provided at levels sufficient to deter crime and placed at the correct height so that light patterns overlap at a seven foot height. The lighting plan shows that the lighting standards are satisfied. However,the lighting plan also shows that light levels extend to the adjacent property to the north which may adversely affect the existing multi-family development. The apartment building is approximately 30 feet from the proposed exterior light for the exit on the north side of the building. Because the elevation drawing (Sheet A-201) does not show the light,it is difficult to discern the off-site impacts.To address this issue,the applicant has been conditioned to provide a revised lighting plan that shows that the exterior lights will not adversely affect the adjoining residential use. Requiring berms, screening or landscaping and the establishment of standards for their installation and maintenance; As discussed above, the size of the proposed building may conflict with the required buffering and screening standards, depending on whether the proposed variances are granted and what conditions may apply. Discussion of this issue is addressed in the Variance section of this report. In addition, as discussed below in the Tree Removal section of this report, the City Arborist provided comments and conditions of approval with respect to the trees located off-site within the development area including the dead sequoias that were planted during Phase 1 in the Hwy. 217 right-of-way.-The survival of Phase 1 and Phase 2 sequoias are conditioned to be identified and replaced on a revised landscape plan and be subject to cash assurance release. In addition, the applicant is conditioned to have the project arborist provide planting and maintenance specifications for the two year establishment period for the giant sequoias. These planting and maintenance specifications will be included on the landscape plan and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. Requiring and designating the size, height,location and/or materials for fences; The,applicant has applied for a variance for the buffer and screening standards. The applicant va ng the "D-3" wall requirement by eliminating r it along the north boundary and by modifying it to include a fence, instead, along the west bounda This issue is discussed in the Variance section of this report,below and my result in denial of the variance request or modification to the conditions of approval. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 8 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees, soils, vegetation, watercourses, habitat areas and/or drainage areas; The single tree on site is scheduled for removal to accommodate construction. Trees on neighboring properties will need to be protected during construction. There are no watercourses, habitat areas or drainage areas on site that require special protection. Requiring the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain when land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100-year floodplain; and The subject site is at elevation 220 to 231. The Nearest floodplain, at elevation 152, is located approximately 2,650 feet to the west. There is no floodplain on or adjacent to the site. Requiring the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. There is no floodplain on or adjacent to the site. FINDING: Hearings Authority may impose conditions on the approval of a conditional use,which are found necessary to ensure the use is compatible with other uses in the vicinity; and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimized. As shown in the analysis above and in the findings in the Variances section of this report, the proposed building may be too large to ensure the use is compatible with adjacent residential uses. The Hearing's Officer may consider denying the buffering and screening variance request or otherwise condition the use to be compatible. ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USE TYPES: SECTION 18.330.050 There are no additional development standards for self-service storage facilities that require conditional use approval. This section is not applicable. B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(18.360) The Site Development Review approval standards require that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. 18.360.090 Approval Criteria. The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving,approving with conditions,or denying an application: Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards; As demonstrated in this report the proposal meets or has been conditioned to meet all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.810. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Buildings shall be: (1) Located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; (2) Located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; (3) Located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation,and fire-fighting;and (4) Oriented with consideration for sun and wind. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 9 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790,Tree Removal. The site's shape and size impose design constraints for siting the building and preserving the single existing tree on site. The applicant states in the narrative that the building z_will not be located on an area subject to ground slumping or sliding and has submitted a geotech evaluation ((west Coast Geotech, Inc. Report,July 25, 2008) to address this issue. No sensitive lands exist on this site. Adequate setbacks are met as discussed later in this report. The building will have a northwest-southeast orientation and will have unrestricted solar access. Buffering,screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, for example, between single-family and multiple-family residential and residential and commercial uses and the following factors shall be considered in determining tire adequacy of the type and extent of tie buffer: (1) The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust,or to provide a visual barrier, 2 The size of the buffer required to achieve the purpose in terms of width and height; 3 The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; 4 The required density of the buffering;and 5 Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. The proposed commercial use is bordered by multi-family housing to the north and single-family housing.to the west. The applicant has proposed landscaping that includes a mix of trees and shrubs. The landscaping will be located within a required minimum 10-foot-buffer between the proposed development and the property line. However,the applicant has not proposed screening for the north boundary as required in Table 18.7452. and proposes an 8-foot fence instead o1 the required 6-foot wall on a portion of the west boundary. The applicant has therefore requested a variance to the landscaping and screening standards. Of particular interest would be the size and density of the buffer that would be appropriate given the potential for adverse effects of the proposed development on the adjoining residential uses. These standards are discussed in more detail in the variance section of this report. Demarcation of public,semi-public and private spaces for crime prevention: a. The structures and site improvements shall be designed so that public areas such as streets or public gathering places, semi-public areas and private outdoor areas are clearly defined to establish persons having a right to be in the space, to provide for crime prevention and to establish maintenance responsibility;and The site is clearly delineated by a perimeter fencing and appropriate signage. Further demarcation is provided through landscaping treatment and hard surfaced walkways. Crime prevention and safety: a. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; b. Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; c. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; d. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime;and e. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Due to the roposed use as a storage facility,windows can only be placed around the entrance and office area of the building. A full-time caretaker will reside on the property to deter crime and ensure safety for the site. The entrance to the building will be adjacent to the office and caretaker's apartment. The applicant has submitted the lighting plan Sheet 09-27 44948),demonstrating exterior lighting levels will be sufficient in areas having heavy pedestrian traffic (such as along pathways). 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 10 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER However,the lighting plan also shows that light levels extend to the adjacent property to the north which may adversely affect the existing multi-family development. The apartment building is approximately 30 feet from the proposed exterior light for the exit on the north side of the building.Because the elevation drawing (Sheet A-201) does not show the light,it is difficult to discern the off-site impacts.To address this issue,the applicant shall provide a revised lighting plan that shows the exterior lights will not adversely affect the adjoining residential use. Public transit: a. Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to or within 500 feet of existing or proposed transit mute... The site is not adjacent to a transit route; the nearest transit mute is on SW Pacific Highway,just within 500 feet of the site. Tri-Met had the opportunity to review the project, but did not suggest any improvements. Impacts on transit needs by storage facilities are clearly not apparent. The construction of public transit facilities will not be required with this development. As other sites along SW Warner Avenue re-develop,the sidewalk will extend to connect with the sidewalk on SW Pacific Highway, giving better access to existing transit facilities. The proposed development provides a sidewalk from the building entrance and along the frontage of SW Warner Avenue. Landscaping: a. All landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745• b. In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped;and c.A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. The applicant's plans call for 15 percent of the site to be landscaped. However, the buffering and screening landscape requirements have not been met. The applicant has applied for a variance to these standards,which is reviewed below in the Variance section of this report. Drainage: All drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; Drainage will be reviewed under 18.810, Utilities. The proposed storm drainage plan has been designed in accordance with Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards which meet and exceed the requirements of the 1981 master drainage plan. Provision for the disabled: All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447;and The development is being designed in accordance with ADA requirements, and will be reviewed specifically for this conformance during the building permit review process. All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title,e.g.,Planned Developments,Chapter 18.350;or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. The Planned Developments standards do not apply to this review. The applicant is seeking variances to the minimum vehicle and bicycle parking,loading space requirements,and landscaping and screening standards of the development code;however,the regulations of the underlying GG zone are met by the proposal. FINDING: According the analysis above, all of the applicable site development review standards are met or can be conditioned to be met elsewhere in this report. Of particular interest is the size and density of the buffer that would be appropriate given the potential for adverse effects of the proposed development on the adjoining residential uses. In addition there is the possibility that the proposed exterior lights will adversely affect the adjoining residential use. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised lighting.plan that demonstrates the proposed exterior lights will not adversely affect the adjoining residential use. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 11 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER VARIANCE S(18.370) The purpose of this section is to provide standards for the granting of variances from the applicable zoning requirements of this title where it can be shown that, owing to special and unusual circumstances related to a specific property, the literal interpretation of the provisions of the applicable zone would cause an undue or unnecessary hardship, except that no use variances shall be granted. Variances are processed through a -Type II procedure, using the criteria contained in 18.370.010.C.2.b. "Special Adjustment" Variances are processed through either a Type I or Type II process, subject to meeting the applicable review criteria described in 18.370.020.C. The applicant has requested three variances for minimum vehicle parking spaces, loading spaces, and buffering and screening. In addition, the applicant has requested two "s eciaL adjustment" variances for bicycle parking spaces,and for access spacing along SW Hall Blvd. The requested variances are each reviewed below according to the applicable variance or special adjustment criteria. Minimum Vehicle Parking Spaces Table 18.765.2 requires 1 parking space for every 4 storage units. 403 storage units are proposed in Phase II, requiring 101 vehicle parking spaces. The applicant proposes 5 additional vehicle parking spaces with the Phase II project. Considered together, Phase I and II would require 169 spaces (675 units/4 units per space). Phase I provided 8 spaces based the ITE Parking Generation Report (3 Edition) calculation for the proposed use. The He s Officer approved the i`lE Parking Generation Report ratio in the Phase I Conditional Use Decision CUP 2005-0100010). The applicant has submitted a CTS Engineers parking study demonstrating t ro h the use of the ITE Report and observation of other self storage operations that using a ratio of 1.39 spaces per 100 storage units would satisfy parking demand for the proposed facility. Therefore, by extension the 13 spaces proposed for both Phase I and II would meet the previously approved ratio and could be approved for Phase II (6.75 x 1.39 =9.38,rounded up to 10 parking spaces). The Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a variance based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied: The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title,to any other applicable policies and standards,and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; The purposes of Section 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements are to ensure adequate vehicle paring and capacity: Insure adequate vehicle parking. These parking requirements are intended to provide sufficient vehicle parking in close proximity to the various uses for residents,customers and employees,and to establish standards which will maintain the traffic carrying-capacity of nearby streets. Based on the CIS Engineers Parking Analysis provided by the applicant, the parking demand for self- storage facilities less than 100,000 gross square feet or 800 units should be 5 - 10 spaces. The applicant is proposing 5 additional spaces for a total of 13 spaces for both Phases I and II ensuring adequate vehicle parking. Adequate capacity. These regulations are also intended to establish vehicle parking areas which have adequate capacity and which are appropriately located and designed to minimize any hazardous conditions on the site and at access points. It is not clear how multiple customers arriving to load/unload at the same time as other customers visit the storage facility can be served by the proposed parking. One parking space will be utilized by the full-time attendant. In addition, one of the two truck loading spaces ism conflict with the recycling.area and will require signage to avoid the conflict during the scheduled solid waste pick up. Based on the applicant's experience with Phase I, the applicant should be able to provide ,evidence that satisfies the Hearings Officer that adequate parking capacity is located and designed to minimize any hazardous conditions on the site and at access points. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 12 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The subject site for Phase I and II is located at the end of SW Warner Avenue with access off of a cul-de-sac. Two businesses and a single-family residence take primary or secondary access off of SW Warner. Therefore, with relatively low demand on SW Warner and the prior approved parking ratio being met, it is unlikely that the reduced parking would be materially detrimental to the other properties in the vicinity. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; Access to the subject site is limited to the cul-de-sac at the end of SW Warner Avenue. Phase I and II constitute a single development with the lot shape size and limited accessibility contributing to the difficulty in developing the site. The applicant states that the required parking would not fit on the subject site even without the proposed,building. Other properties in the area do not share the same restrictions. However, the request for a variance to the arking standard is consistent with the demonstrated need for the use and not the special circumstances of-the site. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; The proposed project is within the GG zone,which allows self-service storage. The requested variance to the minimum vehicle parking will not affect the proposed use allowed within the zone. Existing physical and natural systems such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title;and The applicant also states that other systems including traffic, parks and dramatic land forms will not be adversely affected with the approval of the variance. In addition the applicant states the proposal maximizes efficient use of the site while providing a parking ratio suitaile to the use. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship; The required minimum parking, lot configuration, and limited accessibility to the site are not self-imposed hardships. The 13 total parking spaces provided instead of the 101 required by code is the minimum variance that would alleviate the hardship. This allowance is supported by the parking analysis provided by the applicant. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to the minimum parking standard based on the Hearing's Officer's findings with respect to parking ratios for CUP2005-00001. Staff requests the Hearings Officer evaluate the adequacy of proposed parking with respect to location and design to minimize any hazardous conditions on the site and at access points.Based on the applicant's experience with Phase I,the applicant should be able to provide evidence that satisfies the Hearings Officer that adequate parking capacity is located and designed to minimize any hazardous conditions on the site and at access points. Minimum Loading Spaces Section 18.765.080 requires a minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40 000 gross square feet or more. The proposed Phase II building is 58,518 square feet. The applicant's Phase I proposal was conditioned (Condition # 7, amended by Hearing's Officer Final Order) to provide two spaces.subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.The condition was met under Phase I with the provision of two spaces that allow the full range of U-hauls from the 10-foot Mini Mover to the 26-foot Super Mover. The applicant's Phase II proposal relies on the approved spaces as Phase I and II are considered the same project which is supported by a crossover easement between the two parcels of the respective phases. In addition, the applicant suggests that all thirteen parking spaces provided serve as loading spaces suitable for the proposed self-storage use. Further, the applicant contends the existing loading spaces are code compliant since the minimum two sppaces are provided for buildings over 40,000 square feet (102,138 square feet proposed in both Phases).TI'he proposed variance to the loading spaces standard is necessitated by the phased permit reviews for two phases of a single project. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 13 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a variance based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied: The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; The proposed variance to the loading spaces standard is required because of the phased permit reviews for two phases of a single project. Adequate parking and capacity are provided with the 13 spaces provided, all of which would serve the type of vehicle expected for the use. Therefore,the proposed variance would not be detrimental to the purposes of Title 18.765. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; The proposed loading space variance is caused by the Phasing for the proposed development, which is otherwise code compliant. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; The proposed project is within the GG zone,which allows self-service storage. The requested loading space variance will not result in a change of use that is not allowed within the zone. Existing physical and natural systems such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title; and The variance is requested because of the Phasing of the project and not because it would otherwise not meet the standard. Approving the requested loading area variance would not adversely affect existing physical and natural systems but would ensure an efficient use of the site proportionate to the self-storage use requiring the loading areas. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The standard of the code is being met notwithstanding the phasing of the project.There is no hardship. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, staff recommends the Hearing's Officer approve the requested loading area variance. Buffering and Screening Section 18.745.050 requires buffering and screening to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type. The proposed commercial use is bordered by multi-family residential on the north and single-family residential on the west. The buffer Matrix in Table 18.745.1 requires Buffer type "D" along 120 feet of the north boundary and 160 feet of the west boundary. Buffer Combinations for Landscaping and Screening in Table 18.745.2 allow for three options to meet type "D" buffers with varying widths (10 to 20 feet) corresponding to varying degrees of screening with either 6-foot high hedges, fences or walls. On the west the applicant proposes a minimum 10-foot wide landscaped buffer that utilizes the neighbor's 8-foot high wood fence for screening and proposes to match that fence on the other adjoining abutting property. With the proposed 10-foot buffer, a six-foot high wall is otherwise required. On the north, the applicant proposes an average (5 to 15-feet wide) 10-foot wide buffer and no wall, arguing that the wall of the storage facility serves the function of the required screening wall. Pursuant to Section 18.745.050.F.2 a variance to the standards required in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2 shall be processed using the approval criteria in Section 18.370.010. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 14 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a variance based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied: The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; The purpose of the Landscaping and Screening Chapter is to enhance the aesthetic quality of the City by 1) requiring street trees in new developments, 2) using plant materials as a unifying element, 3) using panting materials to define spaces and articulate the use of specific areas, and 4) using trees and other landscaping material to mitigate the effects of. . . lack of privacy by the provision of buffering and screening. The proposed building is 34'-7" tall. A 20-foot private access drive and a 10-foot buffer are roposed along the border with the two residential properties to the west. The existing and proposed 8-foot high fences would substantially screen the commercial use. However, the fence may not diffuse noise associated with vehicles and storage activities along the west elevation of the building as well as a wall. In practice, the City does not rely on private fences on adjoining properties to satisfy the screening requirements of proposed developments because the City has no control over the adjacent property owner's actions with respect to maultainin existing fencing. The code requires a wall in this case because the buffer is 10 feet. The proposed landscaping and screening along the west boundary may adversely affect the privacy of the adjacent single-family residences. To the north, the proposed development is built within 5 feet of the property line and steps back to approximately 20 feet. The proposed access along the west frontage joins with the emergency flagpole access along approximately 40% of the north boundary. The north elevation of the building includes an emergency pedetrian egress and two upper level windows. The proposed 10-foot average buffer would scarcely provide space for an effective visual buffer from the adjoining apartment complex. Since no activity would be expected along the north boundary, the purpose of the screening wall to provide privacy would be moot, except where exposed to the access ways. The proposed landscaping and screening along the north boundary may adversely affect the aesthetics and privacy of the adjacent multi-family residences. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; The applicant states there are two special circumstances that require the variance: the Fire Marshall requirement for emergency access along the north side of the building and the safety issue associated with a 6-foot wall creating a dead space between the building and the wall. The TVF&R comment letter included at the end of this report does not mention requiring the emergency access along the north side of the building. Even if this were a requirement the applicant could provide for it and the required buffer and screening on the subject site if the building footprint were reduced. Because the emergency access is proposed to be placed in an easement on the adjoining property, there is little opportunity to screen the access portion of the site. However, additional screening could also be provided on the adjacent parcel in an easement to provide the required buffering and screening. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; The proposed use is the same as permitted under this title. At issue is the buffering and screening of the conditionally permitted use. Reasonable economic use of the subject site does not mean maximum use as proposed. Reducing the scale of the building to allow for the required buffering and screening would still permit a reasonable economic use of the land. Existing physical and natural systems such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title; and 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 15 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The applicant states that the proposed variance would not adversely affect the existing systems and would make firefighting easier. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The applicant states that this is not a self-imposed hardship and will meet the intent of the code and creates safer,more attractive condition. Staff believes the hardship comes from the decision by the developer to maximize the building footprint on the subject site. No other factors contribute to the need for the variance request. It would be ossible for the fire access to be placed on the subject site, in addition to the "D-1" buffer requirement of 20 feet (with hedge and no wall) if the building size were reduced. FINDING: As described in the analysis above,staff recommends the Hearing's Officer deny the requested buffering and screening variance and consider the following conditions of approval: 1) The west boundary buffer,as proposed at 10 feet, should include a 6-foot wall as required in the "D-3" Option to provide privacy to the two single-family residences; 2) The north boundary buffer should beexpanded to a minimum of 20 feet from any part of the building consistent with Option"D-1"(requiring a hedge and not a wall) to provide the provide dept to provide a vegetative screen of the proposed building as seen from the adjacent apartments; and-3) The access driveway to the west side of the proposed building which is visible from the apartments should also be subject to the buffering and screening standards,either on the adjacent property (by easement) or on the subject property with a reconfigured building layout. Bicycle Parking Spaces Table 18.765.2 requires 1 bicycle parking space for every 40 self-storage units. The proposed 403 unit development would require 11 spaces,but only five spaces are proposed. A special adjustment to the Parking Standards (Chapter 18.765) is allowed pursuant to 18.370.020.C.7.e: Reduction in required bicycle parking. The Director may approve a reduction of required bicycle parking per Section 18.765.050.E by means of Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, if the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed use by its nature would be reasonably anticipated to generate a lesser need for bicycle parking. The applicant states that seven bicycle spaces were provided in Phase I, consistent with the code requirement. The applicant argues that by observation, the code requirement is excessive to the need generated by the self- storage use. The applicant proposed 5 spaces in Phase II for a total of 12 spaces in the whole development. The applicant suggests that, through observation of the use of bicycle parking spaces in Phase I and doubt of the need for more than 12 spaces at any one time for the proposed use, the proposed use by its nature would be reasonably anticipated to generate a lesser need for bicycle parking. FINDING: Staff recommends the Hearings Officer approve the proposed special adjustment upon evaluation of the applicant's demonstration that proposed use by its nature would-be reasonably anticipated to generate a lesser need for bicycle parking. Access Spacing Along W Hall Blvd Section 18.705.030.83 requires a minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial to be 600 feet. The subject site includes a flag pole access to SW Hall Blvd., an arterial. There are approximately 14 accesses within 600 feet north and south of the subject access between SW Pfaffle and Hwy. 99W. However, the flag pole access is proposed as an emergency access only with the main access off of SW Warner Avenue. The emergency access off of SW Hall provides the site a secondary access, important in case of emergency and supported by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. A special adjustment to access and egress standards (Chapter 18.705) is allowed pursuant to 18.370.020.C.5. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved, the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, as governed in Section 18.390.030, using approval criteria contained in Subsection 2b below. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 16 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The primary access for Phase II is roposed to be a joint access with the adjacent parcel of Phase I. Emergency access is proposed off of SW Hall Blvd. The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment from the access requirements contained in Chapter 18.705, based on the following criteria: (1) It is not possible to share access; Shared primary access is proposed off of SW Warner Avenue. Emergency access off of Hall does not meet the spacing standard. (2) There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; Alternative access from SW Warner is proposed for the primary access. Emergency access off of SW Hall does not meet the spacing standard. (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met; Because of the many existing accesses along SW Hall within 600 feet and the subject access is a flag pole, the separation requirements cannot be met. (4) The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; Preserving the existing access for emergency use only, would reduce the potential adverse effect of the access spacing to the minimum. (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and The proposed emergency access is 30 feet wide and is subject to the visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795. (6) The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. The applicant has been conditioned in the Visual Clearance section of this report to submit a site plan showing how the vision clearance standards will be met for the access on SW Hall Blvd. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, staff recommends the Hearing's Officer approve the requested access spacing special adjustment. COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS(18.520) The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations are permitted conditionally. Section 18.520.040 States that Development standards in Residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.520.2 below: (See Table on the following page) 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 17 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES STANDARD C-G Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 32,216 s.f. - Detached unit - - Boarding,lodging,rooming house Minimum Lot Width 50' 128 ft.average Minimum Setbacks -Front yard 0' 30' - Side facing street on corner&through lots 0' NA -Side yard 0' l'to 20' - Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 20'- NA -Rear yard 0 ft l'to 12' - Distance between front of garage&property line abutting a public or private street - NA Maximum Height 45 ft 34'-7" Maximum Site Coverage 85% 85% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 15% Based on the analysis above,the underlying zone's development standards are met or exceeded. FINDING: Based on the information provided in the narrative and on the site plan, the development standards in the GG zone are satisfied. ACCESS,EGRESS AND CIRCULATION(18.705) No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as pprovided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled.The applicant shall submit a site plan. The applicant submitted a plan set including Sheet A-100, which shows the proposed access, egress and circulation. This standard is satisfied. Joint access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title,provided: 1. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use;and 2. Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City. The applicant proposes joint access with crossover easements for Phase I and the proposed Phase II storage units. The applicant's submittal includes 5 Shared Access Easements in "Exhibit B" and "Exhibit All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. The site has frontage on SW Hall Blvd. However, the applicant proposes this access be used exclusively for emergency purposes. The applicant proposes primary access to the site from SW Warner Avenue with a crossover easement that utilizes the existing access for Phase I. Vehicular access and egress is proposed from SW Warner Avenue,a public street,consistent with this standard. Required Walkway Location On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs; ramps, or elevators 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, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 18 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The applicant has indicated (Sheet A-100) that a 5-foot concrete walkway will be extended from the entrance of the Phase II building to SW Warner Avenue. However, no sidewalk is proposed between the proposed and existing buildings. Therefore,this standard is not met. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; This criterion is not applicable to this proposal. 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 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 ri 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 ; The applicant's site plan (Sheet A-1001_ does not show a required walkway crossing the vehicular access to the common parking area of the site. Therefore,this standard is not met. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The applicant is proposing_to construct all sidewalks with concrete materials, and lighting was discussed previously in this report. This criterion is satisfied. Access Management(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. A sight distance assessment was submitted. The proposed access on Warner Avenue, a local street with parking, requires a minimum sight distance of 250 feet in each direction. The sight distance to the south is about 480 feet. The driveway is at the end of a cul-de-sac so there is no sight distance required in the other direction. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall 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 depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The proposed emergency access driveway is located on SW Hall Blvd., an arterial street. The access is im approxately 700 feet from the intersection with SW Pfaffle to the north and Hwy. 99W to the south. Therefore,the proposed access is consistent with this standard. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along, a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE H PAGE 19 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER An existing driveway to the subject site is located on SW Hall Blvd., an arterial. The driveway, is within 600 feet of approximately a dozen other driveways. The existing access is proposed to be retained as an emergency fire access. Therefore, the applicant has applied For a variance to this standard which is reviewed in the Variance section of this report. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above,not all of the Access Egress and Circulation standards have been met. The applicant's plans do not show a required walkway crossing the vehicular access to the common parking area of the site between the proposed and existing buildings. However,with the following condition of approval the standards can be met. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised site plan showing a walkway between the proposed and existing buildings, crossing the vehicular access to the common parking area of the site. ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS- CHAPTER 18.725: Requires that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 Performance Standards regulates: Noise,visible emissions,vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the Commercial zoning districts and the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340-28-070) apply. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles,trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district, which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Odors. The emissions of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any oint beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. There is no evidence in the record that would suggest that any problems associated with noise, emissions, vibrations,odors,glare and heat,or insects and rodents would result from this specific development. FINDING: Based on the information provided by the applicant, the use of the property will conform to the above requirements. If for some reason the above standards were in question,and it was subsequently found that the use was out of compliance with any of the above standards the property owner would be subject to code enforcement, court review, possible fines, and revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. A search of City records does not indicate any code enforcement issues associated with the existing use. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 20 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING- CHAPTER 18.745: Street trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects frontin on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at matunty(small, medium or large). 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. The project fronts on SW Hall Blvd.with a flagpole access approximately 150 feet in length.The applicant has indicated in the narrative and on the landscape plan that they intend to plant street trees along that frontage. The proposed trees are Columnar Flowering Pear having a minimum two inch caliper at four foot height. Land Use Buffering and Screening: Buffering and Screening is required between different types of land uses. The applicant has proposed buffering and screening of adjacent residential uses that do not meet the requirements in Table 18.745.2. Therefore, the applicant has applied for a variance to this standard which is reviewed in the Variance section of this report. FINDING: Based on the analysis above and the findings in the Variance section of this report,the land use buffering and screening standards have not been met. Provided the recommended conditions of approval for the variance request or other conditions by the Hearings Officer are imposed, landscaping and screening standards can be met. MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLES STORAGE - CHAPTER 18.755: Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on- site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four(4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan, which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The applicant has indicated that the project would utilize the minimum standards method. Under that 5premise, the development is required to provide 4 square feet for every thousand square feet of building. At 8 ,000 square feet,the applicant is required to provide a collection area of at least 232 square feet(58 x 4 =232 square feet). As indicated in the applicant's narrative,the applicant is proposing to construct three 4'x 16' 64 square foot) storage areas, one on each floor of the building (192 total square feet). However, the applicant s plan set (Sheets A-101 and A-102) shows only one storage area on the main floor and none on the second or third floors. Even if the storage areas were included as proposed, the project would be short 40 square feet (232 - 192 =40 square feet). The applicant does not address how the existing outdoor storage area (100 square feet) is to be allocated between Phase I and II,but does state that the outdoor area would-be used by the new building for recyclables. The applicant provided a franchise hauler letter from Pride disposal, dated October 9, 2008. The letter addressed location,design,and access requirements for service. The letter was a conditional sign-off stipulating the size,design and limitations of the proposed(existing) enclosure to a single commercial size container,even though two were proposed. The outdoor storage area was built for Phase I. The letter recommends that no parking signs be posted designating days of service to ensure Pride has access to the outdoor storage area which conflicts with van parking space located in front of it. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 21 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FINDING: As show in the analysis above,the applicant has not provided sufficient storage/collection area for solid waste and�recycfables pursuant to the Minimum Standard method of compliance. Therefore, the proposal does not meet the applicable Mixed Solid Waste and Recydables Storage standards. CONDITION:Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase II construction,the applicant shall provide revised plans that demonstrate compliance with the minimum standards for collection areas and submit a sign-off letter from the-franchise hauler approving the revised plan. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING(18.765) At the time of the erection of a new structure within any zoning district, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070. The subject site is located within the Metro Zone A. The maximum number of parking spaces that can be provided. by the site is 1.0 space for every 4 storage units. Therefore, the maximum number of parking spaces for the site would be 101 (403 proposed units/4 units). The minimum parking standard is also 1.0 space for every 4 storage units. As such, the minimum arking requirement for the development will also be 101 parking spaces. The applicant has proposed to 1pocate 4 standard spaces and 1 accessible space on site for a total of p5 spaces. Therefore, this standard has not been met. However,the applicant has applied for a variance to the minimum parking standard concurrently with the conditional use permit, which is reviewed above in the Variance section of this report. With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: Access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and rovide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705,Access,Egress and Circulation; As discussed earlier in this report,this criterion is satisfied. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; The development plans show access drives defined by concrete curbing. This criterion is satisfied. Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; The applicant proposes to use the existing access approved through Phase I. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; The applicant has proposed to pave the access and all parking areas. This criterion is satisfied. Excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. The parking spaces are serviced by two-way access proposed within this project, and there is room for service vehicles to turn around and enter the street so that no backing movement will be required within a public right-of-way. This criterion is satisfied. Loading/unloading driveways: A driveway designed for continuous forward flow of passenger vehicles for the purpose of loading and unloading passengers shall be located on the site of any school or other meeting place whic is designed to accommodate more than 25 people at one time. Because the development is not a school or meeting place this criterion does not apply. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 22 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Parking Lot Striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences; any area intended to be used to meet the off- street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The applicant has indicated that the parking lot will be striped and direction arrows are shown on the site plan (Sheet A-100).This criterion is satisfied. 'Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel-stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. The applicant has proposed concrete curbs and some sidewalks at the edges of paving adjacent to planting areas. These are shown on the landscape plan provided with the application. This criterion has been met. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Table 18.765.1. outlines the minimum dimensions for angled parking. The proposal (Sheet A-100) identifies a total of 5 new spaces utilizing 90-degree parking, The parking plan illustrates compliance with the requirements of 18.765.N. The aisle width between stales for 90-degree angle parking is 26 feet. This criterion is satisfied. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. The bicycle parking requirement is 1.0 space for every 40 storage units; therefore the required number of spaces is eleven (403 proposed units/40 units). The applicant has proposed to supply a bike rack inside the building with space for five (5) bicycles.Therefore,this standard has not been met.However,the applicant has applied for a variance concurrently with the conditional use permit,which is reviewed above in the Variances section of this report. Off-street loading requirements: Off-street loading spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: • A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; • A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. Off-street loading dimensions: • Each loading berth shall be approved by the City Engineer as to design and location; • Each loading space shall have sufficient area for turning and maneuvering of vehicles on the site. At a minimum, the maneuvering length shall not be less than twice the overall length of the longest vehicle using the facility site; • Entrances and exits for the loading areas shall be provided at locations approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 18.710; • Screening for off-street loading facilities is required and shall be the same as screening for parking Dots in accordance with Chapter 18.745. Because of the size of the building_.(58,518 square feet) a minimum of two (2) off-street loading spaces are required to meet the standard. The applicant has indicated that all of the loading spaces provided can serve the loading purpose because items stored can be loaded into vehicles from the parking spaces and that these items can be transported by passenger cars and trucks. Due to the phasing of the project, the applicant had to request a variance as reviewed in the Variance section of this report. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 23 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FINDING: The applicant has requested variances from the vehicle and bicycle parking and off-street loading requirements. Staff recommends the Hearing's Officer approve the requests as found consistent with respective review criteria in the variances section of this report. SIGNS (18.780): Requires that a permit be issued for any sign that is erected, re-erected, constructed, structurally altered, or relocated within the City Limits. The applicant has not identified or requested approval of signage with this application but has indicated that a sign application will be submitted at a future date. Signs can be applied for at a later date,which is often times the case with most projects. FINDING: The applicant is not proposing signage with this application and will submit the required materials with a future application. CONDITION:Prior to placement of any signs on site, the applicant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the appropriate plans to verify compliance with'MC Chapter 18.780. TREE REMOVAL - CHAPTER 18.790: Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree lan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist be provided for a conditional use application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, identification of which trees are proposed to be removed, and a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; 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 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 requires no mitigation. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed. A protection p rogram defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The applicant has provided an arborist report conducted by Don Richards a certified arborist, and tree plan identifying all trees greater than six inches in diameter. According,to the arborist report there is one tree on the subject property, 33-inch Douglas fir. The fir is proposed for removal and subject to 100% mitigation pursuant to the �)C Section 18.790.030(B)(2)(D). Trees located off-site within the development area include the dead sequoias that were planted during Phase 1 in the Hwy. 217 right-of-way and a row of pear trees along the northern property line on the adjacent parcel. The survival of phase 1 and phase 2 sequoias should-be conditioned-to be identified and replaced on a revised landscape plan and be subject to cash assurance release. In addition, the applicant should be conditioned to have the project arbonst provide planting and maintenance specifications for the two year establishment period for the giant sequoias. 'These panting and maintenance specifications should be included on the landscape plan and include a signature of approval from the project arbonst. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 24 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC BEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The protection specifications in sections 4.1.1 through 4.3.2 shall be included on the grading plan. The tree protection fencing dimensions and tree locations shall be transferred accurately to the grading plan and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. The existing street tree to be preserved shall be included as part of the tree protection program. FINDING: The applicant did not propose any tree protection measures that would be necessary, in order to ensure the viability of those trees that are in close proximity to the construction areas as required by Section 18.790.030(B)(4). The proposed mitigation is subject to a revised landscape plan to accommodate proposed and existing dying sequoias. Based on the analysis above, and comments provided by the City's Arbonst, the Tree Removal standards be met,provided the applicant complies with the conditions listed below CONDITIONS: • Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation required. Any trees successfully planted on or off-site, in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and TDC 18.790.060.D, will be credited against the assurance two years after all of the trees are planted. The Tree Mitigation Plan shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist and be due for review and approval prior to tree planting or the issuance of building permits, whichever is first. The mitigation pproposal shall sow the species,location,and spacing o mitigation trees in relation to buildings, infrastructure, existing trees, street trees, and each other. After the plan is approved and the trees are planted, the project arborist shall submit a letter to the City Arbonst to certify that all of the mitigation trees were roperly planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan in order to set the starting point of the two year tree establishment period. After the two year establishment period,the applicant shall provide a re-inventory of the mitigation trees conducted by a certified arbonst in order to document mitigation tree survival, and compliance with the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The remaining value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in- lieu of planting from the original cash assurance. ♦ Prior to commencing any site work, the existing street tree to be preserved shall be included as part of the tree protection program and be noted on the plans and protected with 4 foot high orange plastic snow fencing. The protection specifications in sections 4.1.1 through 4.3.2 of the arborist report shall be included on the revised grading plan. In addition the tree protection fencing dimensions and tree locations shall be transferred accurately to the grading plan and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. • Prior to commencing any site work,the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that includes replacement of the dead sequoias that were planted during Phase 1. The applicant shall provide planting and maintenance specifications for the two year establishment period for the giant seqquoias as recommended by the project arbonst. The planting and maintenance specifications shall be included on the revised landscape plan and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. • Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall establish fencing as directed by the pproject arborist to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Forester for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan=or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS- CHAPTER 18.795: Section 18.795.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 25 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Section 18.795.030.B. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree) exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. The applicant's narrative indicates that the proposed development will utilize Phase I's existing access on SW Warner Avenue which was found to be in compliance with the visual clearance standards. However, the applicant has not addressed the clear vision area standards with respect to the proposed emergency access of SW Hall. Therefore,this criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the vision clearance standards have not been met. CONDITION:Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant must submit a site plan showing how the vision clearance standards will be met for the access on SW Hall Blvd. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS CHAPTER- 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. Phase 2 will utilize the previously approved Phase 1 site access at the end of the existing cul-de-sac on Warner Avenue. An emergency only access to Hall Boulevard is also proposed. The gate should be locked, as approved by the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District, so that only emergency access is allowed. 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. The proposed emergency access to Hall Boulevard is the only street within the development. It should be constructed to the requirements of the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District. Section 18.810.030.A.4 states that any street adjacent to the development must be improved in accordance with the TDC. Section 18.810.030.A.5 allows acceptance of a future improvement guarantee if at least one of several conditions exist. Condition a. is where a partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards. Street frontage of the development is limited to the intersection of the proposed emergency access at Hall Boulevard. Additional improvements to Hall Boulevard would be based on a widened right- of-way width that would not allow for the connection of proposed improvements, such as sidewalk and curb to the existing improvements. Consequently, construction of improvements along the Hall Boulevard frontage is not feasible until adjacent street improvements are constructed as well. Condition c. allows a future improvement guaranty where development of adjacent properties is unlikely in the foreseeable future and the improvement associated with the project adjacent not, by itself, provide a significant improvement. The adjacent,property is currently developed and no further development is currently proposed. As previously mentioned, construction on the improvement is not feasible so it does not provide a benefit. Since both of these conditions are met,a future improvement guarantee should be accepted. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires an arterial street to have a 64 to 128-foot right-of-way width and varied paved section. A 5-lane arterial street is required to have a 52 right-of-way width from centerline. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage,and street trees. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 26 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The additional right-of-way along the Hall Boulevard frontage should be provided. 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 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% tor 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. The existing development patterns do not provide an opportunity for a street extension. Cul-de-sacs: 18.810.030.L states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and through circulation: • All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other than circular,shall be approved by the City Engineer and • The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured from the centerline intersection point of the two streets to the radius point of the bulb,and • If a cul-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 . The proposed development will get access of SW Warner, which terminates in an existing cul-de-sac. No new cul-de-sacs are proposed. Access to Arterials and Major Collectors: Section 18.810.030.Q states that where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing or proposed arterial or major 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: • A parallel access street along the arterial or major collector, • Lots of suitable depth abutting the arterial or major collector to provide adequate buffering with frontage along another street; • Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a non-access reservation along the arterial or major collector, or • Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection; • If a lot has access to two streets with objectives classifications, primary access should be from the lower classification street. Access to Hall Boulevard,an arterial,is limited to emergency access. Private Streets: Section 18.810.030.T states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a recorded maintenance agreement. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned developments, mobile home parks, and multi-family residential developments. No private streets are proposed. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 27 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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 Tor convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or, . For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. The extension of SW Warner Avenue would typically merit a street connection west to SW Hall Boulevard to meet block size requirements, but is not possible at this tune. Properties to the west of this site contain existing developments and do not share ownership with the subject site. 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 oosible. 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. For the same reasons a street connection is not possible, a bicycle and pedestrian connection is not possible at this time. The connection would need to cross properties which do not share ownership with the subject site. 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. The arcel is pre-existing, and the applicant is not proposing to create any new parcels. This standard is satisfied. 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. The parcel is pre-existing and has approximately 32 feet of frontage onto SW Hall Blvd. 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. Existing sidewalk is provided along the cul-de-sac bulb on Warner Avenue. The future street guarantee for Hall Boulevard provides for future sidewalks along this frontage. 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. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 28 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Service to the development is proposed to be provided by an existing line in SW Warner Avenue. No extension of a public rule is proposed. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Service to the development is proposed to be provided by an existing line in SW Warner Avenue. No extension of a public fine is proposed. 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 developpment. 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 Resolution and Order 07-20 and including any future revisions or amendments). There is no significant upstream drainage to the site. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility,the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective imppe_rvious 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. Required on-site detention is shown on the plans and preliminary calculations have been submitted. A proprietary water quality facility is proposed. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric,lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructedprior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development . The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under- 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 29 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER groundinK 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 opposite site of Hall Boulevard. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. If proposed, it must be approved by Mike McCarthy (503-718-2462). The frontage along this site is 32.00 lineal feet;therefore the fee,if approved,would be $1,120. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant shall submit plans for review and approval to the Water District prior to issuance of permits. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of permits, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for the proposed water quality stormfilter that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall rovide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching,the public storm and surface water system resulting from development construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CW5 regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. Permeable Paving: To be excluded from the detention and water quality requirements imposed on impermeable surfaces, permeable paving surfaces must be designed, constructed and maintained to the Low Impact Development Standards of Clean Water Services. The applicant's engineer shall provide these calculations to CityEngineer staff for review and approval. Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water,sewer,storm,etc.) and driveway construction. Address Assignments: 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 issuance of building permits. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 30 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER D. IMPACT STUDY: Section 18.390.040.B.2.e 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 standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. The applicant has submitted an impact study addressing the required elements above. The report substantiates that all services are capable of serving the site. The applicant has proposed to make the necessary improvements. The improvements proposed by the applicant are required to meet minimum standards to comply with street and utility improvement standards, without which, approval could not be granted. 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 property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which 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's site plan (Sheet A-100) shows the required dedication and, therefore, specifically concurs with the dedication requirement. The site has approximately 30 feet of frontage along SW Hall Blvd. Twenty-five feet of right-of-way dedication is required to meet current standards. ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS The Washington County Transportation Development Tax (TDT - effective July 1, 2009) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on Washington County figures TDTs are expected to recapture 28 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The applicant will be required to pay TDTs of approximately $66,990. (Effective July 1, 2009) Based on the estimate that total TDT fees cover 28 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $239,250 ($66,990 divided by .28). The difference between the 'I )T paid, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the street system;therefore the unmitigated impact of this project is $172,260 ($239,250- $66,990). Less mitigated costs Besides the TDT that mitigates for 28% of the projects im act on the transportation system, the applicant is required to dedicate additional right-of-way along SW Hall Blvd. (750 square feet). The estimated value of the dedication is fifteen dollars a square foot for a total value of $11,250. The applicant is also required to pay a fee in-lieu for half street improvements for the 32-foot frontage section ofpSW Hall Blvd. At an approximate cost of $700 per lineal foot,the improvements are valued at$22,400. Estimated Value of Impacts Full Imppact $239,250 Less 'LW Assessment - 66,990 Dedicated right-of-way... ... ... ... - 11,250 Fee In-Lieu of Frontage Improvements - 22.400 Estimated Value of Unmitigated Impacts $ 138,610 FINDING: Using the above cost factors,it can be determined that the unmitigated impacts exceed the costs of the conditions imposed and,therefore,the conditions are proportionally justified. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 31 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Public Works Department has reviewed this application and recommended that the proposed detention pipe (Sheet C4) include manhole access at each end to properly maintain the facility. The City of Tigard Engineering Department was sent this proposal for review and the comments have been incorporated in sections 18.705 and 18.810 of this report. City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and commented that they have no objections. City of Tigard Arborist has reviewed this application and the comments have been included in sections 18.745 and 18.795 of this report. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: Tualatin Valley Fire &Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required if the remaining distance to an approved intersecting roadway, as measured along the fire apparatus access road,is greater than 150 feet. (IFC 503.1.1) We are comfortable with the lack of a compliant fire apparatus access roadway along the side of the building facing Highway 217. This is due to the building being built out of noncombustible construction, equipped with a complete automatic sprinkler system installed throughout the structure, and compartmented storage rooms. 2) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the fire code official. (IFC 503.1.1) 3) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. (IFC D103.6) All portions of the apparatus access roadways shown on the submitted drawings must be adequately posted. 4) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 60,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. (IFC D102.1) 5) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 si, whichever is less as calculated using IFC.,, Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required faire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (IFC B105.2) Fire flow demand calculations must be submitted to and approved by this office before we will endorse the issuance of any site development or building permits. 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 32 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 6) FIRE HYDRANTS - COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road,as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the buLding, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. (IFC 508.5.1) The proposed design meets this requirement. 7) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C,Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may as follows: Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinlders may contribute to the required number of hydrants. We can't determine the minimum number of required fire hydrants until the fire flow demand calculations are submitted. However, there are other fire hydrants near the site that may be considered. The proposed truck parking space near the existing transformer on the southeast side of the structure obstructs the required existing fire hydrant. This design for the truck parking is therefore not approved. 8) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line,then assume a centerline,and place the reflectors accordingly. (IFC 508.5.4) 9) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. FDCs stall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. (IFC 912.2) The fire department connection must be remote from the building. The submitted design shows the lire department connection attached to the side of the building. This is not acceptable. 1o) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (IFC 1410.1 &1412.1) 11) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. (IFC 506) Verizon commented on the subject proposal that the received plans do not indicate any phone facilities requiring relocations or changes.The applicant will need to contact Verizon with phone requirements such as alarm and elevator phones though. Clean Water Services issued a Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment (File 08-000353) that concluded no significant impact to potentially significant sensitive areas near the site. In addition, CWS commented on the proposal in a letter dated July 1, 2009, which stipulates conditions to be met prior to authorization of a storm water connection permit. These conditions will be satisfied as a condition of the land use approval. Oregon Department of Transportation commented on the subject proposal requiring the applicant to obtain the applicable approach,miscellaneous, and drainage permits for the proposed emergency access to SW Hall Blvd(ODOYComment Letter,6/30/09). 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 33 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Tualatin Valley Water District, Portland General Electric, Northwest Natural Gas Company, Comcast Cable Corporation, and Tri-Met Transit Development were given the opportunity to review this proposal and submitted no comments or objections. la , `7 August 17,2009 PREPARED BY Gary 'agenstec er DATE Assoc ate Planner 217 SELF STORAGE PHASE II PAGE 34 OF 34 8/24/09 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER E'i-- VICINITY MAP MO 7(— � W E ! OEQ VAIQ � o� r— VA R2009-00006 ' ■I PFAFFLE ST �cc ;\____ VA R2009-00007 VAR2009-00008 VAR2009-00009 Mil ' f J 217 SELF-STORAGE ul IIII ila F > t 1 �� Q Subject Site \___\\---t `a L L I AWI qr c� < Id—. 217 . r r c I_ LI 1 Li \\\ ` l �.III. j 5, f� i__,� .. 1. , Li \ p ~ 5, L m l I — r- e- I J r'ytA '',, •'' ---+ I m I I z ( 1.......____--..11 9 I 1 O j Information on this map Is for general location II , only and should be veriRed with the Development _ II l \,,...- •s Services Division. � ` S .77- Scale 1:3,320-tin=277 ft II -_-\ ,j Map printed at 12-Jun-09 02:49 PM L � � I� — S rtt DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES THE CITY TIGARD i O, _ — �� r MNCES NO WARRANTY.REPRESENTATION LINESS CO PL OR TENESS OF N O THE CONTENT,ACCURACY,WARRANTY. OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE G".7.--- DATA PROVIDED HEREIN THE CITY OF TIGARD SHALL ASSUME NO V- LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS,OMISSIONS,OR INACCURACIES IN THE ^ -' 'F�''� .�.�` It _ J INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED OFF �9fi11 o 'yBG' ,511 I '..aq 'ti's O 13125 SW Hall Blvd s % +�: _ Sa S Tigard,OR 97223 � �C ..-\ " 916' MP 5 \ L ,�` 1w��j�A� 503 639-4171 • .�. _ • i ~�Ik .F -1 276ft www.Ugardor.gov -� l r, rILARn 1 2 9 4 1-1-11_1-1-1-1 13SN $ - _ V -- u••..•+rO.t j 55�- -E .....6' -_-- 3 __ rssme...r�e..er ��d..co ono A - ��ir , � its new we A S8 4065 III I EXISTING Ern OF ' �. n HARED . III —/ �:::. _ :,��\ I/�j�DRIVEWA �� 11 / 'r �\ •" _ a 11 111�1 ' /_U r.o..�, v ... 11311.118.10011 n ��� /. A;,/ /// RECEIVED D }�� waoeOenrorx.a+ wtmaQ Ur m /9 H /� � JUN 0 3 l0( / :'11�11t1 &a II :�' •I":r• r /„ �. �.. 4: i;:l I _ CITY OF fluAF) kit 1f:•:•1••c 111111:11:g PLANNif.U(c NiiN-ER lh G West Fasalan III.a....e rMar.u.. ...11" --'="444:kr. '-' 11,11:•••1•: L1 .i- I ..�. � 121.1.1:1::. yv O,, I. IIII \ `, Z:,� .\ I —E.r.m NOM never \. ��_. 1 •o won..onam .iaewwrtmamrnr • - \: • J MIS \ . \\ I sa ' PROJECT INFO. O EASEMENT PLAN HENRY Y.LOUIE -._ ` \���� •a �,`` re.MOa.•eea.wreerua.w..rOrO.a. .uei res DRAWING IBEX .aro:OREGON ma \d �rou,,,, r>!y I Ptt v MIX srt�ew�wo..rl _. 7r ` �'` `�''8\ . �` m�•CO �LO°�°"' IaI 217SELFSTORAGE rron..a,.e,.e,Man.l.erSP.•R(RrV V algae 0001 nwE, wnr.a.alnrrruw M.Ir$.4.11/.0. �I` � anawr.oeeaOn /..., eMOUrtMaw•iMSt.s..e..len sru �' mwO.aa.eM mm ` ` iri _� asocia•OWN stuns a WI PUPS nw •\ _ ` ` rasa a nmaeEwaew,a or+cn . ` Prom rorrranrMa.InrE nasa•aesV.a•sea V. n MRlMn�neeMOr.meew ••.. `sue ■ .nw. •.s...NOUN..MO MAN Ee..oremrm a •eaream urox.,ve..nu SITE PLAN MOM MOM•81181'Ma IMMO NOWT P810101010 A NAT LMOM'N. OM TOME WSW WISE MTOJSCT.wan,eMO.eq ONASSOv.ACCESS. Lea rtMAMrUi. MOMxrara WTI E eoe.®METrenenwt v.wowwa«e MASS e �—: - ^ �s tism nerr MOON PLAN CONCSTIONAL APPLICATION O O e� ; ; liar A-100 ` VICINITY MAP rulaav � TOTAL MANSE WM PROMOS . n.n M.e. mS0011 OOHS. I I I ` 1l Jt. .,injee Circosta Architt. _ 4ure, LLP t Architecture • Planning • Urban Design Conditional Use Application 217 Self-Storage - Phase II 11600 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RECEIVED JUN 0 3 /iJUy CITY OF TIGARD PL.ANN1NG/ENGINEERING Prepared by Jivanjee Circosta Architecture, LLP June 6, 2009 JCA project No. 0790 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Ad wy., Portland, Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 Table of Contents Reports: 01 - Land Use Permit Application 02 — Deed of Trust 03 — Summary of Proposal 04 — Conditional Use Narrative 05 — Easements 06 —Variances and Adjustments 07 — Neighborhood Meeting 08 — Service Provider Letters 09 — Impact Study 10 — Pre-Application Conference Notes 11 — Preliminary Sight Distance 12 — Preliminary Storm Calculations 13 —Arborist Report 14 — Geo-Tech Report 15 —Traffic Report Drawings: A-100 Site Plan and Info 1 of 1 80104 Site Survey CO — Cover Sheet C1 — Existing Conditions C2 — Site Plan C3 — Grading and Erosion Control C4 — Storm Sewer Plan C5 — Sanitary Sewer and Water Plan C6 — Storm Filter Catch Basin Detail L-100 — Planting Plan A-101 — Floor Plan A-102 — Floor Plan A-201 - Elevations 09-27-44948 Exterior Lighting 01 - Land Use Permit Application PRE-APP.HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION I In LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION City jTigard Permit Center 13125 SW Hall Blul, Tigarg OR 97223 Phone 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 File# Other Case# Date By Receipt# Fee Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR SAdjustment/Variance(I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone Change(III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) ❑Planned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation(IV) igf Conditional'Use (III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑ Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑Site Development Review(II) ❑ Home Occupation(II) ❑Subdivision(II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY WILL OCCUR(Address if available) We OO Slr3 }1A.1. StAm. l'APA vD, OF, °"11..4 TAX MAPS&TAX LOT NOS. k Ob 100 TOTAL SITE SIZE ZONING CLASSIFICATION APPLICANT' ■V•cvJ,5e G1Kc-„ 4jTA I -n)g MAILING ADDRESS/QTY/STATE/ZIP C °SS St,J t vE12:10 — 4�11.1✓SVAL- HwY. p TLfl1N)r) 1 OR \-1225 PHONE NO. FAX NO. �D3 (21-7 -S1 too 50 - 26)1 _ PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON PHONE NO. r)0 9 G It 15174t- 6 211 - G 1 leo PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) 1A. k) '".t' ” 1--oO1 MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP 1�J Ce,Co G L W 1'i201'11 9-A GF -1"1 Ci P1RD 01Z. PHONE-NO. FAX NO. GO-) - 1'ID - (04-D - 29-1 - itP 'When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with writtei authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this fore or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) ' 4\ Il O 2l"1 Lf`71012-114 , ± 1617 51"ONMf DK) 1T' '5 59)10()D an I i2 .we. feet APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS A DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. is\curpin\masters\land use applications\land use permit app.doc THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan,attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED.'-- -`27- 62r--- . 7 Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date S.• ature • Date . �� Ce DI "pliP!a Agent/Representative s Signature Dace Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date 02 - Deed of Trust After recording,please return to: ACCOUNT SERVICING 1&� P. 0. BOX 218 MEDFORD, OR 97501 WratiltbUitddmnocatuOdikal htkdtU1A16t Until a change is requested,all tax statements should be mailed to: SAME AS CURRENTLY ON FILE. PROMISSORY NOTE and ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED 01?TRUST Date: January 15,2008 Among: Henry Y.Louie ("Grantor") 13665 SW 130th Place Tigard,OR 97223 and: Salvador and Sandra Espana ("Beneficiary") 13341 NW Berry Creek Road McMinnville,OR 97128-7926 and: Transnation Title and Insurance Company,a Nebraska corporation ("Trustee") Washington Square Branch 10220 SW Greenburg Road,Suite 100 Portland,OR 97223 Grantor,in consideration of the indebtedness recited and the trust created in this Trust Deed, irrevocably grants and conveys to Trustee,in trust, with power of sale,the real property located in Washington County,Oregon,which is more particularly described in attached Exhibit A,which is incorporated herein by this reference(the"Land"); TOGETHER with all the improvements now or hereafter erected on the Land, and all easements,rights,appurtenances, rents (subject however to the rights and authorities given in this Trust Deed to Beneficiary to collect and apply such rents),royalties,mineral,oil and gas rights and profits,water,water rights, and water stock,and all fixtures now or hereafter attached to the Land, all of which,including replacements and additions thereto,shall be deemed to be and remain a part of the property covered by this Trust Deed; and all of the foregoing, together with the Land are referred to in this Trust Deed as the"Property;" 1—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST • FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECURING: (1)Performance of each agreement of Grantor herein contained. (2) Payment of the indebtedness evidenced in this All-Inclusive Trust Deed in the principal sum of Four Hundred Seventy Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars($475,000.00),in the amounts and with interest thereon as provided in Section 1 of this Trust Deed,and with the balance of the indebtedness,if not sooner paid, due and payable no later than January 14, 2010; (3)the repayment of any and all other indebtedness owing from Grantor to Beneficiary at any time hereafter,(4)the repayment of all other sums,with interest thereon,advanced in accordance with the terms of this Trust Deed to protect the security of this Trust Deed;and(5)the performance of the covenants and agreements of Grantor contained in this Trust Deed(the"Obligations"). UNDERLYING OBLIGATION: This is an all-inclusive purchase money deed of trust,and is subject and subordinate to the following instruments: (1) A promissory note in the original sum of THREE HUNDRED FORTY THOUSAND and NO/100 DOLLARS ($340,000.00) in favor of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("Senior Note"), secured by a deed of trust recorded February 2, 2007, as Document No. 2007013007 of the Official Reoords of Washington County, Oregon. TO PROTECT THE SECURITY OF THIS ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST GRANTOR COVENANTS that(a)Grantor is lawfully seized of the estate conveyed by this Trust Deed and has the right to grant and convey the Property;(b)the Property is unencumbered, except for the prior liens of record as of the date of this Trust Deed("Prior Liens"),and any other exceptions of record as of the date of this Trust Deed approved by Beneficiary (the "Permitted Exceptions");and(c)Grantor will warrant and defend the title to the Property against all claims and demands,subject to any Prior Liens,the lien of this Trust Deed,and the Permitted Exceptions. Grantor and Beneficiary covenant and agree as follows: 1. Payment of Principal and Interest. Grantor shall promptly pay when due the principal and interest on the indebtedness and the principal of and interest on arty other advances secured by this Trust Deed as follows: 1.1 Grantor agrees to a down payment to Beneficiary in the amount of Sixty 'Thousand and No/100 Dollars($60,000.00)as the down payment,with the balance of the purchase price due and payable with interest at the annual rate of seven percent(7%); 1.2 Grantor to pay Second Payment of Forty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($40,000.00) on or before June 16, 2008 and a Third Payment of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00)on or before June 16,2009; 1.3 Grantor agrees to pay the remaining balance of all principal and interest on the indebtedness and on any other advances no later than January 14,2010; 2—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST • 1.4 Grantor agrees to pay interest at the rate of fourteen percent (14%) for any principal or interest on the indebtedness and on advances owing after January 14,2010 until paid. 2. ,Prepayment;Application of Payments. Grantor may prepay all or any portion of the balance secured by this Trust Deed any time without penalty; provided, however, excess payments or prepayment shall not excuse Grantor from making any payment provided in Section 1 provided above. All payments shall be applied first to interest to the date of payment and then to principal. 3. Taxes,Assessments and Liens. Grantor shall pay all taxes,assessments,and other charges,fines and impositions attributable to the Property which may attain a priority over this Trust Deed, and leasehold payments or ground rents (if any) by Grantor making payments, when due, directly to the payee thereof. Grantor shall promptly furnish to Beneficiary all notices of amounts due under this Section 3, if requested by Beneficiary, and Grantor shall promptly furnish to Beneficiary receipts evidencing such payments.Grantor may pay taxes and assessments pursuant to the assessor's installment schedule. Grantor shall promptly discharge any lien which has priority over this Trust Deed, except any Prior Liens; provided, that Grantor shall not be required to discharge any such lien so long as Grantor shall agree in writing to the payment of the obligation secured by such lien in a manner acceptable to Beneficiary, in Beneficiary's sole and unfettered discretion,or shall in good faith contest such lien by,or defend enforcement of such lien in,legal proceedings that operate to prevent the enforcement of the lien or forfeiture of the Property or any part thereof. 4. Insurance. 4.1 Requirement to Maintain Property Insurance. Grantor shall obtain and maintain at all times"all risk"property insurance,together with endorsements for replacement cost, inflation adjustment,and all other endorsements as Beneficiary may from time to time require,all in amounts not less than the full replacement value of all improvements now existing or hereafter erected on the Property,without reduction for co-insurance. 4.2 Requirement to Maintain Liability Insurance. Grantor shall obtain and maintain at all times comprehensive general liability insurance with limits, coverages, and risks insured that are acceptable to Beneficiary, and in no event less than 51,000,000 combined single limit coverage. 4.3 Insurance Carrier;Premium Payments. The insurance carrier or carriers providing the insurance shall be chosen by Grantor subject to approval by Beneficiary. All premiums on insurance policies shall be paid by Grantor making payment,when due,directly to the insurance carrier. 4.4 Form of Policies; Proof of Loss. All insurance policies and renewals thereof shall be in forms acceptable to Beneficiary and shall include a standard mortgage clause in favor of and in a fonn acceptable to Beneficiary. Subject to the rights of any Prior Lienholders(as defined below in Section 18), Beneficiary shall have the right to hold the policies and renewals thereof,and Grantor shall promptly furnish to Beneficiary all renewal notices and all receipts of 3—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST • paid premiums. In the event of loss,Grantor shall give prompt notice to the insurance carrier and Beneficiary. Beneficiary may make proof of loss if not made promptly by Grantor. 4.5 Proceeds. Unless Beneficiary and Grantor otherwise agree in writing, insurance proceeds shall be applied to restoration of the Property damaged, if restoration is economically feasible based upon fixed bids for restoration from the insurance proceeds, but if restoration is not economically feasible the insurance proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Trust Deed,subject to the rights of any Prior Lienholders. If the Property is abandoned by Grantor,or if Grantor fails to respond to Beneficiary within 30 days from the date notice is mailed by Beneficiary to Grantor indicating that the insurance carrier offers to settle a claim for insurance benefits, Beneficiary is authorized to collect and apply the Insurance proceeds at Beneficiary's option to restoration of the Property or to the sums secured by this Trust Deed. 4.6 No Postponement of Payments: Right to Proceeds. Unless Beneficiary and Grantor otherwise agree in writing, any such application of proceeds to principal shall not extend or postpone the due date of any payments referred to in Section 1 of this Trust Deed or change the amount of such payments. If under Section 15 of this Trust Deed the Property is acquired by Beneficiary,all right,title and interest of Grantor in and to any insurance policies and in and to the proceeds thereof resulting from damage to the Property prior to the sale or acquisition shall pass to Beneficiary to the extent of the sums secured by this Trust Deed immediately prior to such sale or acquisition. 4.7 Insurance Warning. Unless Grantor provides Beneficiary with evidence of the insurance coverage required by this Trust Deed,Beneficiary may purchase insurance at Grantor's expense to protect Beneficiary's interest. This insurance may, but need not, also protect Grantor's Interest. If the Property becomes damaged, the coverage Beneficiary purchases may not pay any claim Grantor makes or any claim made against Grantor. Grantor may later cancel this coverage by providing evidence that Grantor has obtained property coverage elsewhere. Grantor is responsible for the cost of any insurance purchased by Beneficiary.The cost of this insurance may be added to Grantor's loan balance.If•the cost is added to Grantor's loan balance,the interest rate on the underlying loan will apply to this added amount. The effective data of coverage may be the date Grantor's prior coverage lapsed or the date Grantor failed to provide proof of coverage. The coverage Beneficiary purchases may be considerably more expensive than insurance Grantor can obtain on its own and may not satisfy any need for property damage coverage or any mandatory liability insurance requirements imposed by applicable law. 5. Compliance with Laws.Grantor represents,warrants,and covenants that Grantor and its operations upon the Property currently comply,and will hereafter comply in all material respects with all applicable laws,statutes,ordinances,regulations,and codes of all federal,state, 4—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST and local governments and all covenants, conditions, easements, and restrictions affecting the Property. 6. Environmental Covenants,Warranties and Compliance. 6.1 Environmental Law Definition. For purposes of this section, "Environmental Law" means any federal, state, or local law, statute, ordinance, or regulation pertaining to Hazardous Substances, health, industrial hygiene, or environmental conditions, including without limitation the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA"), as amended, 42 USC §9601-9675, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976("RCRA"),as amended,42 USC§§6901-6992. 6.2 Hazardous Substance Definition. For the purposes of this section, "Hazardous Substance"includes,without limitation,any material, substance,or waste that is or becomes regulated or that is or becomes classified as hazardous, dangerous, or toxic under any federal,state,or local statute,ordinance,rule,regulation,or law. 6.3 No Generation or Use. Grantor will not use, generate, manufacture, produce,store,release,discharge,or dispose of on,under or about the Property or the Property's groundwater,or transport to or from the Property,any Hazardous Substance and will not permit any other person to do so, except for such Hazardous Substances that may be used in the ordinary course of Grantor's business and in compliance with all Environmental Laws,including but not limited to those relating to licensure,notice,and recordkeeping. 6.4 Compliance with Law, Grantor will keep and maintain the Property in compliance with, and shall not cause or permit all or any portion of the Property, including groundwater,to be in violation of any Environmental Law. 6.5 Indemnification. Grantor shall hold Beneficiary and their heirs, successors,and assigns,harmless from,indemnify them for,and defend them against any and all losses, damages, liens, costs, expenses, and liabilities directly or indirectly arising out of or attributable to any violation by Grantor of any Environmental Law, any breach by Grantor of Grantor's warranties in this Section 6,or the use, generation,manufacture,production, storage, release,threatened release,discharge,disposal by Grantor,or presence of a Hazardous Substance on, under, or about the Property, including without limitation the costs of any required repair, cleanup,containment, or detoxification of the Property, the preparation and implementation of any closure,remedial or other required plans, attorney fees and costs(including but not limited to those incurred in any proceeding and in any review or appeal),fees,penalties,and fines. 6.6 Survival. All representations,warranties,and covenants in this Section 6 shall survive the satisfaction of the Obligations, the reconveyance of the Property, or the foreclosure of this Trust Deed by nay means. 7. Preservation and Maintenance of Property. Grantor shall keep the Property in good repair and shall not commit waste or permit impairment or deterioration of the Property. 5—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST $, Protection of Beneficiary's Security. 8.1 Appearances; Disbursements. If Grantor fails to perform the covenants and agreements contained in this Trust Deed, or, notwithstanding Section 3 of this Trust Deed,if any action or proceeding is commenced which materially affects Beneficiary's interest in the Property,including,but not limited to,construction lien foreclosure,eminent domain,insolvency, code enforcement, or arrangements or proceedings involving a bankrupt or decedent, then Beneficiary,at Beneficiary's option,may make such appearances,disburse such sums and take such action as is necessary io protect Beneficiary's interest,including,but not limited to,disbursement of reasonable costs and attorney fees,and entry upon the Property to make repairs. 8.2 Interest on Disbursements. Any amounts disbursed by Beneficiary pursuant to this Section 8, with interest thereon, shall become additional indebtedness of Grantor secured by this Trust Deed. Unless Grantor and Beneficiary agree to other terms of payment,such amounts shall be payable upon notice from Beneficiary to Grantor requesting payment thereof,and shall bear interest from the date of disbursement at the rate of 15 percent per annum,unless payment of interest at such rate would be contrary to applicable law,in which event such amounts shall bear interest at the highest rate permissible under applicable law. Nothing contained in this Section 8 shall require Beneficiary to incur any expense or take any action under this Trust Deed. 9. Inspection. Beneficiary may make or cause to be made reasonable entries upon and inspections of the Property during business hours after prior written notice. 10. Condemnation. 10.1 Assignment of Proceeds. The proceeds of any award or claim for damages, direct or consequential, in connection with condemnation or other taking of the Property, or part thereof, or for conveyance in lieu of condemnation, are hereby assigned rind shall be paid to Beneficiary,subject to the rights of the holder of any Prior Lienholders. 10.2 Total and Partial Taking. In the event of a total taking of the Property,the proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by any Prior Liens and this Trust Deed, with the excess,if any,paid to Grantor. In the event of a partial taking of the Property,unless Grantor and Beneficiary otherwise agree in writing,there shall be applied to the sums secured by this Trust Deed such proportion of the proceeds as is equal to that proportion which the amount of the sums secured by this Trust Deed immediately prior to the date of taking bears to the fair market value of the Property immediately prior to the date of taking with the balance of the proceeds paid to Grantor. 10.3 Property is Abandoned;Failure to Respond. If the Property is abandoned by Grantor,or if,after notice by Beneficiary to Grantor that the condemnor offers to make an award or settle a claim for damages,Grantor fails to respond to Beneficiary within thirty(30)days after the date such notice is mailed, Beneficiary is authorized to collect and apply the proceeds, at Beneficiary's option,either to restoration or repair of the Property or to the sums secured by this Trust Deed. 10.4 No Postponement of Payments. Unless Beneficiary and Grantor otherwise agree in writing,any such application of proceeds to principal shall not extend or postpone the due 6—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST • date of any payments referred to in Section 1 of this Trust Deed or change the amount of such payments. 11. Grantor Not Released. Extension of the time for payment or modification of amortization of the sums secured by this Trust Deed granted by Beneficiary to any successor in interest of Grantor shall not operate to release, in any manner,the liability of the original Grantor and Grantor's successors in interest. Beneficiary shall not be required to commence proceedings against such successor,refuse to extend time for payment,or otherwise modify amortization of the sums secured by this Trust Deed by reason of any demand made by the original Grantor or Grantor's successors in interest. 12. Forbearance by Beneficiary Not a Waiver. Any forbearance by Beneficiary in exercising any right or remedy under this Trust Deed,or otherwise afforded by applicable law,shall not be a waiver of or preclude the exercise of any such right or remedy. The procurement of insurance or the payment of taxes or other liens or charges by Beneficiary shall not be a waiver of Beneficiary's right to accelerate the maturity of the indebtedness secured by this Trust Deed. 13. Remedies Cumulative. All remedies provided in this Trust Deed are distinct and cumulative to any other right or remedy under this Trust Deed or afforded by law or equity, and may be exercised concurrently,independently or successively. 14. pue on Sale. If all or any part of the Property or any interest in the Property is sold, transferred,assigned,conveyed,pledged,hypothecated,or given,either voluntarily or involuntarily, or by operation of law,without Beneficiary's prior written consent,or in the event of a default with respect to any Prior Liens,or if any lien or encumbrance subordinate to the lien of this Trust Deed is placed or allowed to remain on the Property which adversely affects the lien of this Trust Deed, Beneficiary may, at Beneficiary's option, declare all the sums secured by this Trust Deed to be immediately due and payable,and seek any and all other remedies available under this Trust Deed, or under applicable law. 15. Default and Remedies. 15.1 Events of Default. Each of the following shall constitute an event of default under this Trust Deed; 15.1.1 Nonpayment. Failure of Grantor to pay any of the Obligations on or before the due date and within any applicable cure period. 15.1.2 Breach of Other Covenants. Failure of Grantor to perform or abide by any other covenant included in the Obligations,including without limitation those covenants in this Trust Deed or in any other loan document or agreement between Grantor and Beneficiary and the failure to cure any such nonperformance within any applicable cure period. 15.2 Remedies. 15.2.1 Acceleration. Upon Grantor's breach of any covenant or agreement of Grantor in this Trust Deed, including the covenants to pay when due any sums secured by this 7--ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST • Trust Deed,Beneficiary, at Beneficiary's option following ten (10) days' prior written notice to Grantor,may declare all of the sums secured by this Trust Deed to be immediately due and payable without further demand and may invoke the power of sale and any other remedies permitted by applicable law. 15.2.2 Sate by Trustee. If Beneficiary invokes the power of sale, Beneficiary shall execute or cause Trustee to execute a written notice of the occurrence of an event of default and of Beneficiary's election to cause the Property to be sold,and shall cause such notice to be recorded in each county in which the Property or some part of the Property is located. Beneficiary or Trustee shall give notice of sale in the manner prescribed by applicable law to Grantor and to the other persons prescribed by applicable law. After the lapse of such time as may be required by applicable law,Trustee,without demand on Grantor,shall sell the Property at public auction to the highest bidder at the time and place and under the terms designated in the notice of sale in one or more parcels and in such order as Trustee may determine. Trustee may postpone sale of all or any parcel of the Property by public announcement at the time and place of any previously scheduled sale. Beneficiary or Beneficiary's designee may purchase the Property at any sale. 15.2.3 Trustee's Deed. Trustee shall deliver to the purchaser Trustee's deed conveying the Property so sold without any covenant or wananty,expressed or implied. The recitals In the Trustee's deed shall be prima facie evidence of the truth of the statements made therein. Tnistee shall apply the proceeds of the sale In the following order: (a)to all reasonable costs and expenses of the sale,including,but not limited to,reasonable Trustee and attorney fees and costs of title evidence;(b)to all sums secured by any Prior Liens;(c)to all sums secured by this Trust Deed;and(d)the excess(if any)to the person or persons legally entitled thereto. 15.2.4 Other Remedies; Beneficiary may exercise any other rights or remedies available to Beneficiary under this Trust Deed or any other loan document or agreement between Grantor and Beneficiary,or otherwise allowed under applicable law. 15:2.5 Cumulative Remedies. All remedies under this Trust Deed are cumulative and not exclusive.Any election to pursue one remedy shall-not preclude the exercise of any other remedy. An election by Beneficiary to cure shall not constitute a waiver of the default or of any of the remedies provided in this Trust Deed.No delay or omission in exercising any right Or remedy shall impair the full exercise of that or any other right or remedy or constitute a waiver of the default. 15.2.6 Costs and Expenses, Beneficiary shall be entitled to collect all reasonable costs and expenses incurred in pursuing the remedies provided in this Section 15, including,but not limited to,reasonable costs and attorney fees,as provided below in Section 21.5. 16. Grantor's Right to Reinstate. Notwithstanding Beneficiary's acceleration of the Obligations secured by this Trust Deed,Grantor shall have the right to reinstate this Trust Deed if all payments are made to Beneficiary as required under applicable Oregon law and Grantor takes such action as Beneficiary may reasonably require to assure that the lien of this Trust Deed, Beneficiary's interest in the Property and Grantor's obligation to pay the sums secured by this Trust Deed shall continue unimpaired. Upon such payment and cure by Grantor,this Trust Deed and the 8—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST Obligations secured by this Trust Deed shall remain in full force and effect as if no acceleration had occurred. 17. Assignment of Rents;Appointment of Receiver;Beneficiary in Possession. As additional security under this Trust Deed, Grantor hereby assigns to Beneficiary the rents of the Property(if any),provided that Grantor shall,prior to acceleration under Section 15 of this Trust Deed or abandonment of the Property,have the right to collect and retain such rents as they become due and payable. Upon acceleration under Section 15 of this Trust Deed or abandonment of the Property,Beneficiary, in person, by agent or by judicially appointed receiver, shall be entitled to enter upon,take possession of and manage the Property and to collect the rents of the Property(if any), including those past due. All rents collected by Beneficiary or the receiver shall be applied first to payment of the costs of management of the Property and collection of rents,including but not limited to,receiver fees,premiums on receiver's bonds and reasonable attorney fees and costs, and to the sums secured by this Trust Deed. Beneficiary and the receiver shall be liable to account only for those rents actually received. 18. Reconveyance. Upon payment of all sums secured by this Trust Deed,Beneficiary shall request Trustee to teconvey the Property and shall surrender this Trust Deed to Trustee. Trustee shall reconvey the Property without warranty and without charge to the person or persons legally entitled thereto, Such person or persons shall pay all costs of recordation,if any. 19. Mutual Agreement of the Parties, The Grantor and Beneficiary agree as follows: 19.1 By Beneficiary's acceptance of this All-Inclusive Dee of Trust,Beneficiary agrees that provided Grantor is not in default under the terms of this Trust Deed,Beneficiary shall pay all installments of principal and interest which shall become due under the terms of the Senior Note. In the event Grantor shall be in default under the Trust Deed,Beneficiary's obligation under the Senior Note is deferred until Grantor's default is cured. In the event Beneficiary fails to timely pay any installment of principal or interest on the Senior Note at the time when Grantor is not delinquent or in default under the terms secured hereby, Grantor may, at Grantor's option make such payments directly to the holder of the Senior Note,in which event Grantor shall be entitled to a credit against the next installment(s) of principal and interest due under the terms of the Trust Deed secured hereby equal to the amount so paid and including, without limitation, any penalty, charges and expenses paid by Grantor to the holder of the Senior Note on account of Beneficiary's failing to make such payment. The obligations of Beneficiary hereunder shall terminate upon the earliest of(i)foreclosure of the lien of this All-Inclusive Deed of Trust,or(ii) reconveyance of this All-Inclusive Deed of Trust. Should Grantor be delinquent or in default under the terms secured hereby, Beneficiary consequently incurs any penalties, charges, or other expenses on account of the Senior Note during the period of such delinquency or default, the amount of such penalties, charges and expenses shall be immediately added to the principal amount secured hereby and shall be immediately payable by Grantor to Beneficiary. If at any time the unpaid balance secured hereby, accrued interest thereon,and all other sums due pursuant to the terms thereof and all sums advanced by beneficiary pursuant to the terms of this Deed of Trust, is equal to or less than the unpaid principal balance of the Senior 9—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST Note and accrued interest thereon, the Deed or Trust, at the option of Beneficiary, shall be canceled and said property shall be reconveyed from the lien. 19.2 Should Grantor be delinquent or in default under the terms secured hereby, Beneficiary consequently incurs any penalties, charges, or other expenses on account of the Senior Note during the period of such delinquency or default, the amount of such penalties, charges and expenses shall be immediately added to the principal amount'secured hereby and shall be immediately payable by Grantor to Beneficiary. If at any time the unpaid balance secured hereby, accrued interest thereon,and all other sums due pursuant to the terms thereof and all sums advanced by beneficiary pursuant to the terms of this Deed of Trust,is equal to or less than the unpaid principal balance of the Senior Note and accrued interest thereon,secured hereby,at the option of Beneficiary,shall be canceled and said property shall be reconveyed from the lien of this Deed of Trust. 19.3 Grantor and Beneficiary agree that in the event the proceeds of any condemnation award or settlement in lieu thereof, or the proceeds of any casualty insurance covering destructible improvements located upon said property,are applied by the holder of the Senior Note in reduction of the unpaid principal amount thereof,the unpaid principal balance of secured hereby shall be reduced by an equivalent amount. 19.4 Any demand hereunder delivered by Beneficiary to Trustee for the foreclosure of the lien of this Deed of Trust may be not more than the sum of the following amounts; (a) The difference between the then unpaid balance of principal and interest on this Trust Deed secured hereby and the then unpaid balance of principal and interest on the Senior Note;plus (b)The aggregate of all amounts theretofore paid by Beneficiary pursuant to the terms of this Deed of Trust prior to the date of such foreclosure sale, for taxes and assessments, insurance premiums, delinquency charges, foreclosure costs, and any other sums advanced by Beneficiary pursuant to the terms of this Deed of Trust,to the extent the same were not previously repaid by Grantor to Beneficiary;plus (c) The costs of foreclosure hereunder; plus attorneys fees and costs incurred by BenefrcIary in enforcing this Deed of Trust as permitted by law. 19.5 Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary herein contained, in the event of a Trustee's sale in furtherance of the foreclosure of this Deed of Trust,the balance then due on this Deed of Trust secured hereby, for the purpose of Beneficiary's demand, shall be reduced,as aforesaid, by the unpaid balance, if any, of principal and interest then due on the Senior Note,satisfactory evidence of which unpaid balances must be submitted to Trustee prior to such sale, The Trustee may rely on any statements received from Beneficiary in this regard and such statements shall be deemed binding and conclusive as between Beneficiary and Grantor,on the one hand,and the Trustee,on the other hand,to the extent of such reliance. 10—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST 20, Miscellaneous. 20.1 Notices. Except for any notice required tinder applicable law to be given in another manner,(a)any notice to Grantor provided for in this Trust Deed shall be given by certified mail, return receipt requested, first class postage prepaid, to Grantor's address stated on the first page of this Trust Deed, or to such other address that Grantor may designate by notice to Beneficiary as provided in this Trust Deed, and (b)any notice to Beneficiary shall be given by certified mail,return receipt requested,first class postage prepaid,to Beneficiary's address stated on the first page of this Trust Deed or to such other address as Beneficiary may designate by notice to Grantor as provided in this Trust Deed. Any notice provided for in this Trust Deed shall be deemed to have been given to Grantor or Beneficiary when deposited in the United States mail. 20.2 Governing Law. The provisions of this Trust Deed shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Oregon. 203 Captions. The captions and headings of the sections of this Trust Deed are for convenience only and are not to be used to interpret or define the provisions of this Trust Deed. 20.4 Attorney Fees. If Beneficiary refers any of the Obligations to an attorney for collection or seeks legal advice following a default; if Beneficiary is the prevailing party in any litigation instituted in connection with any of the Obligations;or if Beneficiary or any other person initiates any judicial or nonjudicial action,suit,or proceeding in connection with any of the Obligations or the Property (including but not limited to proceedings under federal bankruptcy law,eminent domain,under probate proceedings,or in connection with any state or federal tax lien), and an attorney is employed by Beneficiary to (1)appear in any such action, suit,or proceeding,or(2)reclaim,seek relief from a judicial or statutory stay,sequester,protect, preserve,or enforce Beneficiary's interests,then in any such event Grantor shall pay reasonable attorney fees,costs,and expenses incurred by Beneficiary or its attorney in connection with the above-mentioned events or any appeals related to such events,including but not limited to costs incurred in searching records,the cost of title reports, and the cost of surveyors' reports. Such amounts shall be secured by this Trust Deed and, if not paid upon demand,shall bear interest at the rate specified in Section 8.2. 20.5 Conflicts. In the event that the terms and conditions of this Trust Deed conflict in any way with the temis and conditions of any Prior Liens,the terms and conditions of such Prior Liens shall control. 20.6 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all covenants and obligations of Grantor under this Trust Deed, 20.7 ORS 93.040 Warning. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS,IF ANY,UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE 11—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010,TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES,AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930,AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Parties have executed this All-Inclusive Trust Deed as of the day and year first above written. Grantor; . HEN Y.L lE I frr - • CEIAB R CLARK ""�' FiOTARYPU8L10-OAEaON u� COMMISSION NO.416053 MY COMMISSION E0IRE8 JUN5 0,2011 STATE OF OREGON ) SS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON This instrument was acknowledged before me on January 15,2008 by HENRY LOUIE,Grantor. Notary Public for Oregon Beneficiaries: LAt SALVADOR ESPANA SANDRA ESPANA STATE OF OREGON SS . COUNTY OF WASHINGTON This instrument was acknowledged before me on January 15,2008 by SALVADOR AND SANDRA ESPANA,Beneficiaries. Pl‘.€12—Z e OFFICIAL 8 Notary Public for Oregon LO BNC�' 1� PAY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 0,2011 12—ALL-INCLUSIVE DEED OF TRUST Order No.22y0046695 Exhibit"A" A tract of land,being a part of that certain tract of land conveyed to L.E.Christie Limited Liability Company by deed recorded as Fee No.2001-099783,Washington County, Deed Records,being a part of Lot 32,HOFFARBER TRACTS NO. 16 TO NO.40 INCLUSIVE,and a portion of that certain tract of land conveyed to Lisa A.Cach and Joan L.Cach as co-trustees of the Gerald C.Cach credit shelter trust, recorded as Property No,4 of Deed Document No. 2004-007108,Washington County Deed Records, being a part of Lot 31,HOFFARBER TRACTS NO. 16 TO NO.40 INCLUSIVE,and being situated In the Southeast one-quarter of Section 35,Township 1 South,Range 1 West,of the Willamette Meridian,in the city of Tigard,County of Washington and State of Oregon and being described as follows: • Beginning at a 5/8 inch Iron rod at the most Easterly corner of Parcel 1 of the said Christie tract,which Is located at the Intersection of the South line of Lot 34,HOFFARBER TRACTS NO. 16 TO NO,40 INCLUSIVE,with the Southwesterly right-of-way line of Oregon State Highway No.217;thence North 35°57'49"West,along the Southwesterly right-of-way line of Oregon State Highway No.217,a distance of 82.46 feet;thence North 41°44'58"West,along the Southwesterly right-of-way line of Oregon State Highway No.217, a distance of 164.17 feet;thence South 37° 16' 17"West,parallel with the Northwesterly line of said Christie tract, 106.56 feet to the Westerly line of said Christie tract;thence South 27°41'08"East,along the Southwesterly line of Lot 32,a distance of 5.07 feet;thence South 62° 47'49"West, 135.25 feet; thence South 04°57'22"East,32.44 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of Lot 30,HOFFARBER TRACTS NO. 16 TO NO.40 INCLUSIVE; thence North 62°47'49"East along the Northwesterly line of said Lot 30,a distance of 147,81 feet to the most Northerly corner thereof;thence South 27°46'32"East, along the Southwesterly line of said Lots 33 and 34,a distance of 160.00 feet to an 1 inch bar at the most Southerly corner of said Lot 34; thence North 62°34'00"East along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 34,a distance of 148.04 feet to the point of beginning, • Assignment of Trust Deed ORRQ 6/2005 Page 2 of 2 03 - Summary of Proposal '�‘ 1 It 1; t ;'''';9,'\1,1)J J. lnjee Circosta Archit. b`ure, LLP � := , Architecture • Planning • Urban Design 217 Self Storage Phase II City of Tigard Conditional Use Application Summary of Proposal This proposal is for Phase II of the 217 Self Storage project completed in October of 2008. Phase II proposes +/- 441 additional storage units. The proposed building is three stories with +/- 19,506 square feet per story for a total of 58,518 square feet. The project will include a +/- 800 square foot apartment for use of a full-time on-site attendant. The site is located at 11600 Hall Blvd, Tax Map 1 S135DD00100 and is .74 acres adjacent to Highway 217 with "flag lot" access to Hall Blvd. The site is zoned CG and self-service storage is processed as a conditional use .K. through a Type III-HO procedure. ti,� '` 4.4, With the intention of utilizing se �I "„ resources from Phase I, variances Ns) are requested for minimum parking ""' ; requirements, and loading — ""° ' requirements. A variance is also "°" is,.... `17 self Storage requested for buffer separation ""S ,,,� �� a'4. " ase u between adjacent commercial and -- ; --- `,, ye residential uses. An adjustment is "'" "'" 1. p9 2.i-. requested for a reduction in ''°• minimum bicycle parking __,--- , „.xi �'� requirements and for minimum ,xK ga�p4. driveway spacing along Hall Blvd. A - crossover easement is utilized for i" . shared site access/egress, waste 217 Self Storage', 1"C 1i.1' \ disposal, and pedestrian access. Phase I *'s r. The project also proposes to create °', -00 an access easement for a fire lane °° �°d on the adjacent property to the north , - _?°IV for emergency access to this project. l.°_. 'y:, - The primary access to the site is from Warner Avenue with fire access only from Hall. There is no public access to this project from Hall Blvd. and no opportunity for"short- cutting"from Warner to Hall. A reciprocal easement will be provided to the property to the north along the "flagpole" portion of this property in order to enhance their future development opportunities. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 411I 04 - Conditional Use Narrative , J injee Circosta Archhikture, LLP Architecture • Planning • Urban Design CONDITIONAL USE NARRATIVE 217 Self-Storage Phase II The proposed conditional use conforms to the pertinent sections of the Tigard Community Development Code (CDC) as follows: Chapter 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE 1. "18.330.030 Approval Standards and Conditions of Approval A. Approval standards. The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a conditional use or to enlarge or alter a conditional use based on findings of fact with respect to each of the following criteria: 1. The site size and dimensions provide adequate area for the needs of the proposed use; 2. The impacts of the proposed use of the site can be accommodated considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features; 3. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal; 4. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter, 5. The applicable requirements of 18.330.050, and 6. The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters of this code including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, if applicable, are met." Response: The proposed mini-storage use complies with the approval criteria as follows: 1. The site is 0.74 ac. in size and provides property dimensions having sufficient area to meet the needs of the proposed use. 2. As explained in the applicant's impact study, the impacts of the proposal can be accommodated in view of the property's size, shape, location, topography, and natural features. 3. The project engineer has coordinated the project utility plan with the appropriate service agencies to confirm that the required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. 4. As explained in subsequent sections of the narrative, the applicable zoning district requirements are met, except that the following variances are requested: motor vehicle parking, bicycle parking, loading, buffers, 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 !I 1 and access distance. 5. Concurrent variance applications are submitted with the conditional use. 6. As explained in subsequent sections of the narrative, the proposed development will satisfy the supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters of this code, except for requested variances, including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review. 2. "18.330.040 Additional Submission Requirements A. Additional submission requirements. In addition to the submission requirements required in Chapter 18.390, Decision-Making Procedures, an application for conditional use approval must include the following additional information in graphic, tabular and/or narrative form. The Director shall provide a list of the specific information to be included in each of the following: 1. Existing site conditions, 2. A site plan; 3. A grading plan; 4. A landscape plan; 5. Architectural elevations of all structures; and 6. A copy of all existing and proposed restrictions or covenants." Response: Items A.1.-A.5. are being submitted in graphic form. Item A.6. is being submitted in both graphic and written form to describe a new proposed easement. 2. Chapter 18.360 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 1. "18.360.070 Submission Requirements A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type // procedure, as governed by Section 18. 390.040. B. Additional information. in addition to the submission requirements required in Chapter 18.390, Decision-Making Procedures, an application for the conceptual development plan must include the following additional information in graphic, tabular and/or narrative form. The Director shall provide a list of the specific information to be included in each of the following: 1. An existing site conditions analysis; 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 2 2. A site plan; 3. A grading plan; 4. A landscape plan; 5. Architectural elevations of all structures; and 6. A copy of all existing and proposed restrictions or covenants." Response: The applicant has submitted general and additional information for the Type Ill conditional use application, and this information also satisfies the Section 18.360.070 submission requirements. 2. "18.360.090 Approval Criteria (applicable to proposed development) A. Approval criteria. The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions, or denying an application: 1. Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards;" Response: Except for the requested variances, the proposed development complies with the applicable code requirements including Chapter 18.810 as explained in this narrative. 2. 'Relationship to the natural and physical environment: a. Buildings shall be: (1) Located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; (2) Located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding, (3) Located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and (4) Oriented with consideration for sun and wind." Response: The proposed mini-storage building will be located in an area not subject to ground slumping or sliding, and will meet setbacks between adjacent buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting. There is only one significant tree on the site and the arborist report recommends its removal. The proposed grading plan is designed to minimize as much cut and fill as possible will not create any new drainage issues. The building will have a slight east-west orientation for solar access, and is limited in this regard due to the existing orientation of the lot. "b. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal." 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 . . 3 Response: Only one tree will be removed as recommended by the arborist, and replacement of trees will comply with Chapter 18.790 requirements for tree removal. 3. "Exterior elevations: a. Along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple-family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet by providing any two of the following: (1) Recesses, e.g., decks, patios, entrances, floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet; (2) Extensions, e.g., decks, patios, entrances, floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet, a maximum length of an overhang shall be 25 feet, and (3) Offsets or breaks in roof elevations of three or more feet in height." Response: The proposed building is not a single-family attached or multiple- family structure. Therefore, this requirement is not applicable. 4. "Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: a. Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, for example, between single-family and multiple-family residential, and residential and commercial uses, and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer: (1) The purpose of the buffer, for example noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter provide a visual barrier, (2) The size of the buffer required to achieve in terms of width and height; (3) The direction(s) from which buffering is needed (4) The required density of the buffering; and (5) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile." Response: Buffering and screening between the existing single family residential dwellings to the West will be provided as required under Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening Standards. This project is requesting a variance for the buffer requirement between this project and the multi-family project to the northwest. The main purpose of the buffer is to provide a visual barrier between the residential and commercial uses. The buffer size, direction and density are established under the Chapter 18.745 standards, and the viewer (adjacent residents) will undoubtedly be mobile. b. "On site screening from view from adjoining properties of such things as service areas, garbage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops, i.e., air cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 4 and extent of the screening: (1) What needs to be screened, (2) The direction from which it is needed, (3) How dense the screen needs to be; (4) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; and (5) Whether the screening needs to be year around." Response: The parking, loading, and trash areas are located in such a way between Phase I and Phase II buildings so that they are permanently screened from view. The trash area is also individually screened. There will be no rooftop mechanical equipment. 10. "Crime prevention and safety. a. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants, b. interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; c. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; d. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and e. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person." Response: The proposed mini-storage facility will provide a full time caretaker who will reside on the property and ensure a high degree of crime prevention and safety. The proposed building will contain several windows which will be located so that the caretaker can view the project surroundings. The building will not contain interior laundry and service areas, and access to individual storage units will be provided by common pedestrian corridors easily observed by others. Mail delivery will be handled through the lighted front office next to the main building entrance having customer traffic. The applicant will provide exterior lighting levels sufficient to deter crime and utilize light fixtures placed at the correct height so that light patterns do overlap at a seven foot height. Exterior cameras will be utilized so that the project can be monitored at the main office. The project will be gated for additional security. 12. "Landscaping: a. All landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745, 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland, Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 5 b. In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped, and c. A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped." Response: Project landscaping has been designed according to the requirements of Chapter 18.745. No landscaping variances are requested. 13. "Drainage:All drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan. Response: The project drainage plan is designed to satisfy the adopted 1981 master drainage plan. 14. "Provision for the disabled: All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447. " Response: The building will be fully accessible to disabled persons both internally and externally per requirements of ORS Chapter 447. 15. 'All of the provisions and regulation of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350, or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370." Response: Several variances as outlined in Chapter 18.370 are being requested concurrent with this application. 3. Chapter 18.390 DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES/IMPACT STUDY "18.390.050 Type Ill Procedure A. Pre-application conference. A pre-application conference is required for all Type Ill actions. The requirements and procedures for a pre-application conference are described in Section 18.390.080C." Response: The applicant's representative attended a pre-application conference with City staff on October 1, 2008. B. "Application requirements. 1. Application forms. Type Ill applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director as provided by Section 18.390.080 El; 2. Content Type Ill applications shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; ': ,, I 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 6 d. Include two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all persons who are property owners of record as specified in Section 18.390.050C. The records of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation shall be the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the notice list, 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 that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development." Response: The applicant is submitting the Type III application on forms provided by the Director with the appropriate information, including the required fee and two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for adjacent property owners of record. The relevant code criteria are addressed in this narrative and accompanying plans and documents. The impact study that addresses items specified under Section 18.390.050 B.2.e. above is also included with the application. 4. Chapter 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 1. "18.520.030 Uses A. Types 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 listed as a permitted use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted use under the provisions of Section 18.130.030; 2. A restricted (R) use is permitted outright providing it is in compliance with special requirements, exceptions or restrictions, 3. A conditional (C) use is a use the approval of which is at the discretion of the Hearings Officer. The approval process and criteria are set forth in Chapter 18.370. If a use is not listed as a conditional use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted use under the provisions of Section 18.130.030; 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 7 4. A prohibited (N) use is one which is not permitted in a zoning district under any circumstances. B. Use table. A list of permitted, limited, conditional and prohibited uses in commercial zones is presented in Table 18.520.1. B. Use table. A list of permitted, limited, conditional and prohibited uses in commercial zones is presented in Table 18.520.1." Response: The property is zoned "General Commercial" (C-G), and the proposed mini-storage, i.e., self-service storage, development is listed as a conditional use according to Table 18.520.1. Conditional use approval is subject to the discretion of the Hearings Officer in accord with the approval process and criteria established in Chapter 18.370. 3. "18.520.040 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 18.310 and 18.320; 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. !1 Response: The applicant is requesting approval of several variances. Otherwise, the proposed development will comply with the applicable development standards contained in the C-G District as well as all other relevant code requirements. B. "Development standards. Development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.520.2 below. " Response: The proposed development complies with the relevant development standards shown in Table 18.520.2 as follows: The site does not abut a residential zoning district. Code Proposal Minimum Setbacks Front Yard 0 ft. 30 ft. Side Yard 0 ft. 1- 20 ft. Rear Yard 0 ft. 1-12 ft Max. Bldg. Height 45 ft. 35 ft. approx. Max. Site Coverage 85% 84.4 cYo 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 8 Min. Landscaping 15% 15.6% 5. Chapter 18.705 ACCESS/EGRESS/CIRCULATION "18.705.030 General Provisions C. Joint access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: 1. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and 2. Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City." Response: Access and Egress to Phase II of this project will be through a joint access crossover easement with Phase I of this project as currently Phase I and Phase II are located on separate but adjacent parcels. The appropriate legal materials will be provided to the City. "D. Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.0301 shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis." Response: Public street access is provided at Warner Avenue, and the proposed development will utilize the cul-de-sac and street improvements completed in Phase I. "E. Curb cuts, Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N. " Response: The proposed development will provide curb cuts according to Section 18.810.030N. "F. Required walkway location. On-site 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 elevators 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, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; ' .) 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 9 2. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multifamily developments, each residential dwelling shall 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 separation (curbed) or a minimum 3- 4. 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, 5. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways." Response: An on-site pedestrian walkway will be provided to extend from the front building entrance to the sidewalk in the cul-de-sac bulb. All walkways will be paved with a concrete surface. Walkways that cross the asphalt driveways will be appropriately striped for safe crossing. Thus, the proposed development complies with the required walkway standards cited above. "H. Access Management 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility)" Response: Phase II will utilize the same site access previously approved for Phase I. This is at the end of the existing cul-de-sac on Warner Avenue. 3. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. Response: A variance is being requested for this item. 6. Chapter 18.745 LANDSCAPING & SCREENING STANDARDS 1. "18.745.020 Applicability A. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 10 including the construction of new structures, remodeling of existing structures where the landscaping is nonconforming (Section 18.760.040.C), and to a change of use which results in the need for increased on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. B. When site development review does not apply. Where the provisions of Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, do not apply, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a plan submitted under the provisions of this chapter by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030. using the applicable standards in this chapter. C. Site plan requirements. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. Response: A. The applicant recognizes that the provisions of this chapter apply due to the construction of a new structure. B. The applicant also recognizes that the Site Development Review does not apply according to Section 18.360.020.A5 but will be addressed by the Director by means of Type I procedure as governed by Section 18.390.030. C. The applicant has included in this submittal a site plan for review. 2. "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 shall be maintained in good condition so as to present a healthy, neat and orderly appearance, shall be replaced or repaired as necessary, and shall be kept free from refuse and debris. B. Pruning required. All plant growth in landscaped areas of developments shall be controlled by pruning, trimming or otherwise so that: 1. It will not interfere with the maintenance or repair of any public utility; 2. It will not restrict pedestrian or vehicular access; and 3. it will not constitute a traffic hazard because of reduced visibility. C. Installation requirements. The installation of all landscaping shall be as follows: 1. All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures; 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 11 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. 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 bond. E. Protection of existing vegetation. Existing vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as possible: 1. The developer shall provide methods for the protection of existing vegetation to remain during the construction process; and 2. The plants to be saved shall be noted on the landscape plans (e.g., areas not to be disturbed can be fenced, as in snow fencing which can be placed around individual trees). F. Care of landscaping along public rights-of-way. Appropriate methods for the care and maintenance of street trees and landscaping materials shall be provided by the owner of the property abutting the rights-of-way unless otherwise required for emergency conditions and the safety of the general public. 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 instances shall be less than that required for conventional development. H. Height restrictions abutting public rights-of-way. No trees, shrubs or plantings more than 18 inches in height shall be planted in the public right-of- way abutting roadways having no established curb and gutter. Response: The Owner agrees to maintain, prune and install all landscaping and screening materials as required by this title and accepted practices. The Owner agrees to complete all landscaping requirements prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The Owner agrees to protect existing vegetation as required, care and height restrictions for landscaping along public rights of way and conform with landscape requirements specified in the conditions of approval. 3. "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. B. Street tree planting list. Certain trees can severely damage utilities, streets and sidewalks or can cause personal injury. Approval of any planting list I 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 12 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: 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 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturity 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 private driveways (measured at the back edge of the sidewalk), fire hydrants 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, h. Street trees shall not be planted closer flan 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. Where there are overhead power lines, the street tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will 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 least four by four feet to allow for air and water into the root area. " Response: All required street trees along Warner Avenue were installed in Phase I and no new street trees are proposed for Phase II. The landscape plan shows new street trees placed as required along the proposed emergency access road connecting to Hall Blvd. due to the length of the road exceeding 100'. The trees will 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 13 be installed and maintained as required by this title. 4. "18.745.050 Buffering and Screening B. Buffering and screening requirements. 1. A buffer consists of an area within a required setback adjacent to a property line and having a depth equal to the amount specified in the buffering and screening matrix and containing a length equal to the length of the property line of the abutting use or uses; 2. A buffer area may only be occupied by utilities, screening, sidewalks and bikeways, and landscaping. No buildings, accessways or parking areas shall be allowed in a buffer area except where an accessway has been approved by the City; 3. A fence, hedge or wall, or any combination of such elements, which are located in any yard is subject to the conditions and requirements of Sections 18.745.050.B.8 and 18.745.050.D; 4. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of combinations for landscaping and screening as specified in Table 18. 745. 1. In addition, improvements shall meet the following specifications: a. At least one row of trees shall be planted. They shall have a minimum caliper of two inches at four feet in height above grade for deciduous trees and a minimum height of five feet high for evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing for trees shall be as follows: (1) Small or narrow-stature trees, under 25 feet tall or less than 16 feet wide at maturity shall be spaced no further than 15 feet apart, (2) Medium-sized trees between 25 feet to 40 feet tall and with 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart, (3) Large trees, over 40 feet tall and with more than 35 feet wide branching at maturity, shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart. b. in addition, at least 10 five-gallon shrubs or 20 one-gallon shrubs shall be planted for each 1, 000 square feet of required buffer area; c. The remaining area shall be planted in lawn or other living ground cover. 5. Where screening is required the following standards shall apply in addition to those required for buffering: a. A hedge of narrow or broad leaf evergreen shrubs shall be planted which will forma four foot continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18. 745.2 within two years of planting, or b. An earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials shall be provided which will forma continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two years. The unplanted portion 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale H wy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 14 of the berm shall be planted in lawn or other living ground cover; or c. A fence or wall of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. F. Buffer Matrix. 1. The Buffer Matrices contained in Tables 18.745.1 and 18. 745.2 shall be used in calculating widths of bufferinglscreening and required improvements to be installed between proposed uses and abutting uses or zoning districts;" Response: The site adjoins existing residential uses to the northwest, west and southwest. According to the above requirements and the Buffer Matrices contained in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2, the proposed development is subject to a Type "D" standard. As shown on sheet L.100 (Planting Plan), buffer and screening improvements made along the west and southwest edge of the lot comply with the Type "D" (Option 3) standard, i.e., 10-ft. buffer width, trees planted with maximum 20 ft. spacing, laurel shrubs planted close together, and a six-ft. screen barrier. A variance is requested for the buffer requirements along the northwest property line. 5. "18.745.060 Re-vegetation A. When re-vegetation is required. Where natural vegetation has been removed through grading in areas not affected by the landscaping requirements and that are not to be occupied by structures, such areas are to be replanted as set forth in this section to prevent erosion after construction activities are completed. B. Preparation for re-vegetation. Topsoil removed from the surface in preparation for grading and construction is to be stored on or near the sites and protected from erosion after construction activities are completed. 1. Such storage may not be located where it would cause suffocation of root systems of trees intended to be preserved; and 2. after completion of such grading, the topsoil is to be restored to exposed cut and fill embankments or building pads to provide a suitable base for seeding and planting. C. Methods of re-vegetation. 1. Acceptable methods of re-vegetation include hydro-mulching or the planting of rye grass, barley, or other seed with equivalent germination rates, and: a. Where lawn or turf grass is to be established, lawn grass seed or other appropriate landscape cover is to be sown at not less than four pounds to each 1,000 square feet of land area; b. Other re-vegetation methods offering equivalent protection may be approved by the approval authority; c. Plant materials are to be watered at intervals sufficient to ensure survival and growth; and d. The use of native plant materials is encouraged to reduce irrigation and maintenance demands. Response: Re-vegetation is not required. The entire site will be provided with new 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 15 landscaping as shown on the submitted landscape drawing and conform to code. 7. Chapter 18.755 MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE STORAGE 1. "18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance A. Alternative methods of compliance. An applicant shall choose one of the following four methods to demonstrate compliance: 1. Minimum standards; 2. Waste assessment, 3. Comprehensive recycling plan; or 4. Franchised hauler review and sign-off B. Provisions. The following provisions apply to all four methods of demonstrating compliance: 1. Section 18.755.050, Location, Design and Access Standards, except as provided in 18.755.040 G; 2. The floor area of an interior or exterior storage area required by this chapter shall be excluded from the calculation of lot coverage and from the calculation of building floor area for purposes of determining minimum storage requirements. C. Minimum standards method. 1. Description of method: This method specifies a minimum storage area requirement based on the size and general use category of the new construction; 2. Typical application of method: This method is most appropriate when the specific use of a new building is not known. It provides specific dimensions for the minimum size of storage areas by general use category, 3. Application requirements and review procedure: The size and location of the storage area(s) shall be indicated on the site plan of any construction subject to this ordinance. Through the site plan review process, compliance with the general and specific requirements set forth below is verified, 4. General requirements: a. The storage area requirement is based on the predominant use(s) of the building, (i.e. residential, office, retail, wholesale/warehouse, manufacturing, educational, institutional, or other). If a building has more than one of the uses listed herein and that use occupies 20 percent or less of the floor area of the building, the floor area occupied by that use shall be counted toward the floor area of the predominant use(s). If a building has more than one of the uses listed herein and that use occupies more than 20% of the floor area of the building, then the storage area requirement for the whole building shall be the sum of the requirement for the area of each use. b. Storage areas for multiple uses on a single site may be combined and 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 ;.`I 16 shared. c. The specific requirements are based on an assumed storage height of 4 feet for solid waste/recyclable. Vertical storage higher than 4 feet but no higher than 7 feet may be used to accommodate the same volume of storage in a reduced floor space (potential reduction of 43% of specific requirements). Where vertical or stacked storage is proposed, the site plan shall include drawings to illustrate the layout of the storage area and dimensions of containers. 5. Specific requirements: a. Multi-unit residential buildings containing 5-10 units shall provide a minimum storage area of 50 square feet. Buildings containing more than 10 residential units shall provide an additional 5 square feet per unit for each unit above 10. b. Non-residential buildings shall provide a minimum storage area of 10 square feet, plus: (1) Office: 4 square feet/1,000 square feet gross floor area (GFA). (2) Retail. 10 square feet/1,000 square feet GFA. (3) Industrial: 6 square feet/1,000 square feet GFA. (4) Institutional: 4 square feet/1, 000 square feet GFA. (5) Other: 4 square feet/1,000 square feet GFA." Response: The proposed development will utilize the minimum standards method for compliance with this code section. This method will consist of providing interior storage containers for mixed solid waste and recycling materials located on each floor at the south end of the building. The resident caretaker will be responsible for servicing the storage containers, i.e., removing the solid waste and recycling materials for curbside pick-up by the franchise hauler. Recyclable materials will be placed in the container in the trash enclosure and mixed solid waste will utilize roll carts. Pride disposal has provided an approval letter and a copy is included in this application. The size of the storage area on each floor will be 4' x 16', and the total storage area for the building amounts to 192 sq. ft. (4x16x3). The specific size requirements specified above for a non-residential building (Other category) would amount to 186 sq. ft. (10-x-186). 2. "18. 755.050 Location, Design and Access Standards for Storage Areas A. Applicable standards. The following location, design and access standards for storage areas are applicable to all four methods of compliance, described in 18.755.040 above. B. Location standards. 1. To encourage its use, the storage area for source separated recyclable shall be co-located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; 2. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements, 3. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland, Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 17 multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations, 4. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street, 5. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users, 6. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards, 7: The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. C. Design standards. 1. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; 2. Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; 3. Exterior Storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; 4. Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. D. Access standards. 1. Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons. However, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collections services, 2. Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment, considering paving grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered 3. Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safely exit the site in a forward motion. " Response: The solid waste and recycling materials storage area will be located at a convenient location on each floor and will be readily accessible by tenants upon entering or exiting the building, i.e., tenant would need to walk by the solid waste storage area on the way into or departing from the self-storage unit. The indoor solid waste storage areas and individual containers will comply with Uniform 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 18 Building and Fire Code requirements. The resident caretaker will transport the solid waste and recycling materials in containers to a trash enclosure or a curbside location on pick-up day for the franchise hauler and return the empty containers inside the building the same day. 8. Chapter 18.765 OFF-STREET PARKING/LOADING REQUIREMENTS "18.765.040 General Design Standards A. Maintenance of parking areas. All parking lots shall be kept clean and in good repair at all times. Breaks in paved surfaces shall be repaired promptly and broken or splintered wheel stops shall be replaced so that their function will not be impaired. B. Access drives. With regard to access to public streets from off street parking: 1. Access drives from the street to offstreet parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; 2. The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; 3. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; 4. Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; 5. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and 6. Excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. E. Curb cuts. Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030A F. Pedestrian access. Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18. 705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow- moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. G. Parking lot landscaping. Parking lots shall be landscaped in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 18.745. H. Parking space surfacing. 1. Except for single-family and duplex residences, and for temporary uses or fleet storage areas as authorized in 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 19 18.765.040.H.3 and 4 below, all areas used for the parking or storage or maneuvering of any vehicle, boat or trailer shall be improved with asphalt or concrete surfaces. Any pervious paving surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained; N. Space and aisle dimensions. (Figure 18.765.1)" Response: The applicant will maintain the off-street parking area in proper condition at all times. The project will be served by a single access drive and curb cut with pedestrian access, landscaping and parking space surfacing provided per code requirements above. The space and aisle dimensions of the proposed perpendicular parking stalls will be a minimum 9'x18.5' with a minimum 26' backing space in accord with the off-street parking matrix standards. 2. "18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards A. Location and access. With regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: 1. Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; 2. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways, 3. Outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; 4. Bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the later requirement for parking on upper stories within a multistory residential building. B. Covered parking spaces 1. When possible, bicycle parking facilities should be provided under cover. 2. Required bicycle parking for uses served by a parking structure must provide for covered bicycle parking unless the structure will be more than 100 feet from the primary entrance to the building, in which case, the uncovered bicycle parking may be provided closer to the building entrance. C. Design requirements. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: 1. The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; 2. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; 3. Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 2 1/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An fI 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 20 access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; 4. Each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; 5. Required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement, 6. Areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. D. Paving. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. E. Minimum bicycle parking requirements. The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.768.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. Single-family residences and duplexes are excluded from the bicycle parking requirements. The Director may reduce the number of required bicycle parking spaces by means of an adjustment to be reviewed through a Type // procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.3 70.020. C. 5. e. " Response: Bicycle parking will be provided inside the proposed building with bike racks that meet the design requirements above. A variance is requested for the number of bicycle parking spaces. 3. "18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements" Response: A variance is requested from the required number of spaces. 4. "18.765.080 Off-Street Loading Requirements A. Off-street loading spaces. Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: 1. A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10, 000 gross square feet or more; 2. A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more." Response: The proposed mini-storage use will not be receiving or distributing material or merchandise. The commercial use will rent small, individual self storage units that range in size from 38 sq. ft. to 260 sq. ft. Tenants will typically use the units to store excess possessions that can be transported by an automobile, 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 21 SUV, pick-up truck, and small to mid-size rental trucks. These possessions can usually be loaded or unloaded directly into the vehicle from the parking spaces. A variance is requested for the number of loading spaces. 9. Chapter 18.780 SIGNS "18.780.020 Permits Required A. Compliance with regulations. No sign or sign structure shall hereafter be erected, re-erected, constructed, structurally altered or relocated within the City limits except as provided by this title, and a permit for the same sign or sign structure has been issued by the Director. B. Separate permits for each sign. A separate permit shall be required for each sign or signs for each business entity and a separate permit shall be required for each group of signs on a single supporting structure. C. Compliance with UBC. Separate structural permits under the Uniform Building Code shall also apply. D. Electrical permit required. An electrical permit shall be obtained for all illuminated signs, from the enforcing agency subject to the provisions of the State Electrical Code. E. E. Retroactive sign permits. The Director may require application for sign permits for all signage at a given address if no existing permits previously had been approved or documented" Response: The applicant is not proposing signage with this particular application and will submit for a required sign permit with a future application. 10. Chapter 18.790 TREE REMOVAL "Tree Removal 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement A. Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. B. Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: 1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city, 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; 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 22 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 requires no mitigation. 3. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed, 4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction." Response: A certified arborist has prepared a tree plan in accord with the above code requirements (See attached correspondence dated September 19, 2008 from Applied Horticultural Consulting, Inc.). Only one tree is identified for removal. Approvals for removal will be obtained as required and the landscape plan provided with this submittal identifies proposed mitigation trees 11 . Chapter 18.795 VISION CLEARANCE AREAS "18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements A. At corners. Except within the CBD zoning district a visual clearance area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to the intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street B. Obstructions prohibited. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. C. Additional topographical constraints. Where the crest of a hill or vertical curve conditions contribute to the obstruction of clear vision areas at a street or driveway intersection, hedges, plantings, fences, walls, wall structures and temporary or permanent obstructions shall be further reduced in height or eliminated to comply with the intent of the required clear vision area." Response: Phase II will utilize the same site access previously approved for Phase I. This is at the end of the existing cul-de-sac on Warner Avenue. 12. Chapter 18.810 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland, Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 23 "18.810.020 General Provisions A. When standards apply. Unless otherwise provided, construction, reconstruction or repair of streets, sidewalks, curbs and other public improvements 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 public facility requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available. Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development." Response: The code sections of Chapter 18.810 are addressed by the project engineer in the attached "Public Facility Plan Completeness Checklist Response" prepared by Afghan Associates, Inc. As explained in the project engineer's report, the proposed development satisfies the City's street and utility improvement standards. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 I 24 05 - Easements EXHIBIT "A" SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT A tract of land located in a portion of Lot 31 of the plat of"HOFFARBER TRACTS, NO. 16 TO NO.40 INCLUSIVE"located in the southeast quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South,Range 1 West,Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County,Oregon,being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a 5/8"iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747" marking the corner common to said Lots 31, 32 and Lots 30 and 33 as shown on Washington County Survey No. 29809;thence following the southwesterly boundary of said Lot 32, N 27°46'29" W 30.01'to a 5/8"iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747" marking the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING";thence S 62°47'49" W 4.37'; thence following the arc of a non-tangent 28.00 foot radius curve to the left having an arc length of 4.88' (chord bearing of N 36°01'09" E,4.87')to a point on the boundary line common to said Lots 31 and 32;thence following boundary line common to said Lots 31 and 32, S 27°41'08"E 2.20' to the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING",containing an area of 4.45 square feet,more or less. All bearings for the above description are based upon Washington County Survey No. 29809. File No. 80803 ae2.doc Date: Tuesday, December 02,2008 REGISTERED PROFESSIO L „ LANDS RVE 0,' O-EGir ' JULY 14, ' 8 GARY W. HICKMAN 167/p8'''' RENEWAL.DAZE Uu Otn DATE OF SIGNATURE`-fJCJ-LJ REGISTERED EXHIBIT "C" P0%, SURVEY* , / f' SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT __ f/Z11 LOCATED IN LOT 32 OF HOFFARBER TRACTS, �9, ,ULY1 ,� NO. 16 TO NO. 40 INCLUSIVE IN THE SE 1/4 11 .N \�\'` GARY W.Q� RENEWAL DATE: 06/30/09 ICKMAN OF SECTION 35, T1 S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF ��\ TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF Z, 1,CP DATE OF SIGNATURE: 12 /01/08 OREGON. CURVE ARC LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANGLE CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTH C,' C1 4.88' 28.00' 9'58'55" N 36'01'09" E . 4.87' O� \\ \ ��-(� �-�'' ul .52 LINE BEARING DISTANCE \� S c ) G, 1 \- -5� L1 S 6247'49" W 4.37' b I0 , - Q \\O• GNP\� -5\� \-()-\ L3 S 27'46'229" E 2.20' File Path: C:�DIMG_FLES\DM1G68\ <A`Q. Ii a� `(c �� ' �% -J File Name: 80803E3.DWG ( G °� Q » Plot Date: 12-02-2008 �QC� 0 \"-� / \ FN D. 5/8 I.R WITH Plot Time: 12:22 am YPC "LOVE PLS 747" �v� P \ PER SURVEY NO. 29809 ‘ 60' 40' 20' 0' I= En EN EXHIBIT "A" SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT A tract of land located in a portion of Lot 35 of the plat of"HOFFARBER TRACTS, NO. 16 TO NO. 40 INCLUSIVE"located in the southeast quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South,Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard,Washington County, Oregon,being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a 1"iron bar marking the most southerly corner of said Lot 35;thence following the boundary line common to Lots 34 and 35 of said plat,thence N 62°34'00" E a distance of 27.91'to the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; thence continuing along said boundary line,N 62°34'00"E a distance of 108.38';thence S 27°28'13" E a distance of 21.51';thence N 62°31'47"E a distance of 10.40';thence S 28°53'57" E a distance of 10.40';thence S 61°35'15" W a distance of 118.48'to a point on the S.W. Warner Avenue right-of-way line;thence following said right-of-way line, along the arc of a 55.50 foot radius curve to the left a distance of 19.63' (chord bears N 57°15'54" W 19.53');thence leaving said right-of-way line and following the arc of a 48.00 foot radius non-tangent curve to the left a distance of 19.41' (chord bears N 00°47'25" E 19.28') to the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING". All bearings for the above description are based upon Washington County Survey No. 29809. File No. 80803 ae4.doc Date: Tuesday,December 05,2008 REGISTERED �j•FESSIONA AIT.D SUiV • ; �A /;i //1,!'/1�U//' •T•EG• J Y14, 978 GM W. HICKMAN 1678 RENEWAL DATEQaZej DATE OF SIGNATURE.,/Za FN4p 16°;)16°;)----- 0� "5� ��NG <� L6`` E� OF pF ca,G`N\'Z FZON .Go�N F.?0\��O .- , . � r • \ „• r ` /∎�.• N '#\,.(15 LINE BEARING DISTANCE i U L1 S 62'34'00" W 27.91' L2 N 62'34'00" E 108.38' L5 S 27'28'13" E 21.51' L6 N 62'31'47" E 10.40' 7.11.. REGISTERED Cl L7 S 28'53'57" E 10.40' L8 S 61'35'15" W 118.48' / 1ND OFESSION SURVE 04 ‘ ' � ��'�� �"'1 ■ C2 E ARC 9 63 LENGTH 4RADIUS 8.00' DELTA 23'10 04 ANGLE CHORD 57'4 BEARING CHORD 19.28'om_44• ,1 JULY Y 14,1978 GA'Y W. HICKMAN I • 1678 60' 40' 20' 0' I � ■ im I RENEWAL DATE: 06/30/09 DATE OF SIGNATURE: /05/08 12 Toop.,A) EXHIBIT 13 B" /' 741k File Path: c:\OWC_ sDWWGGB\ SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT File Name: 80803B.DWG O Plot Dote: 12-05-2008 LOCATED IN LOT 35 OF HOFFARBER TRACTS, z Plot Time: 5:20 pm NO. 16 TO NO. 40 INCLUSIVE IN THE SE 1/4 NoopOF SECTION 35, T1 S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF At TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF / \ OREGON. 1.574 EXIIIBIT "A" SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT A tract of land located in a portion of Lot 35 of the plat of"HOFFARBER TRACTS, NO. 16 TO NO. 40 INCLUSIVE"located in the southeast quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South,Range 1 West,Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County,Oregon,being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a 1"iron bar marking the most southerly corner of said Lot 35;thence following the boundary line common to Lots 34 and 35 of said plat, thence N 62°34'00" E a distance of 27.91'to the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING";thence following the arc of a 48.00 foot radius non-tangent curve to the right a distance of 19.41' (chord bears S 00°47'25" W 19.28')to a point on the S.W. Warner Avenue right-of-way line;thence following said right-of-way line, along the arc of a 55.50 foot radius curve to the left a distance of 20.11' (chord bears N 77°46'41" W 20.00');thence leaving said right-of-way line and following the arc of a 28.00 foot radius non-tangent curve to the left a distance of 5.14' (chord bears N 07°13'27" E 5.13')to the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING". All bearings for the above description are based upon Washington County Survey No. 29809. File No. 80803_ae5.doc Date: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 REGISTERED ROFESSIO ND ! " : !, � •REe LY 14,1978 G "Y W. HICKMAN 1678 RENEWAL DATE IDI�I DATE OF SIGNATURE • p--. F �0 OFOG � / O \ ,c0,.\..- o'\\. ■ \,,C5 S M ■ ■ ( .--- 4 /�' 60 riN• j CURVE ARC LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANGLE CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTH Cl 19.41' 48.00' 23'10'04" S 00'47/25" W 19.28 C2 20.11' 55.50' 20'45'38" N 7746'41" W 20.00' - G-5 C2 C3 5.14' 28.00' 10'31'01" N 0713'27" E _ 5.13' ■ REGISTERED ROFESSIO AL / , AND SURJYO' / tp. M..TAg JULY 14.1978 i • 44 GARY W. HICKMAN / • 1678 60' 40' 20' 0' N. I 44 RENEWAL DATE: 06/30/09 — — — ames' tDATE OF SIGNATURE: 12/01/08 Vj EXHIBIT "B" #_\ File Path: C:\DWG_FlIES\DWG08\ SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT ~ File Name: 80803B.DWG LOCATED IN LOT 35 OF HOFFARBER TRACTS, II � , Plot Date: 12-02-2008 NO. 16 TO NO. 40 INCLUSIVE IN THE SE 1/4 Plot Time: 12:22 am Ito OF SECTION 35, T1 S, R 1 W, W.M., CITY OF h6 6 TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF OREGON. 74 EXHIBIT "A" SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT A tract of land located in a portion of Lots 31 and 32 of the plat of"HOFFARBER TRACTS,NO. 16 TO NO.40 INCLUSIVE" located in the southeast quarter of Section 35,Township 1 South,Range 1 West,Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County,Oregon,being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a 5/8"iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747"marking the corner common to said Lots 31, 32 and Lots 30 and 33 as shown on Washington County Survey No.29809;thence following the boundary line common to said Lots 31 and 32,N 27°4629" W a distance of 30.01'to a 5/8"iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747"; thence continuing along the boundary line common to said Lots 31 and 32,N 27°41'08" W a distance of 5.04'to a 5/8"iron rod with a yellow plastic cap I marked"Love PLS 747";thence N 37°16'17"E a distance of 7.84'to a 5/8" iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747"marking the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING";thence following the arc of a non-tangent 28.00 foot radius curve to the I left having an arc length of 10.76'(chord bearing of N 00°41'29" E, 10.69');thence following the arc of a 48.00 foot radius reverse curve turning to the right with an arc length of 39.87'(chord bearing of N 13°28'36"E 38.73'); thence N 37°16'17" E a distance of 59.01'to a point on the northeasterly boundary of said Lot 32;thence following the northeasterly boundary of said Lot 32, S 41°44'58"E a distance of 22.41'to a 5/8"iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747";thence S 37°16'17" W a distance of 98.77'to the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING",containing an area of 1,884 square I feet(0.043 acres), more or less. All bearings for the above description are based upon Washington County Survey No. 29809. File No. 80803_ae6.doc Date: Tuesday,December 02,2008 r4 ' REGISTERED PROFE SI• ` / ,., L. •s r. , 4/f 77 /►//off REG on LY 14, : 8 GAR W. HICKMAN 1678 /�q RENEWAL DATE Ol!/�.iC .,9, DATE OF SIGNATURE/ICU/Xi EXHIBIT "B " ' /' �,s 1, SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT / CScb TD,-:) -74)'c LOCATED IN LOT 32 OF HOFFARBER TRACTS, / O /NO. 16 TO NO. 40 INCLUSIVE IN THE SE 1/4 °‘ 'D' y'cti�i OF SECTION 35, T1 S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF /rO y,i_ TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF / / OREGON. / �9 FND. 5/8" I.R WITH 1= YPC "LOVE PLS 747" 1- r\G' PER SURVEY NO. 29809 Q / "\c) /ROFESS!ONA REGISTERED Z , U ND SURV•YaR CURVE' ARC LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANGLE CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTH Co !,Cl 10.76' 28.00' 2701'07" N 00'41'29" E 10.69' Ni ,LEI/ C2 39.87' 48.00' 47'35'21" S 13'28'36" W 38.73' OREGON LY 14,1978 LINE BEARING DISTANCE U GAR W. HICKMAN L1 N 2746'29" W 30.01' 1678 L2 N 2741'08" W 5.04' RENEWAL DATE: 06/30/09 L3 N 3716'17" E 7.84' N\�G \ �? DATE OF SIGNATURE: 1?/01/08 L5 S 41'44'58" E 22.41' ' 'CI\ ��� L6 _ S 3716'17"4 8 E _ 98.77' OF \ Fife Path: C:\DWG_FlLES\DWG08\ Qo�N� (j File Name: 80803B.DWG ,'''S?• - --\14\,., , „ \ �j2 Plot Date: 12-02-2008 \ g 1\,0 -5-5 Plot Time: 12:22 am / O 5 0\E� O' .� '5\0 \-C-)- .� C�o -{Q SCR �� �� \ FND. 5/8” I.R WITH QE \ YPC "LOVE PLS 747" (.- . \PER SURVEY NO. 29809 1 EXHIBIT "A" SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT A tract of land located in a portion of Lots 31 &32 of the plat of"HOFFARBER TRACTS,NO. 16 TO NO.40 INCLUSIVE"located in the southeast quarter of Section 35,Township 1 South,Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian,City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon,being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a 5/8"iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747"marking the corner common to said Lots 31, 32 and Lots 30 and 33 as shown on Washington County Survey No. 29809 to the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING";thence following the boundary common to Lots 30 and 31, S 62°48'18" W a distance of 148.05'to a'/4" brass washer with a brass pin marking a point on the easterly right-of-way line of S.W. Hall Boulevard;thence following said easterly right-of-way line of S.W. Hall Boulevard, N 10°19'52" W a distance of 31.34'to a 3/4"brass washer with a brass pin;thence leaving said right-of-way line N 62°47'49" E a distance of 138.65' to a 5/8"iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747"marking a point on the boundary line common to said Lots 30 and 31;thence N 27°41'08" W a distance of 5.04'to a 5/8" iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked"Love PLS 747";thence N 37°16'17" E a distance of 41.47';thence following the arc of a non-tangent 28.00 foot radius curve turning to the left with an arc length of 12.61'(chord bearing of S 02°35'00" W 12.50'); thence following the arc of a 48.00 foot radius reverse curve turning to the right with an arc length of 46.04'(chord S 17°09'44" W 44.30')to a point on the boundary line common to said Lots 30 and 31; thence following said boundary line common to said Lots 30 and 31, S 27°46'29" E a distance of 10.40'to the"TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING";having an area of 4,990 square feet (0.12 acres),more or less. All bearings for the above description are based upon Washington County Survey No. 29809. File No. 80803_ae7.doc Date: Tuesday, December 02,2008 FREGISTERE, ROFESSI9 A / ND " I, //,,,i /irAN///// •-:,' JULY 4,1978 •RY W. HICKMAN 1678 RENEWAL DATE X01 l DATE OF SIGNATURE -1.—I 45)<-9 EXHIBIT "B" %� ,,JG,Q�o SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT /,\� c LOCATED IN LOT 31 & 32 OF HOFFARBER �/ y4. TRACTS, NO. 16 TO NO. 40 INCLUSIVE IN THE 00 -9� SE 1/4 OF SECTION 35, T1 S, R1 W, W.M., CITY / `L / OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF ,' CO' / FND. 5/8" I.R WITH OREGON. YPC LOVE PLS 747" 4f). // PER SURVEY NO. 29809 60' 40' 20' 0' - GISTERED �� �,,� / I'il ESSIONA .. NM OM r,- // 4 a /i,Me / v LY14,198 GARY W. HICKMAN ,IEN / 1678 RENEWAL DATE 06/30/09 FND. 5/8" I.R WITH / YPC "LOVE PLS 747"�F DATE OF SIGNATURE: t2 /01/08 Z, / PER SURVEY NO. 29809 'A� ,n/ `Z File Path: C:\DWG_FILES\DWG08\, / ` File Name: 80803B.DWG '�i /, <� �9- Plot Date: 12-02-2008 5��� �� 1 \��'� Plot Time: 12:22 am i/ S�a09 0� � � NING q,S .I,g \� �J \TRUE POINT OF BEGIN (f B�NO i�O� FND. 5j8" I.R WITH "5 4.-- " YPC LOVE PLS 747" (0' Sv .• \PER SURVEY NO. 29809 ' %‘ 0. \:\ LINE ' BEARING DISTANCE L1 S 62.48'18" W 148.05' L2 N 10'19'52" W 31.34' 1 yyP`'Ng� L4 N 27'41'08" W 15 04' rk g.g.1,5 '19 L6 S 27'46'29" E 10.40' OD cto- 43' CURVE ARC LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANGLE , CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTH pE' C1 , 12.61' 28.00' 25'48.09" S 02'35.00" W 12.50' Q C2 46.04' 48.00' 54'57'37" N 1T09'44" E 44.30' 06 - Variances and Adjustments It I I J injee Circosta Archheture, LLP Architecture • Planning • Urban Design VARIANCE - Parking Project: 217 Self Storage Phase II Subject: Variance to minimum parking spaces. Table 18.7652 Minimum required off-street vehicle parking and loading requirements. 1 vehicle space for every four storage units. Required: 403 storage units = 101 vehicle parking spaces. Approval Criteria 18.370.010 C2. a) The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity b) There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district c) The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land d) Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title e) The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Response: a) Phase II will add 403 storage units to the 272 storage units provided in Phase I for a total of 675 units. The CTS Engineers parking study provided in this application justifies a parking ratio of 1.39 parking spaces per 100 storage units which translates to 10 total parking spaces for Phase I and Phase I I combined. A total of 13 spaces are proposed with 8 of the spaces on Phase I and 5 of the spaces on Phase II. Phase I and Phase II will share parking spaces and driveway access as if they were a single project, not two separate ones. This is accomplished through a crossover easement between the two parcels. This variance request is consistent with the purpose of Section 18.765.010 which is to provide adequate off-street parking to meet the real needs of the proposed development. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 'iJ As the actual parking needs of the project will be satisfied, the variance will not be detrimental to other policies and standards or to surrounding properties. This is also in conformance with the desire for less parking according to Metro Title II standards. A similar variance was approved by the City for Phase I. b) Because of the size of the site it is not feasible to provide 101 parking spaces and 403 storage units on the site. Without structured parking it is not even possible to park 101 cars on this site even if there was no building associated with the parking. The number of storage units being proposed is what is required to create a feasible project based on land and construction costs. The number of parking spaces proposed represents what is adequate to serve the project as well as meeting the 15% landscaping requirement, and fire department access requirements. The flaglot configuration of the site, access limitations, setbacks, buffers, and the long frontage along Hwy 217 contribute to the uniqueness of the site and it's development constraints. c) The proposed use is allowed as a conditional use under this title and the proposed development, as described in this application, will maintain the City standards to the greatest extent possible. d) This variance does not adversely affect the existing systems more than if the variance was not requested. Parking will be provided based on actual demonstrated need so that the variance will not create a parking shortage that would burden the transportation system. No natural systems are affected by the parking reduction. The variance enables the site to be utilized more efficiently and make better use of the available land. Making the best use of available developable land has a positive effect on the physical and natural systems. This project does a good job of maximizing site potential in regards to building size, height limitations, setbacks, and buffers. e) The minimum parking requirements and the uniqueness of the site are not self-imposed hardships and this variance proposes a parking scenario that is based on engineering studies and data that describes actual parking needs that are practical and realistic for this use. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 October 3, 2005 Project: OR05.050.T15 Mini Warehouse Mr. Saj Jivanjee Engineers ao,o,.amoa, Jivanjee Architecture 9055 Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy Portland, OR 97225 Fax (Original in Mail): 503-297-4635 Subject: Parking Spaces Need for Mini-Warehouse Facilities Dear Saj: This letter present information we have found about parking requirements for mini-warehouse facilities in the ITE Parking Generation Report (3rd Edition) and counts at several facilities in south Beaverton, OR. In reviewing all this information, a mini-warehouse facility should have 5-7 parking spots for customers for a wide range of sizes. First, the ITE Parking Generation Report (3rd Edition) contains parking demand for Land Use Code 151 Mini-Warehouse, which is defined as having a number of vaults or units that are rented for the storage of goods and offered referred to as self-storage facilities. Review of this data (see attached sheets from the ITE Report) reveal that parking demand at sites observed ranged from 5 -10 vehicles for facilities of 100,000 GSF or 800 storage units. The average rates were 0.16 spaces per 1,000 GSF or 1.39 vehicles per 100 storage units. ' J To confirm this, my staff observed parked vehicles in up front customer parking areas at three mini-warehouse facilities in south Beaverton: 1) Public Storage (4 customer spaces provided) located north of Denney Road, just west of Rte 217, 2) Shurgard Self Storage (8 customer spaces provided) located south of Denney Road just east of Rte 217, and 3) Parkside RV and Mini Storage (4 customer spaces) located north of Hall Blvd along Nimbus. Parked vehicles were observed on Friday, September 30, from 10:30 AM to 5:30 AM on an hourly basis (i.e., at 10:30, 11: 30, 12:30, etc). These counts revealed that the number of vehicles parked in these spaces were typically 0-2, but were as high as 4 at the Shurgard facility. Based on the data in the ITE Report and our own observations, the number of parking spaces provided at mini-storage facilities should range from 5 to 10 spaces depending on the number of units provided. 20085 NW TAHAS80URNE DR. HILLSBORO OR 97124 Si el yr .ED PROF. PH S03.690.8080 cNGI £ ,`,- fX 503.645.5930 Howard S. Stein, P.E. 17 `A� WWW.CTSENGINEERS.CON Transportation Engineer I HILLSBORO, OREGON f BELIEVUE, WASHINGTON Attachments w411/OREGON o, Jo 19. 199 (c> �R0 sco-c RENEW DATE 7/Lo6 Land Use: 151 Mini-Warehouse Land Use Description Mini-warehouses are buildings in which a number of units or vaults are rented for the storage of goods. Mini-warehouses are typically referred to as"self-storage"facilities. Each unit is physically separated from other units and access is usually provided through an overhead door or other common access point. Database Description Saturday parking demand was only provided for one site. The site was 172,300 sq. ft. GFA and the peak parking demand ratios were 0.06 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA and 0.77 for vehicles per 100 storage units. The peak period of demand occurred between 4:00 and 5:00 p.m. The following table presents a time-of-day distribution of parking demand for three study sites. •pOied on'Veh!ges per ; 1,000 sq.ff.GFA '` :• Weekday Data Hour Beginning Percent of Peak Period Number of Data Points* 12:00-4:00 a.m. - 0 5:00 a.m. - 0 6:00 a.m. - 0 7:00 a.m. 31 3 8:00 a.m. 24 3 9:00 a.m. 59 3 • 10:00 a.m. 91 3 11:00 a.m. 100 3 12:00 p.m. 55 3 1:00 p.m. 45 3 2:00 p.m. 46 3 3:00 p.m. 40 2 4:00 p.m. 88 1 5:00 p.m. 27 1 6:00 p.m. _ 35 1 7:00 p.m. 27 1 8:00 p.m. - 0 9:00 p.m. - 0 10:00 p.m. - 0 11:00 p.m. - 0 *Subset of database Study Sites/Years Canada: Burnaby, BC (1991); Coquitlam, BC (1991); Richmond, BC (1991) United States: Santa Barbara, CA(1998) Institute of Transportation Engineers °e. r'° Parking Generation,3rd Edition {3v and Use 151 1r; Ani-Warehouse n Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: 1,000 sq. ft. GFA On a: Weekday i ` (�' 411'0;"1-`: - Peak Period Demand: r:l eak Period 10:00 a.m.-12:00 ..m.;4:00-5:00 •.m. "Ilumber of Stud Sites 5 , �.>.,. t Orera•e Size of Stud Sites 70,000 Ss.ft. GFA i '6/erase Peak Period Parkin. Demand 0.16 vehicles •er 1,000 s•. ft. GFA rC.tandard Deviation 0.07 °efficient of Variation 46% .i ;n•e 0.09-0.27 vehicles •er 1,000 s•.ft. GFA �i p, th Percentile 0.20 vehicles •er 1,000 s.. ft. GFA ('Y°3rd Percentile 0.13 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA ",‘--, Weekday Peak Period ,, Parking Demand ,, 30 CD 0 25 om EIS 20 14., 111 15 — s' ' i 10 . � P = 0.07x + 4 •II 5 . � R2 = 0.88 0 0 50 100 150, 200 x = 1,000 sq. ft. GFA a; • Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ----Average Rate 1 , `� �'slitlite of Transportation Engineers ,,� r;r 43 Parking Generation,3rd Edition Land Use: 151 Mini-Warehouse Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: 100 Storage Units On a: Weekday Statlatic,,:;t• .•:. • • ::Peak Period Deitiancly'A-0,MWV Peak Period 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.; 4:00-5:00 p.m. Number of Study Sites 5 Average Size of Study Sites 660 storage units Average Peak Period Parking Demand 1.39 vehicles per 100 storage units Standard Deviation 0.37 Coefficient of Variation 27% Range 1.05-1.96 vehicles per 100 storage units 85th Percentile 1.72 vehicles per 100 storage units 33rd Percentile 1.18 vehicles per 100 storage units Weekday Peak Period Parking Demand A (1) 25 CD 73 • 20 - _a •-- 1. .C11_ 1 0 - •• • P = 0.89x + 2.5 a. 5 = 0.92 it a_ 0 0 5 10 15 x 100 Storage Units • Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ----Average Rate Institute of Transportation Engineers 44 Parking Generation,3rd Edition 0.47. .�\ '';L'v '�� J !Tee Circosta Archie lure, LLP Architecture • Planning • Urban Design VARIANCE - Loading Project: 217 Self Storage Phase II Subject: Variance to minimum loading spaces. Section 18.765.080 A minimum of 2 loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. Required: 58,455 gsf= 2 loading spaces. Approval Criteria 18.370.010 C2. a) The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity b) There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district c) The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land d) Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title e) The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Response: a) Phase I and Phase II are two phases of the same project. Combined the two phases approximately equal 102,138 gsf. This variance proposes two designated loading spaces for Phase I and Phase II combined. This is code compliant except that the two phases were processed under separate conditional use reviews. There are 13 spaces designated for vehicle parking. Due to the nature of the self service storage use, all thirteen spaces can be used as loading spaces by clients. There are no commercial deliveries to this project that will require separate loading spaces. Clients will come to the project in a variety of vehicles ranging from passenger cars, to pick-up trucks, to U-haul type trucks of various sizes. The parking facilities shown on the proposed site plan can accommodate I9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 the full range of U-hauls from the 10' Mini Mover to the 26' Super Mover. Phase I and Phase II will share loading spaces and driveway access as if they were a single project, not two separate ones. This is accomplished through a crossover easement between the two parcels. This variance request is consistent with the purpose of Section 18.765.010 which is to provide adequate off-street parking to meet the real needs of the proposed development. As the actual loading needs of the project will be satisfied, the variance will not be detrimental to other policies and standards or to surrounding properties. b) The special circumstances that require this variance is that the project is being developed in two phases. The overall project (combined Phases I and II) conforms to the standard of the code and the crossover easement enables the two phases to share resources. c) The proposed use is allowed as a conditional use under this title and the proposed development, as described in this application, will maintain the City standards to the greatest extent possible. d) This variance does not adversely affect the existing systems more than if the variance was not requested. Loading will be provided based on actual demonstrated need so that the variance will not create a loading shortage that would burden the transportation system. No natural systems are affected by the proposed loading configuration. The variance enables the site to be utilized more efficiently and make better use of the available land. e) Since the standard of the code is being met, there is no hardship imposed on anyone. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 J injee Circosta Archit tune, LLP f ' Architecture • Planning • Urban Design SPECIAL ADJUSTMENT— 18.370.020 C 7 e — reduction in required bicycle parking Project: 217 Self Storage Phase II Subject: Adjustment to minimum bicycle parking spaces. Table 18.765.2 Minimum required off-street vehicle parking and loading requirements. 1 vehicle space for every forty storage units. Required: 403 storage units = 11 bicycle parking spaces. Approval Criteria 18.370.010 C2. (Since there is no defined approval criteria for this adjustment we are using the variance criteria) a) The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity b) There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district c) The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land d) Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title e) The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Response: a) Seven bicycle spaces were provided in Phase I of this project conforming to the standard of the code. This has been observed to be more than is actually needed. People to do not often come to a self-service storage facility on a bicycle; you just can't carry much on a bicycle. This phase proposes 5 bicycle spaces instead of 12. That would mean there will be 12 total bicycle spaces shared between Phase I and II. b) The special circumstance for this variance is that it is inconceivable that there will be more than 12 people at a time visiting this facility on bicycles. This is based on observation 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland, Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 of Phase I needs and an understanding of actual need. At a time when conservation and sustainability are on everyone's mind we should be conscious of not expending resources needlessly. c) The proposed use is allowed as a conditional use under this title and the proposed development, as described in this application, will maintain the City standards to the greatest extent possible. d) This variance does not adversely affect the existing systems more than if the variance was not requested. Bicycle parking will be provided based on a compromise between the actual demonstrated need and what the standard requires so that the variance will not create a shortage that would burden the transportation system. No natural systems are affected by the bicycle parking reduction. The variance enables the site to be utilized more efficiently. e) The standard of 1 bicycle parking for every 40 storage units is not a self- imposed hardship. It is not so much that the standard creates a hardship as that in this case the standard is excessive. 12 spaces could be provided but the need does not justify that many. This variance proposes a realistic compromise that we feel exceeds actual need. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 , 1 1 k \''li ;/ .) anjee C'ircosta Archie_ .:cure, LLP -. `\ i Architecture • Planning • Urban Design SPECIAL ADJUSTMENT— 18.370.020 C 5 b 3—access separation Project: 217 Self Storage Phase II Subject: Adjustment to minimum spacing of driveways. Section 18.705.030 H 3. Required: The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. Response: The existing driveways along Hall Blvd. are spaced much closer than 600 feet. This project proposes to have it's primary access from Warner Avenue, not Hall. The existing Hall Blvd access will not be utilized by the public at all. The Fire Marshall has requested access to the site from Hall Blvd. so the 'flagpole" portion of the site will serve as an emergency access road that will be gated with knox box access for emergency vehicles only. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 I ' 11j f, I J injee Circosta Archi, ture, LLP Architecture • Planning • Urban Design VARIANCE— Buffering and Screening Project: 217 Self Storage Phase II Subject: Variance to minimum buffer requirements. Section 18.745.050 Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type. Required: Buffer type "D" required along +1- 120' of the north boundary and +1- 160' of the west boundary. Approval Criteria 18.370.010 C2. a) The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity b) There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district c) The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land d) Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title e) The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Response: a) This project proposes to provide the required buffering and screening in a slightly different way than as prescribed by Table 18.745.2. a. Currently along the west property line there are two equal sized lots with residential uses. The southernmost lot already has an existing 8' high wood fence along the entire length of the property line. The other lot has shrubs along its boundary edge. This project proposes a variation of option 3. Provide a 10' buffer with shrubs and trees as required along the boundary edge of the two properties, but not construct a 6' wall. Instead construct an 8' high wood fence to match the existing along the length of �I9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 the property that does not have one. This will provide a consistent look along the west property line while meeting the intent of the code. This also eliminates putting a 6' wall against an 8' fence. b. Along the north property line this project proposes to provide a buffer that averages 10' along the length of the new building. Shrubs and trees would be provided as required, but a 6' wall would not. The building itself serves the function of the 6' wall. Because of the nature of the use, one only needs to look at Phase I of the project to see that the building is essentially a wall itself. Putting a 6' wall 10' away from the building is actually a less desirable condition because it creates a space between two barriers where people can hide or do things they shouldn't be doing. Again, one can look at Phase one and see the space between the wall and the building. It is not a desirable condition and we would not like to repeat it. This variance request is consistent with the purpose of Section 18.745.050 which is to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses. As the buffering and screening needs of the project will be satisfied, the variance will not be detrimental to other policies and standards or to surrounding properties. b) There are two special circumstances for this variance request. One is that the Fire Marshall has required a fire lane along the north side of the project and a 6' wall would make firefighting more difficult. Reason two is that because of the nature of the storage building a 6' wall would create a less safe condition by creating a space where things could happen unseen or where people could hide. This would not be a good condition next to an apartment complex or single family residence where children could be present. c) The proposed use is allowed as a conditional use under this title and the proposed development, as described in this application, will maintain the City standards to the greatest extent possible. d) This variance does not adversely affect the existing systems more than if the variance was not requested. It will make firefighting easier. e) This is not a self-imposed hardship, will meet the intent of the code, and create a safer, more attractive condition. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 aI 07 - Neighborhood Meeting AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF TIGARD A COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME PROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE,TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION,THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT&COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: I, t!QAS Jd W 4N . & ,being duly sworn,depose and say that on the - (o �day of 'Prfi a 200 _,I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list,a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) J I ,o0 Ste/ ii ALL £L.Ilfl. TiG42i ) OL°7Z23 ,a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said person. and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at 3Z S).../ 871'''''Ave, AZ%[-4,11- O]Z `700.5- 3 40'7 with postage prepaid thereon. .ignature are presence of a Notary Public) POSTING: , Ja//�l/4-J$SJJ ,do affirm that I am(represent)the party initiating interest in a proposed land use application for rain,t 57D242, S .F STLYrss .E Zoit--13i1-1G- affecting the land located at(state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and all tax lot(s) currently registered) 1 I 1000 SW HAAA._ %Lye) , 116.42+O O291ZZ3 TAK LOT 1S 13s-' )D oO lex, ,and did on the Ii '- day of Seflittot( .--2 ,200r personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a Co N Di rid i—t Att. land use application,and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at ■ 1—g-b or Pp°re4 21 G Hr I-l4tti &.-'i1 r The 50,1x1-1 KGs Ir of- Pieei ry AT- wA Z& — • 0 E . (state location you posted notice on pro rty) i/1/ Signa r prese - • • . .. • ' •• c (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY P LIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF "Cc. ti ) County of I 64.t 0.1 roid) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the (9 -day offerer 1 f3E-e___ ,2000 . OFFICIAL SEAL en r) SCOTT HUTCHINSON ; NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON / 4/1 Nita COMMISSION NO.428459 ��fG ti /, COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 27,2012 ■ i ARY PUBLI OF OREGON My Commission Expires: is\curpin\masters\neighborhood meetings\affidavit of nuiling•posting neighborhood meeting.doc Page 5 NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING 09-15-08 RE: Mirage Storage, Phase II Dear Interested Party: Jivanjee Circosta Architecture, LLP is representing the owner of the property located at 11600 SW Hall Blvd. Tax Lot number 1 S 135DD00100. We are considering proposing a multi story self storage facility at this location under City of Tigard Conditional Use guidelines. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Wednesday, October 1, 2008 Red Rock Creek Conference Room 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 6:00 pm Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to submittal of the application to the city. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 503-297-5160 if you have questions. Sincerely, 0?)fil c‘i Doug Circosta Architect 1 \ '•...._____.________.___I__ I ' I� I I CITY ofTIGARD 1 —'—J _� —� GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM 1' .�,� i PFAFFLE AREA NOTIFIED °•° \ (500 ) ----) FOR: Jivanjee Circosta L ....... smons =NUM » 1 y RE: 1S135DD, 10(' 1R II i _ \ 1�OCp7N ( waw _ Sta55007505 Property owner information ♦ is valid for 3 months from `� ��N.110•74,410,.\, the date printed on this map. _�— 151350002300 I IRMISMIN Z• 151250001400 `�� 1 stssouoioal /IM AI V i i i tslaitnlniel r----1 co t✓ G. immoral) I It.abaaw ';i N 1 0 100 200 300 Feet i i 151350000900 o 1'a 219 feet f ` ili „.--II , CP l TtC;ARD . tilt 'Al Infommtion on this map is for general location only and \' should be verified with the Development Services Division. • gg rrVll 13125 SIN rlan elve 1•• ,_ II \ _ \ J Tigard,OR 9 _ ( (503)639-4171 httplM�nvw.ci.figsrd.or.us I .-- Din+rlata.Can 10 Onnst.r:\maninlMA(:If:(13 APR 1S13500-03300 1 S 1350A-01000 1616 SHORELINE LLC& DALTON DAVID L LOMITA WEST LP 8530 SW PFAFFLE RD BY AFFINITY PROPERTY MGMT TIGARD,OR 97223 421 SW 6TH AVE STE#905 PORTLAND,OR 97204 151350D-00500 1 35DA-01200 ALDERWOODS(OREGON) INC DAL ID L ATTN:TAX DEPT 8530 FFLE RD PMB 6126 T ARD,OR 9 223 250 H ST BLAINE,WA 98230 1S13500-00600 1 S136CC-00300 AL. RWOODS •REGON)INC HERBERHOLZ PAUL A&ANNA ATTN: ' • •- •T 8400 SW PFAFFLE ST PMB 61 - TIGARD,OR 97223 250 - T •INE,WA 982 0 1 S 136CC-00200 1S13500-00900 ANDREWS MANAGEMENT LTD IMAD LLC 5805 JEAN RD 11875 SW PACIFIC HWY LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 TIGARD,OR 97223 136CC-00301 151350A-01401 AN ANAGEMENT LTD KC PROPCO HOLDING I LLC 580 RD BY KNOWLEDGE LEARNING CORP KE OSW 0,OR 97035 ATTN:TAX DEPT 650 NE HOLLADAY ST#1400 PORTLAND,OR 97232 136CC-0220 1S13500-00100 AN E MANAGEMENT LTD LOUIE HENRY Y 58 RD 13665 SW 130TH PL KE OSW 0,OR 97035 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S1350A-01500 1S13500-01201 BECKAL LLC MAINS ELDON H JR 7100 SW GABLE PKWY PO BOX 1178 PORTLAND,OR 97225 HILLSBORO,OR 97123 1 135DA-01600 1513500-01601 BE • `CC MAUCK BENJAMIN M&PHOUKHONG X 7100 • ABLE PKWY 1622 SW WESTWOOD DR ••RTLAND,OR 97225 PORTLAND,OR 97239 1350A-01710 1S1 50A-0130 BE • C MAU JAMIN M& PHOUKHONG X 710. -• GABLE PKWY 162 STWOOD DR ••RTLA I,OR 97225 RTLAND, R 97239 1 S135DA-01400 1513500-02000 BRAHMA PREMANANDA ASHRAM MB INVESTMENTS LLC 11515 SW HALL BLVD 8320 NE HWY 99 TIGARD,OR 97223 VANCOUVER,WA 98665 I 1S1 DD-0;:001 161350D-01300 MB I E ENTS LLC STEELE NANCY STEE 83 WY 99 PO BOX 230057 ANCOUV ,WA 98665 TIGARD,OR 97281 1 S 136C C-00400 1613500-0330i MCGUIRE ROBERT J& TIGARD PLAZA LLC MCGUIRE THOMAS P& 8320 NW HWY 99 MCGUIRE WILLIAM A VANCOUVER,WA 98665 8470 SW PFAFFLE ST TIGARD,OR 97223 1513500-05200 1613500-01000 MIRAGE WORKS LLC WELLS FARGO BANK NA 9055 SW BEAV-HLSDL HWY BY DELOITTE TAX LLP PORTLAND,OR 97230 PO BOX 2609 CARLSBAD,CA 92018 1 S 135DD-00700 OLSON NORRIS A&KATHLEEN A 13660 SW ASH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135DD-00701 OLSON NORRIS ALFRED AND KATHLEEN ANN 13660 SW ASH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 16135M-018m PANG KEIKO TR 46-442 HOLOLIO ST KANEOHE,HI 96744 1S 1350D-00800 SANOKEE 375 NW GILMAN BLVD STE C-203 ISSAQUAH,WA 98027 1613500-01400 SAYLER ANNA R PO BOX 23757 TIGARD,OR 97281 1 S 135DA-01100 SCHAEFFER DONALD M& MUNCH MICHAEL T TRUST PO BOX 23697 PORTLAND,OR 97281 161350D-01600 SILVERCREEK APARTMENTS LLC 13670 SW WRIGHTWOOD CT TIGARD,OR 97224 I Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Des group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Miidren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Susan BeiIke 11250 SW 82nd 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 ' 3 Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 6-Aug-07 1 1 � ':'',;►,„ ' Jivanjee Circosta Architecture, LLP - 1 Architecture • Planning • Urban Design Meeting Sign-in Sheet Date: 10/1/08 Project: 217 Self Storage Phase II Location: City of Tigard — Red Rock Creek Conf. Room Name Address Phone or Email C'Oc.61..)-E,(..,a5 5R,f Ik. 17104.51A)3,._tP�A CT • r5 2-i8. 244/ odFi e- -Du 4-Wiwi, 012 IA■kz_ -, b1,3,--_-- pc=> O..ke A va.,, .:rte l9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 `\ ',►�,;;Ii,t Jivanjee Circosta Architecture, LLP _ , Architecture • Planning • Urban Design 10-1-08 Meeting minutes of Neighborhood meeting. Location: Red Rock Creek Conference Room, City Hall, Tigard, OR Time: 6:00 pm to 7:00 pm • Doug Circosta of Jivanjee Circosta Architecture opened the meeting at 6:00 pm by reading the Statement of Purpose as required by the City of Tigard. • All neighborhood attendees completed the sign-in sheet. Present were one neighbor, her son, and her real estate agent, the property owners, and the design team. The meeting being small, was conducted in an informal, pleasant discussion with everyone participating. • Doug Circosta then described the project proposal and the options being considered. • Discussion followed the description of the proposal. Topics discussed included; o The benefits and issues of each option. o Future development opportunities on adjacent parcels and how we could work together for everyone's benefit. o Project Schedule. • Those present were supportive of the project and no one present expressed any opposition or concerns. • Meeting was adjourned 6:30 pm. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel.(503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 .. l..;I 869 NW Wall Street Suite 201, Bend,Oregon 97701 Tel.(541)330-0009 Fax(541)330-0027 08 - Service Provider Letters Feb. 7. 2008 2:58PM No. 4606 P. From:J1vanJee Architect, All 603 297 4635 02/0' 39 13:D7 I1717 P.002/002 FEB 0 7. 2D08 ll . CleanWat;\'4tervices By Our tommflmont Is tlear, GW9tnieNUmtwr Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment Jurisdiction: exre-I • Property information; (axamplm 1S234111301400) Owner Information: Tsxlet tD(e): I 1 5• T) 4 i!.10. ; Name: • Company: •.-� Address: Site Address:4 I(af�0 74j • . raj .• Phone/Fax: ?3 r sr J "/• - __ Nearest Cross Streat: t f+i .. Ciotti ioM r te/_ — E-mall; IaYL E� t?? G r 6! .. 1 '1}vwa , DeVetopment ACtivityv Check all that apply Applicant Information: Addition to Single t'amliy Residence (roams,dock,garage) 0 Name: 1' c��i l Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Minor Lend Partition ❑ Company: _1 i t,��4 t�i.irT~ 6 i i'(i Residential Condominium ❑ Commercial Condominium ❑ Address -�F rw.,,,�, t,, i-� i�,Fl( paw • •:. Residential Subdivision ❑ Commercial Subdivision ❑ 1701Z-Ti.,-41'41:;). Single Lot Commercial IV Multi Lot Commercial ❑ phone/Fax�`°+ 1 R�lGvr t ?`7� ?' 5 Other 7. i6'tAhi ^( T(? Email: L V��co+J�,d,rL kt 1 edti Cor-ervvieze4.4A4.+- Wilt the project involve any off site work: YES❑ NOM Unknown L._l Location and description of otf•slte works • Additional comments or Information that may be needed to understand your project: car= Gd t V I`r'4t. Tlmte application does NOT replete the need for Grading and Erosion Control Perri tfa-,Connetttan Petro I ,Gu limn Permitts fide 1]evafopmnirt Permits,DEQ 1200-C Permit or other parmtts eg issued by the Department of Environmental Duality,Department of 5ta1O Lando andlgr lbepdrbmant Of the Army COE. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and pomplated under apptleahla local,steto,ens federal IoW, By signing this form,the Owner or Owner's authoteted agent Or representeiive.acknowladg es and agrees that empigyo es of Clears Water Services have authority to enter the p rojeat alto at all rrss,sanabta times for the purpose or inspecting project oh conditions and gathering information misled to the project site. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in thin document,and to the bast of my knowledge end boor,thus infOrMat{on ie true,complete,and arcurstc. PrindType N:• te F - r .Print/typeTide: ,J 1?r1-t . • St•neturu: �t • Date: ---- .FOR DISTRICT USE ONLY . Sensitive :as potentially exist on alto or within 200'of the site THE APPLICANT ItniltE ASSESSMENT pataLTAL$&JIAN F A RWptit?AQYIDBR L�7Tl?R. If Sensitive Areas exist on The site or within 200 feel on adjacent properties,a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required. d Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on alto or within 200'of the alto. This Sensitive Area Pre-Soreening Site Assessment • does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality eena'hive areas If they are subsequently discovered. This document will serve as your Service Provider letter as required by Reealution and Order 07-20,Section 2,02.1. All required parmito and approvals must be obtained and completed under applitable 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 eliminate the need to evaluate end protect additional water quality senaitive areas if they are subsequently disccvarid. 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 aapprovets must be obtained and completed under applicable local,state,and federal law, ❑ This Service Provider Letter is•ngt valid unless CWS approved site plan(s)are attached. ❑ The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development, NO SITC ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQU -ED, - Reviewed 8y: ;Lie .r% Date: • IMF 2654 8W HIIIeboro tilpnwey.Hnlrbvle,Oman $7123 , Phone; ($03)8&i-cline.Pec (543)Est-4438•Wwa.glesewAthritainet.la RMp4f MIN t,¢0457 p * R * 1 * D * E DISPOSAL COMPANY P.O. Box 820 Sherwood, OR 97140 Phone: (503) 625-6177 Fax: (503) 625-6179 October 9,2008 Jivanjee Architect 9055 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy Portland,OR 97225 Re: Mirage Storage on Warner Ave-Updated site plan/Enclosure location/size. We have reviewed the updated site plan for Mirage Storage on Warner Ave. The most recent site plan we were sent shows an enclosure straight back from the entrance to the property. The gates open towards the entrance to the complex so that Pride drivers will be able to drive straight into the enclosure and empty the container. Per your E-mail the enclosure will be 10' deep and 10' wide.This size will only allow for 1 commercial size container. It's our understanding the customer will be using a roll cart for garbage collection (residential size). The gate opening must be no less than 10' wide. There must be full swing gates that open at least 120 degrees. The gate placement must be in front of,not inside the walls to allow for the full 10' required. The gate also needs cane bolts and holes put in place so the gate can be held in the open and closed position. Two front load containers can not go in the enclosure as it is planned. If the customer wishes to have garbage and recycling services, only 1 service can be provided in a container if it is to be placed in the enclosure. The other service must be provided in residential size roll carts. There must not be any sort of overhang/roof over the area that our trucks will need to drive to get to the enclosure. Also I'd like to note that 2 parking spaces are designated directly in front of the enclosure. It is recommended that no parking signs be posted designating which day(s)we service the enclosure to ensure our access to the container. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Kelsey liams Pride Disposal Co. (503)625-6177 *105 kelseyw@pridedisopsal.com 09 - Impact Study .\\ L. \ ; 1 ', \,`\.',,�,1� i J ,rnjee Circosta Archie. Lure, LLP �. I _'` A Architecture • Planning • Urban Design 217 Self Storage Phase II City of Tigard Conditional Use Application Impact Study Transportation System (including bikeways) Improvements to the transportation system which included improvements to Warner Avenue and the construction of the cul-de-sac were completed during Phase I. These improvements are adequate to serve Phase II and no additional improvements are required. Hall Blvd is not impacted by this project other than the emergency access required by the Fire Marshall. A fire truck access and turnaround lane is provided on site in conjunction with an easement on an adjacent neighbor's property. Drainage System (off-site) The storm drainage system in Warner Avenue was upgraded during Phase I and designed to accommodate Phase II. Phase II will tie into this existing system as planned. Drainage System (on-site) On-site stormwater from roof downspouts and new paved areas will be piped to a stormfilter catchbasin for water quality and then to an on-site detention facility and will then be released to the existing stormwater system in Warner Avenue similar to Phase I. Parks System The proposed development is not residential and will therefore have no additional impact on the parks system. Water System The water system will consist of both domestic and fire systems. The water system in Warner Ave. was upgraded in Phase I and has adequate capacity to serve Phase II. Phase II will be connected to the existing system. A double detector check assembly and fire hydrant will be provided for the new building. Sewer System The sewer system was upgraded in Phase I and has adequate capacity to serve Phase II. Phase II will be connected to the existing system. Noise Impacts Noise impacts will be limited to passenger car and truck traffic to and from the site. 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,Oregon 97225 Tel. (503)297-5160 Fax(503)297-4635 10 - Pre-Application Conference Notes CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES s (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6)Months) iv':' ,, 4 PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: STAFF AT PRE-APP.: - NON-RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: T dNNJE9 C/i'CC5Trf' 4111T'1. AGENT: 1,..r4Ks 7 h44•1,4., Phone: (5°3 ) 297 - S/b 0 Phone: ( ) - PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: H 6 C'O W -14 L /3 b14) TAX MAP(S)/LOT#(S): 1 5 ( 3 S' 01) NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: uD 1 Tl d n.5 L c S'&' pe-e 'l I r ( ii ) �i 0). V A T. ,`CC )l.c. )� PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: ..-A VMa- Z ' . E 4 ei i w/ efts o S r mmi a-rale i7 FoR .4 F'✓l1- T/nota anu-3RV #972744■fst/7" COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: G E x44-, Cc:WV1 me-sac/14 ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.5=Z0 ) MINIMUM LOT SIZE: "B-sq. ft. Average Min.lot width: `C0 ft. Max. building height: Y.S+ ft. Setbacks: Front: $ ft. Side: -V—ft- Rear: ft. Corner: '1--ft. from street. MAXIMUM Sl'1'L COVERAGE: i1'$ %. Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: I$`%- ,JNEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED PARTIES,AVD THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18.390) • The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to 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 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum,the transportation system,including bikeways, the drainage system,the parks system,the water system,the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact,the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Esz ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.765) I00 4 Minimum number of accesses: j Minimum access width: . • Minimum pavement width: 24 ' . All driveways and parking areas,except for some fleet storage parking areas,must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.705.030) WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators 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, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. ❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) ➢ STREETS: • feet from the centerline of • LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet,along the site's boundary. ➢ FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK ❑ SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.B.) BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS-Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: ► A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; • ► All actual building setbacks will be at least half('/z) of the building's height; and ► The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. gif BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.745) In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences,utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFF 2.WIDTHS applicable toyoux proposal area are: j p= Z p t 110 feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. wt+11— kt°tif e feet along south boundary. 1(e►O feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION,SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS R E Q U I R E D ALONG: 10°' Y (A)"6—gr. c)& T sooty), CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section EX/LANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.705) STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms,decorative walls,and raised planters. 1ECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPAI'113ILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a Beat 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. PARKING (Refer to Code Section 18.765.040) REQUIRED parking for this type of use: . ) ,' i * f U� ,) ys'D v ntca Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): l Vt/3TJte e„ "�.�, 1) REQUIRED Q parking: SECONDARY USE RE arkin : ` Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 50%OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. PARKING STAT T S 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. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. HANDICAPPED PARKING: • All larking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions,is mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. • BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.765.080) Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.765) BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic an in convenient locations. a 61411.101;.161.- /24 El .4-7,;(/ CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of B NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section ❑ SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.775) The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS,WETLAND AREAS,ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT,OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas. and their boundaries.is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection,QorrDmodifilc�at on of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WI ❑ STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.775.080.C) When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.0. g CLEAN WATER SERVICES (CWS) BUFFER STANDARDS (Refer to CWS R&O 07-20/USA Regulations-Chapter 3) LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor fox a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: ' • The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION &ORDER 07-20 SLISIT1l :AItEA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT • WIDTH OF VEGETATED VE • . • - `TO.SENSITIVE AREA' CORRIDOR PER SIDES • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 15 feet 10 to <50 acres 25 feet >50 to <100 acres • Existing or created wetlands<0.5 acre 25 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands>0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers,streams,and springs with year-round flow ♦ Streams with intermittent flow draining>100 acres • Natural lakes and ponds • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% I 10 to <50 acres 30 feet >50 to <100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure in 25- • Rivers,streams,and springs with year-round flow foot increments from the starting point to • Streams with intermittent flow draining>100 acres the top of ravine(break in<25%slope), ♦ Natural lakes and ponds add 35 feet past the top of ravine6 'Starting point for measurement=edge of the defined channel(bankful flow)for streams/rivers,delineated wetland boundary,delineated spring boundary,and/or average high water for lakes or ponds,whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs,located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement ;Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 6The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet,if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section Restrictions in the Vegetate ir: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except asprovided for in the CWS Design and Construction Standards. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership,such as a subdivision,the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract,and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the CWS R&O 07-20 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas,CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAIN-RD PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively,a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.0 and the "Tree Plan Requirements Handout" included in your pre-application conference packet) A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING,REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot,parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. PROTECTION IS PREFERRED OVER REMOVAL WHEREVER POSSIBLE (Address all items in the City's Tree Plan Requirements Handout). THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: ▪ Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; • Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; I Retainage of from 50 to 75%of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50%of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ▪ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed;and ▪ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section PI/MITIGATION (Refer to Coae Section 18.790.060.E.) REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. • If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. • If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: I The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner,private property. ry The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN-LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director,elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.795) The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FF.F,T IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting streets functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. n ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot-wide access easement. The DEPTH.OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH,unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. CODE CHAPTERS ,j2" 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) n 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) n 18.340(Directors Interpretation) n 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ,� 18.765(Oft-Street ParkinglLoading Requirements) ❑� 18.350(Planned Development) n 18.640(Durham Quany Design Standards) n 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) 18.360(Site Development Review) 01.. 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) J/' 18.780(Signs) Z 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) E 18,710(Accessory Residential Units) n 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) I j 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ❑ 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(Tree Removal) El 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) n 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) 2. 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) j:_a. 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) n 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) n 18.430(Subdivisions) n 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) E 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) ,a# 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) ❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) 2 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • ADDITIONAL CONCERNS C `.OMMENTS: • PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. The Planning counter closes at 5:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2"x 11". One,81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project shall be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Applications with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if'additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard.G'/7 y.( Mic7,A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon rec]uest. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building Tpermit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT HE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). CITY OF TIGARD Pte-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning 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 information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: e CITY OF TIGARD PL NING DIVISION PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-624-3681 DIRECT: 503-718.2.i/3 EMAIL: 94 ryp agttgard-or.gov TITLE 18(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE) INTERNET ADDRESS: www.tigard-or.gov H:\patty\masters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 16-May-08 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES : • ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION Cttyefllgard Oregon Community(Development Shaping A Better Community PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map[s): 1S1350D Tax lolls): 100 Use Type: SDR The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: ® SW Hall Boulevard to 52 feet from centerline (5-lane Arterial) SW to feet SW to feet I I SW to feet Street improvements: ® Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Hall Boulevard, to include: Fl 36 feet of pavement from centerline ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 10-foot concrete sidewalk with 5 foot planter strip ® street trees sized and spaced per TDC ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ® Other: Contact ODOT for additional requirements CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Holes Page 1 of 6 Inglneerhig Depnriment Sectlan street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb U storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. [ I 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 I 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 I I street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. l Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: I I feet of pavement concrete curb storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk I I street trees I I street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Applicalion Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 Engineering OepertmentSeclien I I Other: Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1.) (2.) Overhead Utility Lines: EI 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 Hall Boulevard (opposite side of the street). Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is located in Hall Boulevard and a line in Warner Avenue. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to connect to the public sewer. Water Supply: The Tualatin Valley Water District (Phone:(503) 642-1511) provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: 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 TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 FugineerIng Department Section drainage plan for the site, ,... may be required to prepare a suL .sin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. On-site detention is required. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on- site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof. 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. I I Payment of the fee in-lieu. Must comply with CWS requirements and ODOT requirements if discharging to an ODOT facility. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. 1) 18.705.030.H.1 If proposing access to Hall Boulevard, must provide preliminary sight distance certification. 2) 18.705.030.H.3 If proposing access to Hall Boulevard, must address 600 foot minimum access spacing standard for an Arterial. An adjustment request will be required. 3) Zone Change 2008-00001 Limits trip generation to that allowed under the existing R-12 zone (153 Trips). 4) I8.E.IU ,O 19 tl4$4 pC SS rb Intl"dt -2- o& 149,1- VA-A4 L, 6(--V D 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 building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4016 Engineering Department Section Pay the TIF PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for any final design-related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering DepartmentSecllon For a land partition, applicant must obtain an Engineer,. Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: �"` . y, ENGINEERING DEPA TMENT STAFF DATE Phone: 1503)639-4171 Fax 1503)624-0152 tern platel Revised: September 2,2003 CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Fire Marshal's Office c) - o 9 - 2-00g eeld? 000(0 Date File No. Project Name r1164)(...4' J _ The following checked items are applicable Fire Code requirements based on your proposal. This form is for informational purposes only and does not constitute any type of approval of your project or its design. VIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads all be within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required if the remaining distance to an approved Intersecting roadway, as measured along the fire apparatus access road, is greater than 150 feet. (IFC 503.1.1) i11 'EAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided ith an approved turnaround. (IFC 503.2.5) IRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When uildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the fire code official. (IFC 503.1.1) ❑ ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS—COMMERCIAL: Where buildings exceed 30 feet in height or three stories in height shall have at least three separate means of fire apparatus access. Buildings or facilities having a gross area of more than 62,000 square feet shall be provided with at least two separate means of fire apparatus access. Buildings up to 124,000 square feet provided with fire sprinklers may have a single access. (IFC D104) ❑ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS—ONE-OR TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL: Where there are more than 30 one-or two-family dwelling units, not less than two separate approved means of access shall be provided. Where there are more than 30 dwelling units and all are protected by approved residential sprinkler systems, a single access will be allowed. (IFC D107) ❑ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS—MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL: Where there are more than 100 multiple-family dwelling units, not less than two separate approved means of access shall be provided. Projects up to 200 dwelling units that are protected by approved residential sprinkler systems may have a single access. Projects having more than 200 dwelling units shall have two separate approved means of access regardless of whether they are equipped with fire sprinkler systems. (IFC D106) ERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height �yove the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet in height. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. (IFC D105) ❑ REMOTENESS: Where two access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. (IFC D104.3) IRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads s all have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet(12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 26 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. (IFC 503.2.1) The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. ❑ FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS WITH FIRE HYDRANTS: Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. (IFC D103.1) ❑ TURNOUTS: When any fire apparatus access road exceeds 400 feet in length, turnouts 10 feet wide and 30 feet long shall be provided in addition to the required road width and shall be placed no more than 400 feet apart, unless otherwise approved by the fire code official. These distances may be adjusted based on visibility and light distances. (IFC 503.2.2) ❑ NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking"signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Roads 26 feet wide or less shall be posted on both sides as a fire lane. Roads more than 26 feet wide to 32 feet wide shall be posted on one side as a fire lane. Signs shall read "NO PARKING- FIRE LANE" and shall be installed with a clear space above grade level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have red letters on a white reflective background. (IFC D103.6) (ftS-URFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that Is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load)and 60,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. (IFC D102.1) ❑ BRIDGES: Where a bridge or an elevated surface is part of a fire apparatus access road,the bridge shall be constructed and maintained In accordance with AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges. Bridges and elevated surfaces shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus.Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bridges when required by the fire code official. Where elevated surfaces designed for emergency vehicle use are adjacent to surfaces which are not designed for such use, approved barriers, approved signs or both shall be installed and maintained when required by the fire code official. (IFC 503.2.6) URNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. (IFC 503.2.4 & D103.3) ❑ PAINTED CURBS: Where required,fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted red and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE"at approved Intervals. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red background. (IFC 503.3) ❑ GRADE: Flre apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed 10 percent. Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 5%)with the exception of crowning for water run-off. When fire sprinklers are installed, a maximum grade of 15% may be allowed. Adequacy of fire apparatus access shall be evaluated from the point beginning at the first due fire station to a point within 150 feet of all structures within the development.The approval of fire sprinklers as an alternate shall be accomplished in accordance with the provisions of ORS 455.610(5). (IFC 503.2.7 & D103.2) GATES: Gates securing fire apparatus roads shall comply with all of the following: (IFC D103.5) • Minimum unobstructed width shall be 16 feet, or two 10 foot sections with a center post or island. • Gates serving one-or two-family dwellings shall be a minimum of 12 feet in width. • Gates shall be set back a minimum of 30 feet from the intersecting roadway. • • Gates shall be of the swinging or sliding type • Manual operation shall be capable by one person • Electric gates shall be equipped with a means for operation by fire department personnel • Locking devices shall be approved. %! OMMERCIAL BUILDINGS-REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not e ceed 3,000 gallons per minute(GPM)or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi,whichever is less as calculated using IFC,Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (IFC B105.2) ❑ SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS -REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is(are)3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. (IFC B105.1) ❑ RURAL BUILDINGS-REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: Required fire flow for rural and suburban areas in which adequate and reliable water supply systems do not exist may be calculated in accordance with National Fire Protection Association Standard 1142, 2001 Edition, when approved by the fire code official. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for special assistance and other requirements that may apply. (IFC B105.1.1) ❑ FIRE HYDRANTS–COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. (IFC 508.5.1) ❑ FIRE HYDRANTS–ONE-AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS&ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: Where a portion of a structure is more than 600 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the structure(s), on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. (IFC 508.5.1) lir- FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants vailable to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C,Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. ❑ FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (IFC C102.1) ❑ REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there Is no center line, then assume a centerline,and place the reflectors accordingly. (IFC 508.5.4) :i RE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the apparatus access roadway. FDC's shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code o ial. (IFC 912.2) ;:; •CCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus `� cess roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) ; .■ NOX BOX: A Knox Box for access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for a order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. (IFC 506) Additional information may be obtained from our web site at www.tvfr.com Air,- K . Jol.n K. Dalby, D y Fire Marshal II Tu latin Valley Fire & Rescue, North Division 563-356-4700 11 — Preliminary Sight Distance Certification D L DESIGN GROUP INC. PRELIMINARY INTERSECTION DISTANCE CERTIFICATION Date: 04/08/09 City of Tigard CD — Development Engineering 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 5036-639-4171; Fax 503-642-0752 http.//www.tigard-or.gov Attn: Ms. Kim McMillan RE: Mirage Ministorage Phase 2 The access for this proposal is located at the site's southeasterly property corner where it abuts the Warner Avenue cul de sac. There is no posted speed limit on Warner Avenue. However, the minimum speed limit on a local street is 25 MPH. Therefore, the speed limit along Warner Avenue is 25 MPH, requiring 250 feet of sight distance in both directions, in accord with Tigard Development Code Section 18.705.030.H.1. As required by Code Sections 18.705.030.H.1, sight distance from the access to SW Warner Avenue was measured to be 480 feet to the south (intersection with Highway 99). The driveway is at the end of a cul de sac and therefore no road and no sight distance requirement in the other direction. The Code Section requires that measurements be 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, (actual measurement is taken 15 feet from pavement edge). In conclusion, I hereby certify that the intersection sight distance at the proposed access for the Mirage Ministorage Phase 2 conforms to the requirements for sight distance as set forth in the Tigard Development Code. Gary D rling, PE r et ► Z \ DL Design Grou , Inc. �`.p �� '. r , • 10700 SW Bvrtn-Hillsdale Hwy, Suite 655 • Beaverton, Oregon 97005 • Phone: 503.644.4628 • Fax: 503.644.8965 12 — Preliminary Storm Calculations D L DESIGN GROUP INC. Preliminary Drainage Report MIRAGE 2 MINISTORAGE Tigard, Oregon Prepared for: Jivanjee-Circosta Architecture 9055 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Highway Portland, OR 97225 Prepared : p Y Gary Darling DL Design Group Inc. 10700 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Highway, Suite 655 Beaverton, OR 97008 �.t PR0/ G!N 6.�6,�0 cy 4 19160 OREGO,�1 0 15. Iti" 444' i .aik\\ lEx1SIHES 11-31.08 .l Oct 23,2008 Project No:JCA001 10700 SW Bvrtn-Hillsdale Hwy, Suite 655 • Beaverton, Oregon 97005 • Phone: 503.644.4628 • Fax: 503.644.8965 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project is for the development of phase 2 of the Mirage Ministorage located on SW Hall Blvd. adjacent to Highway 217 in Tigard, Oregon. The project will consist of the construction of a new building, additional parking, and a new driveway and turnaround. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The area of the proposed project is 0.78 acres. The site generally slopes from northeast to southwest at a rate of approximately 4.5%. The elevation difference between Highway 217 and Hall Blvd. is 12 feet. The elevation difference between Highway 217 and SW Warner Street is 7 feet. • r ./ PROJECT SITE Y.ak we r U p ,. , rn YlrTq:A S � V/C:IN1TY /OAF' Fiffure 1: Vicinity Map 2 I <' - - I =�. 4- ;_ Irr • •�•. .r� --- - — ----- \, j ` ' . •.; ;. \ - i. 1. 1• r{ ,• - y'y 'S. a I ;- ,� i PI /r R '• ` f ' I� _i ? 4,V., `• v --A y: '1 • .‘F''- —" - I s I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1• Figure 2: Pre-Developed Basin Map I I I 3 , ; i Figure 3: Post Developed Basin Map L SOIL INFORMATION According to the Soil Survey of Washington County, the soil on this site belongs to Aloha Silt Loam(1) Soil of Group for both of these series is C. The runoff for this soil is described as being medium and moderate for erosion hazard. 4 ,f 'Ad ISL6 I���.SO�� i't, *' 11- ( r may} .'->*--- ,, ti ti S . , gg "' 4' 4' .Z 4=o,_ 'N-• t,, _ ' t '' - "may - 90TH AVM r Iry■ CtJ N .� ) ' &'{' • ..' y r ` G//X .. % "J .}3h'N V 111 01 MS , ^# ,' " • 4., ... •�L 1W I-t Ih'P Mt, t.:] },r+A.� :��,'' 1 4 as, N. , }' Ir. r- f, -.I -�i5 r`'' e. lit"' I. rr ' ,' - .sj VA f/X rf -'.`—i....),{ �lg -� v"! 4 wy i ii 1 L''4.1 r ' _ , *lite \ / �, s''�b .,,, . At '4`.i ? --,,,,,,-* ,/ t,„.„ yJ i ; ,r 1,....., 471'i r r' •1r`,ri in `f- .. c ...,/ ..,- .„.",--,. i fS ,' --r ° • 4 t - . . J" f' kt 4 -i y f ' i .•5 ��� � tttt� � �1 ■ ' Figure 4: Washington County Soil Map Soil Description 37B Quatarna 38.8 48.9% loam, 3 to 7 I percent slopes I I 5 III. PROPOSED DRAINAGE The runoff will be collected by means of roof drains and catch basins and will be detained in an underground detention system and will be treated with a 2 cartridge Stormwater Management catch basin. IV. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS Hydrologic analyses for the site have been completed following the SCS (Type IA) method, with modeling by the WaterWorks computer program. This program enables the user to develop runoff hydrographs for purposes of modeling the 2- 25-year storm events. Analysis calculations, supporting information, and computer output are contained in Appendix A. Impervious and Pervious Surface Areas The pervious and impervious areas used in the analyses are summarized in Table 1 for the Pre- Developed Site(Figure 2) and the Post-Developed Site(Figure 2a). Curve Numbers Curve numbers used for the analyses are based on characterization of the site's soils as primarily Type C soils. The curve numbers represent values that are appropriate for wet antecedent moisture conditions, which is typical of the wet-weather conditions for the area. Table 1. Impervious and Pervious Areas (On-Site) Pre Developed Site Post Developed Site Area Description Area(ac) CN Area(ac) CN Pervious Surface 0.78 74 0.05 74 Impervious Surface 0.00 98 0.78 98 Time of Concentration 12.00 minutes 3.90 minutes Peak Discharges Peak discharge rates for the prescribed rainfall events for pre-developed and post-developed site conditions are summarized in the following table. The rainfall depths are 24-hour rainfall depths used for the Washington County area(per Cleanwater Services). Computer model output is contained in Appendix C. Storm Event Rainfall (Inches) Peak Runoff Rate(cfs) Existing Developed 25-Year 3.90 0.20 0.34 6 V. WATER QUALITY Per City of Tigard and Clean Water Services 2007 R&O's 4.05.4.d Water Quality Flow (cfs) = 0•36 (in.) x Area (sq.ft.) 12(in/ft)(4 hr)( 60 min/hr)(60 sec/miii) .36 x 31799/(12 x 4 x 60 x 60) = 0.066 CFS Number of Cartridges=Water Quality Flow(cfs) x (449 gpm/cfs/15 gpm/cartridge) ) .066 x(449/15)= 2 cartidges • 7 Appendix A Calculations & Supporting Information 8 I I carpet.tat • ,041e0S 10/74/09 4.30:8 as Shareeare 3414054 9144 1 -...............�. 0E1'A11 BAilti SUWµJY��---..,......-.-.._ I BASIN ED' 1]011244 NINE: 101001 2 Year 4(0 NETN006(0Gt TOTAU MLA • 0.78 Acres 645E$1ONS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • TWILL PSRV Iwo PRECIPITATION - 2.60 113(3341 AREA..: 0.71 Acres 0.00 Acres TINS IMTERYAL 10.00 a 110 CN • 66.00 0.00 TC • 10.00 N1n 0.00.9n I ABSTRACTION(0*77: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.20 cfs Y41: 0.09 Ac•ft TINE: 500.1n 04626 TINE DESIGN T1LE 0E5164 TINE 0551(31 TINE 0E5160 TIME DESIGN TINE O$SIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF 0000#0 RUNOFF I (+rtn) (efs)(wln) (cfs) (31(9) (cfs) loin) (cfs) Wu) (cfs) (oln) (cfs) �... ...--.0 ��w 110 0.0010 610 0.0676 910 0.0461 1240 0.0366 10 • 1110 20 370 0.0037 620 0.0667 970 0.0459 1220 0.0366 1520 1530 30 130 0.0037 630 0.0666 930 0.0439 1730 0.0366 40 740 0.0064 614 0.0018 940 0.0462 1240 0.0368 1040 SO 300 0.0003 810 0.0506 910 0.0462 1250 0.0368 ISSO 60 360 0.0094 600 0.0608 960 6.0462 1260 0.0168 1560 1570 70 170 0.0147 679 0.0576 970 0.0441 1770 0.0169 60 160 0.0159 660 0.0169 930 0.0437 1280 0.0170 1510 93 390 0.0159 090 0.0169 990 0.0437 1790 0.0170 1590 100 400 0.0715 700 0.0556 1000 0.0440 1300 0.0171 1600 1670 110 410 0.0251 710 33.0153 1010 0.0440 1310 0.0171 120 470 0.0257 720 0.0553 1070 0.0440 1320 0.0371 1820 130 430 0.0363 710 0.0538 1030 0.0441 1330 0.017? 1630 140 440 0.036$ 740 0.0535 1040 0.0441 1340 0.0173 I 1840 1610 10 410 0.4340 710 0.0635 1010 0.0441 1350 0.0377 140 460 0.0941 760 0.0019 1060 0.04221 1360 0.0348 1660 170 470 0.0573 770 0.0516 1070 0.0414 1370 0.0343 1670 193 480 0.0555 760 0.0516 1080 6.0416 1380 0.0143 I 1680 1640 190 490 0.1791 790 0.0498 1090 0.041$ 1390 0.0144 200 500 0.7046 600 0.0491 2100 0.0411 1400 0.0344 1700 110 310 0.7019 810 0.0495 1110 6.0419 1410 0.0344 1710 220 520 0.1324 820 0.0300 1170 0.0396 1420 0.0141 1720 1730 230 S10 0.1171 110 0.0004 1130 0.0391 1430 0.0145 240 540 0.1171 $40 6.0000 1140 0.0391 1440 0.0141 1740 150 150 0.0961 850 0.0487 1150 0.030E 1150 0.6060 1750 I 1760 260 560 0.0916 863 3.0(73 1160 0.0391 1440 270 570 0.0415 870 0.0478 1170 0.0301 1470 1770 140 0.0301 550 0.0732 060 0.0412 1180 0.0370 1460 1780 I I2 year storm predeveloped I I I I 9 00.01 i1.,:•;U 9131114 a sher,wer.141e4su PAW 1 04TA11 SAM MOW LATIN Mt 1..allea• MORI 3014.01 16 31441 Witt 5CS NLTU97ClDi TOTAL META • 0.78 1304.[ MA91P101P51 0.CE tft .M.6r.4.1 'rVi ...I TYPCIA MERV IMP r4tc:r:14-tcu.._.: 3.S0 100044 .01.3A..1 C.76 Ate.• 0.00 Mires TIME :nlrlvtL....: 10.00 Mir CM • 64.02 0.00 1C 10.02 010 0.00#Sn 4131LACt11.LOLtP: 0.20 0w 6A1C: 0.37 al vole 0.13 AL ri link: 140 re. 118425 1153 Oe510I TIME 011101 Tank %tS3 . ME etstOS TtMC 011164 71113 MIEN MEOW MEW 0i,60rr M3N7'P MUNGPr WWI 411t) (46)(4100 (c4) (010) (efa) (Kin) (eft) (119) (tA) (411n) (tfs) eaireaw.eememmvv r.r±earsewra.wanesrrn.enrrnamear_arss•efe.w.waw..rTevr..w.rzr.wlierwm avAw.arawaxwweawatrmse. 1510 10 316 0.0203 610 0.1116 013 0.0726 1110 0.0162 1520 2D 370 0.0216 620 0.1099 9247 0.0719 1220 0.0162 1130 30 330 0.0219 630 0.1096 970 0.0719 1130 0.0567 40 340 0.0102 640 0.5013 9443 0.0723 1240 0.0164 1140 1590 50 310 0.0319 659 0.0094 950 6.0723 1150 0.0164 65 350 0.0120 66D 0.0993 960 0.0723 1260 0.0964 1140 70 370 0.0411 470 0.0036 970 0.0610 1270 0.0565 1170 60 360 0.0431 489 0.4024 900 0.0662 1760 0.0566 1140 00 300 0.0432 499 0.4924 046 0.0612 1290 0.0166 1190 1600 100 4.:16 0.0167 709 0.0696 1005 0.9584 1300 0.0167 1610 110 410 0.0595 710 0.0899 1010 0.066i 1350 0.0167 120 414 0.010? 729 0.0592 1020 6.0613 1320 0.0567 1620 1630 130 41C 0.0704 730 0.0865 1030 0.0680 1330 0.0166 140 440 0.613S 749 0.0851 1045 0.0688 1140 0.0569 1640 150 450 0.0636 710 0.0859 1050 0.0688 1350 0.0168 1650 1660 165 464- 0.1092 760 0.4130 1065 0.0652 1340 0.0130 170 470 0.1146 770 0.0974 1070 6.6611 1370 0.0122 1670 160 460 0.1166 780 0.0674 1032 0.0645 1340 0.012? 1160 190 410 0.3296 700 0.6794 1095 0.0647 1340 0.0123 1610 1700 205 500 0.3744 600 0.0767 1100 0.0648 1400 0.0124 210 414 0.3731 610 0.6787 3.110 0.0647 1430 0.0124 1730 210 0.0301 570 0.3123 120 0.0791 1120 0.0621 1420 0.0525 1720 230 0.0044 530 0.2027 130 0.0791 1135 0.0604 1410 0.0525 1730 1700 240 0.0051 5.40 0.2023 140 0.0713 1140 0.9604 1440 0.0521 1710 210 0.0044 510 0.1630 630 0.0761 1160 0.0101 1410 0.0001 260 0.0914 16C 0.1147 660 0.6751 1165 0.0644 1440 1760 270 0.0015 170 0.1145 470 0.0745 1170 0.6501 1470 1770 287 0.0114 5.60 0.1236 880 0.4750 1160 0.0568 1410 1760 Peps 1 10 year storm predeveloped 1(1 I I 01105 10/21/68 9:11011 w :r uuty.at.t.at arer4rt ealttas Drys I re.ese.a..... ..s.sa serslWs.set.VerTSwr^..-,-.--e+.!JISRStnsmel1RR meter :gin. OITAIL NASA% S.NIVorf I.41IN IIFi_`1CA3liax Not: iistl 1S yet- 14440 0 S F[TM 061 TOTAL MLA I 0.78 Jr.t. rt 64s:rears: 0.00 LfI C*INPI{C3. 717C • TTD11A TIKE IMr PAICIPIIATION.._.$ 4.00 irChaw AMA..? 0.78 AEIYt 0.00 4::t416 TINS INILIVAL....I ISM sin CN....t 66.00 0.1.6 1c....t 10.00 NIA 0.05 ti, ASSfK ld ACIIO$1 COrt 0.20 I RAE NAZI: 0.46 :Ss .tt: 0.16 AC•ft TIMI: !i.0 n.n 111821 TINE OE01471 TIME 0L310N TIN1 7ISI•2s IIUN ECSIGN Tilt OLSIGY 111M1 RESIGN Utsor, RUMEN, !.'.Purr SUNSET SUSEPI SSW, CMtn) (ef6)( .) (ofs) (rein) Cal) (n5n) icfa) (Ti,) (66) Cntn) (ifa) r11,,r.. Rexsee eswesnrri+sw.te,vsesarmmw.mNet.raQa sense--,,,..es rm e,w senaa.sssassr..ssvtaRw.sxassnsz.�• 10 316 0.0310 610 0.1345 910 0.0613 1210 0.0460 1!10 70 320 0.0329 420 0.1314 936 0.0130 1220 0.0440 1!40 10 330 0.0130 630 0.1116 930 6.0650 1210 0.0460 1!30 1340 60 146 0.0431 640 0.1212 260 6.0633 1240 0.0461 1510 S6 310 0.0413 610 0.1180 956 0.0614 1.210 0.0462 60 360 0.0414 660 0.1109 960 0.0654 1240 0.0462 1160 1170 70 376 0.0544 670 0.1116 970 6.0913 1270 0.:463 80 166 0.0147 680 0.1103 985 0.0604 1730 0.6463 1180 1!90 95 332 0.0149 690 0.1103 995 0.0604 1290 0.0663 100 466 0.0754 700 0.1071 1.600 0.9667 1300 0.0464 1662 1612 110 416 0.0749 710 0.5064 1010 0.0107 1110 0.0465 120 420 0.0792 720 0.1064 1070 0.0607 1120 0.0465 1670 135 430 0.1632 730 0.1030 1030 0.0600 1350 6.0666 1630 160 440 0.1642 740 0.1023 3.660 6.0610 1340 6.0466 I 1640 1652 ISO 436 0.1043 710 0.1022 3.056 0.0610 1350 0.0666 1662 165 466 0.1192 760 0.0987 1060 6.0744 1340 0.0623 170 470 0.3456 770 0.0079 1070 6.0759 1270 0.0612 1670 143 446 0.1431 745 0.0079 1080 6.0749 1110 0.3612 1680 145 49.- 0.4699 790 0.6942 1000 6.0761 1390 0.0613 1640 200 ¶06 0.4639 100 0.0934 1100 6.0762 1410 0.0613 1760 210 SIC 0.4621 310 0.0934 3110 6.0761 141.0 0.0613 3710 I 1720 223 0_0037 Sit 0.2843 970 0.6940 1170 6.0714 1420 0.6414 230 0.0041 Sat 0.2466 815 0.0941 :130 0.0709 1410 0.0614 1710 240 0.0045 540 0.2443 140 0.6945 1140 6.0700 1440 0.6400 1740 1750 250 0.0101 656 0.1474 11.0 0.0002 1160 6.0711 1410 0.0106 I1740 265 0_6122 666 0.1871 160 0.0894 1165 6.0711 1440 270 0_0123 516 0.1867 170 0.6494 1170 6.0711 1470 1770 1780 280 0.0701 Sit 0.1114 180 0.0896 1180 6.0668 1440 I Poo. 1 I 25 year storm predeveloped I I I 11 uutput.Ltt U1205 10/24/06 2:31146 4. S1'4rI.MrI 141... a+5. 1 -�>.c.non.. _-aanv- .rte-c.+=---'--'-r- -,--..-+'•..-- ---'--- OLtA1L NASIR 5.104ViYr- "SIM c TI 9 C 01 .2d MPACI jc.001 2 yea, 44tv 0 MI TOTAL MICA 1 4.70 mew* 64;t11-0M1 0.04 Ors CAINrA L 'YPCs tT►C TRV lISP 1'6252 et 14-106.._ 1 2.50 10.4.4 ARIA..: 0.Q1 Air.. 0.7 Atrt. TITS IR1uIAL.._ 1 10.60 nir. CM....: 64.40 93.00 IC. • 5.00 eth 5.00 din A1Z76ACT706 mows 0.20 1030 we: 0.41 Lfi VOL: 0_211 At.ft Trim 490 Elsa Itis2s TINL IN SIGN TINS 013105 77263E 010205 1IML littGN -[Mt 013145 TM 001[063 LLNOrr 6115011 Fewer PUM7.e 61150►r 6032321 GItn1 (cf.)(921) (cf.) Otirr) (en) (..d T.) (cf.) (iii) (LP)) Wu) (sr') 1'411".:'.124.43.-1'IE"""."n ""'" '31"r"TanF"""-a rr:+.aeries.'"Ti'''Te;7)r"wnRa'','xranww. 10 310 0.0447 610 0.1002 910 0.0502 Ill) 0.0154 1510 320 0.0647 420 0.1002 950 0.0602 1270 0.0614 1120 30 31C 0.0641 430 0.1001 935 0.1402 1220 0.0454 1510 40 302 0.0731 640 9.0592 Tai 0,0603 1210 0.0454 1140 SO 35C 0.0735 650 0.0892 910 0.0603 1250 0.0634 2120 60 360 0.0736 460 0.0192 960 0.0602 1240 0.0454 1140 70 0.0011 370 0.0322 470 0.0320 970 0.0165 1270 0.0415 1570 6) 0.0011 360 0.0822 680 0.0820 960 0.0141 1260 0.0415 13110 1140 90 0.0014 340 0.0524 695 0.0670 905 0.0165 1710 0.0405 103 0.0125 +(A 0.0477 700 0.0714 1000 0.0166 1100 0.0455 1600 110 0_0125 410 0.0577 719 0.0714 1010 0.0566 1320 0.0455 1610 120 0.0124 tIC 0.0670 72) 0.0714 1020 0.0146 1120 0.0415 1620 1630 235 0.0234 410 0.1205 710 0.0741 1030 0.0164 1310 0.0455 141 0.0234 440 0.1205 749 0.0748 1063 0.0146 1140 0.0415 1640 150 0.0236 £50 0.1107 7111 0.0741 2050 0.0146 1150 0.0455 1610 110 0.0321 460 0.1474 740 3.0711 1060 0.0529 1140 0.0417 1640 170 0.0324 470 0.1474 770 0.0711 1070 0.0129 1170 0.0417 1670 160 0.0324 420 0.1495 780 0.0711 1060 0.0129 1110 0.0417 1610 10) 0.0362 it 0.1134 790 0.0671 1093 0.0129 1190 0.0417 1630 20) 0.0362 1/.0 0.1136 1100 0.0475 1100 4.0529 1400 0.0417 1700 210 0.0382 110 0.4121 1110 0.0471 1110 0.0179 1410 0.0117 1710 270 0.0420 420 0.1014 130 0.0676 1120 0.0491 1420 0.0617 1720 230 0.0420 SIC 0.2014 410 0.0676 1130 0.0141 1430 0.0417 1710 740 0.042% 110 0.7010 140 0.0675 1140 0.+5491 1110 0.0414 1740 210 0.0477 510 0.1474 410 0.0636 1110 0.0492 1410 1740 1760 265 0.0477 160 0.1474 164 0.0432 1160 0.0142 1440 1770 270 0.0474 470 0.1472 170 0.0639 1170 0.0431 1470 17110 263 0.0161 SIC 0.1110 110 0.0630 1163 0.5414 1410 rsp. 1 2 year storm developed 12 uutpul.t4t 44405 10/24/06 9:33:32 s, tl•arnars 6s1144R R„p 1 • CLZ41L 0#0:6 GsM41lY 641111 LC: 144140 IMMC: 1.4081 10}1..r d+rJ 50.711970LD64 TxAL APt71.......1 0.70 46.1.4 4ftari14JS: 9.CC cfa 1.4.0104.L-}1L.._.! 770[}6 0G6V 104 r4tclrrl4-ccq....t 1.10 lr.lra M4A..1 C.irf A.rra 0.71 41n/r "MG :"LWAL....1 :0.114 ft" CN....1 {`��.08 96.C�C 7:....s 5.DS nta I.D7 NIi 4!I14AC1101►L'8crrt :1.10 PLAC lAtt: 8.11 :fs '.TiLt 0.14 At-fl Ma:: 4510 n R IK178 00 0i::611 7:66 001011 TINC 10[9101 1IM4 m144 -LRE DtU114 12141 01401 05352 4r (,i•) (c}:) (fir: 41.6) 6min) (sfs) (,II) ccro {nZa) ;ch) <rem) (cfr) 10 316 0.0647 415 8.1092 018 11.91t2 1110 0.0431 1524 iZ 3it 0.' 47 628 5.1052 0:0 t.5142 1220 0.0434 18 310 0.0646 618 0.1001 010 t.51,0 1230 0.0454 1110 3510 45 34:. 0.0715 648 8.11103 045 t.060 1740 0.0414 3it D.8'30 fit D.C892 750 1.'.9603 lil0 0.6434 . 1550 64 34 0.0736 669 8.C892 065 11.954.7 1260 0.04 3540 70 5.0813 3k 0.0327 6711 0.078 070 C.0161 1770 0.0436 1570 1110 60 0.0811 36t 0.6577 685 0.0670 065 C.0163 12l0 0.5435 95 u.0914 3ik 0.0524 699 0.020 047 C.BUS l240 0.0435 1100 193 0.0121 18* 0:1177 708 8.0764 1005 0.9566 13011 0.5435 1500 110 0.0121 41C 0.0177 715 5.11761 1010 0.8526 1310 0.0455 3610 1620 00 5.01226 .2t 0.0079 725 8.11764 1070 C.5116 1310 0.0433 136 0.0716 470 0.1705 737 0.0716 1030 0.5.566 1110 0.0435 3510 140 0.0734 44C 0.1205 749 0.0740 1040 0.9566 1340 0.0435 1640 1650 106 0.0236 die 0.1207 739 8.0746 1005 0.9526 1350 01,455 160 163 0.0321 414 0.1474 760 0.0711 :065 0.5120 1140 0.0417 17,0 0.4331 474 0.1471 771 5.0711 1070 1.9120 1370 0.0417 1570 157 00331 41: 0.1475 785 5.6722 1609 e.5 1z9 1530 0:744? 16-10 1610 195 0.0351 4A 0.1130 249 9.'6,671 1007 0.9529 1198 0.041 1700 252 0.0312 '.0 0.4.16 149 504675 1157 0.5429 *400 0440 265 0.0102 Sit 0.4:21 115 5.0671 .1113 0.8120 1410 0.0417 1710 220 5.0430 530 0.31114 2127 3.0625 1110 0.9491 1410 0.044? 1720 233 0.51434 Sit 0.7*11 435 94676 1130 0.34.11 0s10 1.4!? 1730 247 0.0472 540 0.2015 445 5.067S 2t41 0.5411 1440 0.0414 17.40 1750 265 0.0477 1St 0.1474 135 5.t636 :1 5 1.9492 1450 245 0.0177 524 0.1474 169 8.1:63') 2165 0.5457 1428 1760 274 4770 0.0423 570 0.1.172 4;:l 5.1!639 1170 C.541t 1478 2145 0..055. itt 0.1:15 165 5. 611 .1167 4.8404 1410 17:0 Ns* 1 10 year storm developed 13 rseme.TYt ALs:t 1:]*:27 a stamar V0 b1NN 11101 L ^- -_- fet I Oht1N 1 101Ytr tam:o: )71214 MM.:}1483 25 Star=ow /Li Mtlt.LI..Wf 7911.1."AAA.......: 0.76 A.TFt tMI1uM: l∎AO VI 44YM•1t1 Ten.....: ]R IA ✓N4' Av. •01 C9t:7Att71 . 4.0*•r,t,l MAL.: 0.:S A:,H 0.73 lee.' -ala :4t4Nr4 10.0:ett .743....7 64.:6 0E.03 1t....: t.:0 rr 1.10 mA w i 7144 I 't: 0.10 tom 447s: 0.10 eft 1e►; 0.23 Ae-r: 77.11 103 sin 40111 'l.0 11.:1■1 7/Pt Y1 31M fir ota1W F:IAn 442:20 Il01 11242421 -111 altttel ' 6:14:1! 0.10,• lN1:t• M/1:4• 1.t1R1 14342.4 0 1117) tett7 (1V) ,cfa MK' TA's) e1191'• 7:737 :1'l) 'I'ti (*•r) (eft) 15:: 152: 151: 154: 110: LS:: 15.. 1.11: 1411 Ina: L412 112: 131: 144 145: 1447 142: LG1: 112:• 170: Ent t7.. LrI: 17e: l:s: `-.177: 175: 14 .1_ 0.1144 170 0.1030 010 0.4170 1220 0.0714 N 12: 4.1134 130 D.1.41f 470 0.0176 1234 4.0714 Y} 132 4.1145 110 0.1434 470 0.4571 1334 0.0754 4.) 14: 4-1171 140 0.1411 540 0.4177 124) 0.0724 F7 117 4.12^3 OW 0.1451 910 0.117, 1251 0.07E-4 03 0.7:01 24: •1.121] 1011 0.1451 560 0.0576 1223 0.0714 74 0.:376 27; 0.1.14 270 0.1371 170 0.0114 1773 0.0715 00 0.:1:6 11: 4.1414 2111 0.1315 110 0.0111 1.212 0.0726 *3 0.1110 34: 4.141.6 C10 &lilt 950 0.0211 1233 4.075 101 0.7371 40: 4.1013 7:0 0.1121 3 V 0.4614 1140 0.021 194 0.2372 •:: 0.1111 710 0.12!6 3010 0.0611 1713 0.0715 123 0.7374 42: 4.1445 72$ 0.1271 3170 0.4114 1313 0.0711 134 0.4747 43: 0.703: 730 0.1711 1010 0.0610 1:13 0.0715 140 0.2747 44: 0.707: 740 0.1711- 2010 0.0116 1514 4.0725 161 0.2116 46: 0.7025 250 0.1311 3070 0.4614 12 SI 0.034 103 0.30.1 44. 0.7404 710 0.1155 3120 0.0114 1103 4.1024 170 0.4112 A 7: 4.7404 770 0.1961 1070 0.0011 1F40 4..01'4 114 0.3511 43: 0.7441 !60 0.1.!L 3140 0.4171 1711 O.007, 143 0.:742 40: O.idol 740 0.1006 3060 0.0114 1650 0.0671 703 0.:741 70: 0.6141 1:0 0.1011 1160 0.3156 1040 0.0074 710 0.:710 17: 4.7611 130 0.4331 1110 0.3110 2423 0.002* 724 0.7210 •2: O.3'-00 1 2$ 0 1027 3 12 0.4742 1AM 4.11:4 7:-3 0.:710 i1: 4-VAC 170 0 ill? 3U0 0.4791 1413 4.1074 :44 0.:750 :4: 0.3705 - 140 0.102C 1140 0.4740 140 .3.10.1 724 0.:174 25: 4.741.S III 0.1331 3150 0.4202 1253 143 0.:474 92. 4.7413 110 0.9411 1100 0.4735 1443 774 0.:170 0.2402 170 0.9114 3670 0.4725 1174 740 0.1:00 56: 4..141. 110 0.1037 31(0 0.0724 1133 25 year storm developed 6,464 14 I I output.txt r.&kOS =�`10/24/Oi_v951:50 as Shareware Release page 1 LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY &k25 MATCH INFLOW -STD- -DIS- e-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION s (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- e-STAGE. id (cfs) VOL (cf) 25•year storm s �==�o� 0.20 0.41 DETPIPE oRIFICE 221.79 1 0.19 a 639.00 cf 10 year storm 0.37 0.41 DETPIPE oRIFICE 221.79 1 0.19 639.00 cf 2 year storm 0.46 0.68 DETPIPE ORIFICE 222.92 1 0.40 1179.25 cf I Detention Calculations I output.txt ii&k0S 10/24/08 9:53:46 am Shareware Release page 1 a Q o . z STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST u . - UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. DETPIPE Description: DETENTION PIPE I Diameter: 3.00 ft. Length: 180.00 ft. Slope.. . : 0.0020 ft/ft upstr: dnstr: ii I Pipe Size and Lenjth I output.txt ;!&kOS 10/24/08 9:55:15 am Shareware Release page 1 ...aza.-===_..==.- . STAGEGISCHARGE IARLE __ ...n...... MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID Nu. ORIFICE Description: ministorege orifice Outlet Elev: 220.10 [ley: 220.10 ft Orifice Diaa:eter: 2.3000 in. Elev: 222.00 ft Orifice 2 Diare;er: 2.5000 in. G&k25 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---. STAGE c--DISCHARGE---, STAGE <--DISCHARGE-- STAGE <--DISCHARGE---. ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) 220.10 0.0000 220.90 0.1284 221.70 0.1416 222.50 0.3423 220.20 0.0454 221.00 0.1362 221.80 0.1872 222.60 0.3584 I 220.30 0.0642 221.10 0.1436 221.90 0.1926 222.70 0.3734 220.40 0.0786 221.20 0.1306 222.00 0.1979 222.80 0.3676 220.50 0.0908 221.30 0.1573 222.10 0.2567 222.90 0.4011 220.60 0.1015 221.40 0.1637 222.20 0.2839 223.0D I 0.4141 220.70 0.1112 221.50 0.1699 222.30 0.3058 223.10 0.4265 220.80 0.1201 221.60 0.1758 222.40 0.3250 I Orifices I I 15 13 - Arborist Report APPLIED HORN►.. RTURAL 4. - CONSULTING, INC. September 19, 2008 City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR To whom it may concern: Please reference our inspection number 08423 regarding a tree removal/retention assessment for the Mirage Storage Phase 2 development located at the dead end of S.W. Warner Avenue, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon on September 18, 2008. The following is a summary of my observations with recommendations to my client, Jivanjee Architects, ALA, 9055 S.W. Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway, Portland. OR 97225 based on my opinion as the Consulting Arborist. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me. OBSERVATIONS 1. A site assessment was conducted at this location to identify and locate the trees that are requested for removal/retention. 2. The (1)tree identified for removal, its relative size and condition observed was as follows... {A}. (1) Pseudotsuga menzeisii, Douglas fir measuring 33 inches DBH1. This tree (tagged as tree #1) is above 12 inches DBH and will require mitigation. This tree is a 3-stem multiple top at approximately 4' and it has a substantial chink of bark removed at the same level. 3. There are another (7) trees located on the ODOT easement to Highway 217 that are in close proximity to the construction envelope and will require adequate protection to insure their survival during construction. These (14)trees identified for retention, their relative sizes and condition observed were as follows... {A}. (5) Crataegus monogyna, single-seeded hawthorn measuring 6", 5", 6.5", 5.5" and 5" DBH respectively. These trees are mostly defoliated and covered with English ivy. {B}. (1) Prunus cerasifera, purple leaf flowering plum measuring 5.5" DBH. This tree is partially foliated and covered with English ivy. 1 DBH is diameter measured at breast height (approximately 4.5' above mean ground level). P.O. Box 2355 Lake Oswego, OR 97035-0601 (503) 699-9349 fax(503) 699-9366 e-mail: richar( hevanet.com Page 2 Mirage Storage Phase 2 3. Continued... {C}. (1) Pseudotsuga menzeisii, Douglas fir measuring 8" DBH is located farther down the hill closer to Highway 217. {D}. (7)Pyrus calleryana, callery flowering pear measuring 1.5" caliper at 6" above mean ground level are located on the north property line and belong to the neighboring property owner. RECOMMENDATIONS and TREE PLAN 1. The recommendations and remedies for these trees are as follows... {A}. One (1)tree is over the size (12" DBH) requiring a Tree Plan as outlined in The City of Tigard Tree Removal Ordinance Chapter 18.790. This tree is not located on sensitive lands as described in Chapter 18.775. The one (1)tree that needs to be removed has been flagged using yellow survey tape. The one (1)tree that is over 12 inches DBH has been numbered 1 on a metal tree tag affixed to the tree and identified on the Tree Plan using the same numbering system. {B}. Remove the tree identified in this report completely using industry accepted arboricultural practices. Protect any individuals and personal property in the adjacent area during the removal process. {C}. Replacement has been suggested by my client in accordance with the landscape plan submitted for the project and made part of this report. {D}. Fertilization, staking and irrigation adequate for the proper health and maintenance of any replacement trees and proper pest management shall be maintained for two years after completion of the project. Sincerely, Applied Horticultural Consulting, Inc. L)-(3YN. C-0\o'4-44— Don Richards, President Consulting Arborist,ASCA Consulting Arborist, ISA Reg. #PN-5536A Certified Horticulturist,ASHS Reg.#25543 OCCB#143325 METRO License#00006409 Specifications and Recommendations for Removal, Pre-Construction Protection, Post-Construction Maintenance and Retention of Trees Related to Construction and Soil Excavation For Mirage Storage Site Phase 2 —Jivanjee Architects, PC/Mirage Works, LLC City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon By Applied Horticultural Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 2355 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035 Don Richards, President ISA Certified Arborist Number PN-5536A Copyright©Applied Horticultural Consulting,Inc.2008 Table of Contents 1.0 Scope and Limitation of Work 1.1 General 1.2 Timetable 2.0 Qualifications, Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 2.1 Qualifications 2.2 Assumptions 2.3 Limiting Conditions 3.0 Standards 3.1 General 3.2 Reference Standards and Guidelines 3.3 Specifications 4.0 Recommendations 4.1 Critical Root Zone Protection 4.2 Compaction Protection 4.3 On Site and Post-Construction Care 5.0 Remaining Tree Inventory 5.1 Identification of remaining trees 6.0 Mitigation and Tree Replacement 6.1 Tree removal 6.2 Landscape plan 6.3 Final tree mitigation and fees 1.0 Scope and Limitation of Work 1.1 General 1.1.1 A request was made by Mr. Doug Circosta, partner in the firm of Jivanjee Architects PC/Mirage Works, LLC,for a consulting arborist's report containing an opinion on specifications for removal, retained tree protection and post-construction care on this site located at the east end of SW Warner Avenue just off Highway 99W in Tigard, Oregon. The owner plans to install additional storage buildings on this site as Phase 2 of the Mirage Storage project. This scope of work shall include all applicable requirements for the site as outlined in the City of Tigard Tree Ordinances and specifications as required for tree removal and adequate tree protection during installation of the storage buildings, roads and associated utilities. 1.1.2 We were retained on September 18, 2008 to conduct an initial pre-construction tree inventory and we included the location of each tree on the site, the trees on the adjacent properties that could be affected by the proposed construction and the trees located on the Highway 217 easement relative to the proposed installation of the storage buildings, roads and utilities. We also identified the genus and species of each tree, measured the current size of each tree in DBH', made observations regarding the relative health and condition of each tree and noted all other pertinent, special tree information associated with this project. 1.2 Timetable 1.2.1 A timetable for completion of our current part of the project was confirmed as the week of September 22,2008. 1 DBH is Diameter at Breast Height measured approximately 4.5 feet above mean ground level. 2.0 Qualifications, Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 2.1 Qualifications 2.1.1 Mr. Richards is a certified consulting arborist under certification with ASCA,American Society of Consulting Arborists and the ISA,International Society of Arboriculture with certification#PN5536-A, and a Certified Professional Horticulturist under certification with the American Society For Horticultural Science with certification #25543, he is licensed by the State of Oregon as a contractor under license#143325 and by the City of Lake Oswego as a qualified business owner under license#2003123. Mr. Richards is also a licensed contractor under METRO license#6409 and is a member in good standing with all of these organizations and is therefore qualified to perform this consultation. 2.2 Assumptions 2.2.1 Any legal descriptions provided to the consultant are assumed to be correct.Any titles and/or ownerships to any property or services are assumed to be true and accurate. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. 2.2.2 It is assumed that the property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances,statutes, quarantines or other governmental regulations that have not been identified to the consultant. 2.2.3 Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable and up to date sources.All data has been verified insofar as possible; however,as the consultant,Mr. Richards can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. Information provided by the client in association with this consultation is assumed to be correct and accurate to the best of their knowledge. 2.3 Limiting Conditions 2.3.1 The limited use of this report is to offer recommendations for best management practices for tree removal, retained tree protection and post construction maintenance by the client in performing their tasks in relation to placement of the structures on this property. 2.3.2 As the consultant, Mr. Richards has not been asked to render any opinions legal in character. 2.3.3 Mr. Richards is not an attorney. This report is not intended as, and does not represent, legal advice and should not be relied upon to take the place of such advice. Although every effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the information included in this report as of the date which it was issued, laws, court, and arbitration decisions and governmental regulations in the United States and Oregon are all subject to frequent change. Current information is to be included in all the standards and duties of evaluation, investigations, interpretations, methodology and contradictions in determining the failure for claims and litigation. 2.3.4 As the consultant, Mr. Richards may not be asked to give testimony or to attend meetings with the City's Development Review Commission by reason of this report. 2.3.5 Loss or alteration of any part of this report or its attachments may invalidate the entire report. 2.3.6 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 prior written or verbal consent from the consultant. 2.3.7 Neither all nor 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 conclusions, identity of the consultant, or any reference to a professional society or institute or to any initialed designation conferred upon the consultant as stated in the qualifications listed. 2.3.8 This report and any information expressed herein represents the opinion of the consultant, and the consultant is in no way responsible for a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, based upon any finding reported herein. 3.0 Standards 3.1 General 3.1.1 Documentation for this report and the attachments consists of: 1)A measurement of trees identified for removal by size; 2)A measurement of trees identified for retention by size; 3) An identification of trees for removal by common and botanical names; 4) An identification of trees for retention by common and botanical names; 5)A visual inspection of all plants for quality and general health prior to construction; 6) A review of applicable tree protection specifications, all sections and subsections from the City of Tigard Tree Preservation and Protection Codes; 7) Recommendations for pre-construction tree preservation of the retained trees; 8) Recommendations for post-construction tree care of the retained trees; 3.2 Reference Standards and Guidelines 3.2.1 Measurements for this report are based on the American Standard for Nursery Stock, revision ANSI Z60.1-2004 and the National Arborist Association Standards for Tree Measurements, ninth edition. 3.2.2 Common and Botanical names referred to in this report are based on vernacular currently used to describe similar goods or products in the national nursery industry and correspond to plant names and listings found in Hortus III, Fourth Edition,2004. 3.2.3 Plant protection criteria used in this report are based on best management practices adopted for use by the American Society of Consulting Arborists and the International Society of Arboriculture as found in Trees and Development,A Technical Guide To Preservation Of Trees During Land Development, 1998. 3.2 Reference Standards and Guidelines (continued) 3.2.4 The reporting format used to present the findings in this document follows the current guidelines found in Guide To Report Writing For Consulting Arborists, 1995. 3.3 Specifications 3.3.1 Specifications for existing tree removal are based on information gathered during the most recent site evaluation conducted on September 18,2008. 3.3.2 Specifications for existing tree protection and retention are based on information gathered during the most recent site evaluation conducted on September 18, 2008. 3.3.3 Additional specifications used for tree protection will be developed from information contained in the reference Trees and Building Sites, 1995. 3.3.4 Tree Retention: Observations were made during the most recent site inspection and the remaining trees designated for retention are mostly of poor quality to warrant protection, although all trees are alive. Removal of invasive parasitic plant species such as English ivy would be beneficial. 3.3.5 The recommendations for tree protection will be based on the plan drawings submitted with this report. 3.3.6 The consulting arborist should be contacted 48 hours in advance of any excavation in the critical root zone of the remaining trees. 4.0 Recommendations 4.1 "Critical Tree Protection Zone"Protection for Retained Trees 4.1.1 Delineation of the "Critical Tree Protection Zone" shall be established as a minimum distance up to 8-10 feet from each tree as defined by the drip line. This "Critical Tree Protection Zone" shall be marked using a minimum 4-foot high, orange, snow fence secured by steel posts around all trees to remain within 15 feet of the construction zone, and shall be installed prior to continuation of construction and shall remain in place until completion. A note that clearly informs all site contractors about the necessity of preventing damage to the trees, including bark and root zone shall be affixed to the fence and incorporated on all final construction plan drawings. 4.1.2 The"Critical Tree Protection Zone" shall be protected at all times from chemicals and contaminants,which may be injurious to the root systems of trees. 4.1.3 The "Critical Tree Protection Zone" shall be protected at all times from excess water,mud or debris as a result of construction and soil excavation. 4.1.4 The "Critical Tree Protection Zone" shall be protected at all times from erosion or sediment depositing as a result of construction and soil excavation. 4.1.5 The "Critical Tree Protection Zone" shall be protected at all times from compaction and mechanical tamping as a result of construction and soil excavation. 4.2 Compaction Protection 4.2.1 No machinery will be allowed in the"Critical Tree Protection Zone" of the trees to be retained during excavation, unless approved by the consulting arborist. Soil excavation outside the "Critical Tree Protection Zone" is expected to be accomplished mechanically. Any roots that may be exposed outside the"Critical Tree Protection Zone" should be uncovered by hand and removed using a saw with a clean cut at an angle perpendicular with the growth of the root by a qualified tree care company.No roots within 10 feet of the "Critical Tree Protection Zone" shall be removed using excavation or construction equipment. 4.2 Compaction Protection (continued) 4.2.2 If machinery is required to enter the"Critical Tree Protection Zone" during construction or excavation, a protective pad must be established over the soil surface prior to entry for purposes of weight distribution and compaction prevention. The options for soil surface covers are, 1.) installation of steel plating over the soil surface adequate for weight distribution of the equipment to be used; or 2.) installation of steel grating over the soil surface adequate for weight distribution of the equipment to be used. 4.2.3 Machinery operating within 10 feet of the"Critical Tree Protection Zone" shall proceed back and forth at a radius to the tree trunk-no abrupt wheel or track turns shall occur within the drip line of the trees 4.3 On Site and Post-Construction Care and Maintenance 4.3.1 The consulting arborist is required to be on site with 48 hours notice during the excavation and construction phase of the project to insure compliance with the specifications outlined in this report. The consulting arborist shall retain a log of all visits to the site and shall report the findings of each visit to the City of Tigard City Forester and the City Planner assigned to this project on a 2-week schedule beginning November 11, 2008 until completion. 4.3.2 Post-excavation and construction care of the trees to be retained shall include; but not be limited to; pruning of limbs and branches that appear to have been impacted as a result of excavation or construction activities for a period of two years after completion of the project and occupancy of the storage buildings. Fertilization and irrigation adequate for the proper health and maintenance of the trees equal to or greater than that which existed prior to excavation and construction shall be maintained for two years after completion of the project and; pest management if trees show serious pest infestation resulting from excavation or construction activities for a period of two years after completion of the project. 5.0 Existing Tree Inventory 5.1 Identification of retained trees and trees on adjacent properties that may be affected by construction 5.1.1 The existing tree inventory with species and sizes may be found on Appendix A attached and made part of this report. 5.1.2 All trees designated for retention that are within 15 feet of the proposed construction and excavation zones have been identified and correspond to Appendix A attached and made part of this report. 6.0 Tree Removal, Mitigation and Tree Replacement 6.1 Tree removal 6.1.1 Only (1) tree currently exists on the property that will be in the construction envelope. This tree is identified by species and sizes may be found on Appendix A attached and made part of this report. 6.1.2 This (1) tree is on the east side of the proposed structures and is too close to be able to save it due to the large subsurface roots that extend well beyond the canopy of this species. It also has a substantial chunk of bark that has been removed at approximately 4'. 6.2 Landscape plan 6.2.1 The attached landscape plan calls for planting of a sufficient number of trees to exceed the quantity and caliper inches required for mitigation of the (1) tree necessary for removal to construct the structures as proposed. 6.3 Final tree mitigation and fees 6.3.1 There is (1) tree on the property 12" DBH or larger (refer to Appendix A) that is scheduled for removal from the site.This leaves more than 25% of the total trees on the property or on the adjacent ODOT easement remaining.The total number of caliper inches of trees 12" DBH or larger to be removed from the site equals 33 caliper inches. 6.3.2 Mitigation of 33 caliper inches of lost trees from the site is recommended to be accomplished by implementation of the landscape plan,which is equal to a sufficient number of caliper inches. However, an assurance payment may still be required by the City of Tigard. CERTIFICATION OF ARBORIST'S REPORT CERTIFICATION OF REPORT We certify that,to the best of our knowledge and belief: ♦ The statements of facts contained in this report are true and correct. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions,and conclusions. ♦ We have no bias with respect to the parties involved with this assignment. ♦ Our engagement in this assignment is not contingent upon delivering or reporting predetermined results. ♦ The compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined direction that favors the cause of the client, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this report. ♦ The analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the International Society of Arboriculture's Guidelines for Tree Protection and all applicable tree ordinances outlined by The City of Tigard,Oregon. ♦ The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the International Society of Arboriculture and the American Society of Consulting Arborists and subject to review by their respective,duly authorized representatives.nn � • Don Richards,President,AHC,Inc. ♦ R.,;CLnaAAQ. VIA 5536 -, Arborist's Name and Title Arborist's Signature&ISA Cert. No. • September 18,2008 ♦ September 19, 2008 Date of Site Observation Date of Report September 18, 2008 Mirage Storage Phase 2 Tree ID AHC, Inc. TREE TREE NOTES TREE NUMBER TYPE SIZE AND OTHER RETAIN=O OR DESIGNATION (" DBH) OBSERVATIONS REMOVE=X 1 Pseudotsuga menzeisii - Douglas Fir 33" 160' Height x 15'Spread On-site-3-Stem at 4'-Substantial Chunk of Bark Missing X 15' Height x 5' Spread On ODOT Highway 217 Easement- Mostly Defoliated A Crataegus monogyna -Single Seeded Hawthorn 6" & Covered w/lvy O 18' Height x 8'Spread On ODOT Highway 217 Easement- Partially Defoliated B Prunus cerasifer- Purple Leaf Flowering Plum 5.5" & Covered w/lvy 0 15' Height x 5'Spread On ODOT Highway 217 Easement-Mostly Defoliated C Crataegus monogyna -Single Seeded Hawthorn 5" & Covered w/lvy O ;15' Height x 5' Spread On ODOT Highway 217 Easement-Mostly Defoliated D Crataegus monogyna -Single Seeded Hawthorn 6.5" &Covered w/lvy O 15' Height x 5' Spread On ODOT Highway 217 Easement-Mostly Defoliated E Crataegus monogyna -Single Seeded Hawthorn 5.5" & Covered w/lvy 0 15' Height x 5'Spread On ODOT Highway 217 Easement-Mostly Defoliated F Crataegus monogyna - Single Seeded Hawthorn 5" &Covered w/lvy o 9' Height x 5' Spread On ODOT Highway 217 Easement-Mostly Defoliated G Pseudotsuga menzeisii -Douglas Fir 8" &Covered w/lvy 0 N/A Pyrus calleryana -Callery Flowering Pear 1.5" Caliper 8' Height x 3' Spread On Neighboring Property- Good Condition-Very Young 0 "DBH is Diameter at Breast Height measured approximately 4.5'above mean ground level. Appendix A Copyright Applied Horticultural Consulting, Inc.2008 1 Photographic Exhibits Mirage Storage Phase 2 - SW Warner Ave., Tigard, OR / ., + A �h 104 • foie Tree #1 - 33" DBH Douglas Fir Scheduled for Removal 41;: r-• r.., .;,,.8'_.R11., :;„P tea,:—.4t,: `` tf yl if , - r l t � • aao zr1 e . 40 I':-:. t lit 4r4!**. al.ems 4) `• Tree A - 6" DBH Single-Seeded Hawthorn Scheduled for Retention - Exhibit 1 1 Photographic Exhibits i . • 1 Y f tiv am ;..,r l't 'tii LL �.t •.r..rw. • ♦� k a i Tree B - 5.5" DBH Purple Leaf Flowering Plum Scheduled for Retention t� - •A''t>-,r- - ice `� yl►' • {� •L , r f ,tt__ '' G ' 5k� a x . Tree C - 5" DBH Single-Seeded Hawthorn Scheduled for Retention Exhibit 2 Photographic Exhibits 4 ■ t.:zt. A ru ir > t.4. ! PP a' . �J' - mg .ori a ., t � f., E loft liphA, 1-t ` t '''SQL{. '� '`1M 'f'(l g a',. i`jj '' X. -r+rr Tree D - 6.5" DBH Single-Seeded Hawthorn Scheduled for Retention ,.. ,.. s., , ..,,,,, ,..�•1• l �n �i '1 _n t•- fi ..q,..'Nov,. a%: 1P,'- )'','� • • . ` `...:: <''•',Ott' `�i' !... .'7. V'�Y7� ;.... l 7t h "' , Tree E - 5.5" DBH Single-Seeded Hawthorn Scheduled for Retention I Exhibit 3 Photographic Exhibits , om tt ` t ; +�r t t � - , . ^ ...14.'"-i�� .�� A �s JAG, s `3��," 'Ail �1. .414 Tree F- 5" DBH Single-Seeded Hawthorn Scheduled for Retention M ' i Tree G - 8" DBH Douglas Fir Scheduled for Retention Exhibit 4 I Photographic Exhibits ,4! '�c , al ate fie, ;J�.i,'` pi vii r nz,.. .,, J r 1.5" Caliper Callery Pear Trees on Neighbor's Property Scheduled for Retention Exhibit 5 • 1 2 3 4 ftNt ., ,/ A w • r� ■ -• / Jiwrytr ChasseAld14Men.I Id'r. c r�� _ - r _ ___ 1 A ) io ��orS 131,‘ '. g N1GK r �� '< 2At �i __ - ...it rw I►il _�, (•/ _ '-- �?, i� Lim - I iii iiilii T - ...■ `` - r p....• _..• Amos .-11. , . \.., i m . ... , :,./ �� I I _...... _ ./. 1_ �l- _ I , --n_. ,, Aim !1 •R i / ,.;., - fitic.-.,...-11 -., 11111___111111=11 r• ., .1 . , / $ • . fei I _____i_•___ .,• mirmummummati:n .1 r, ,r,4)__. ItL.,..3/3nummh:t311313i. I / i ___ _ _ . l.. .-'ter I ' . SW WARN6ft AV q. _ 1 I C �I 11.. \1• Q.• -4.- ....._i ...IA 0 . � � ; _ fi t 1 :1'.11. / iy'1 yr,11 � i T`... i rI L'' ;' MIRAGE-2 ` i' -- .u,r,twirew " OVERALL SITE PLAN AND VICINITY MAP - ! 0 ' gI / A-001 0790 — / N,orim W. 14 - Geo-Tech Report CIAT. C_CD- West Coast Geotech, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants July 25, 2008 W-2656 Eric Gambee Construction, Inc. P.O. Box 13354 Portland, Oregon Attn: Mr. Eric Gambee Principal GEOTECIINICAL REPORT MIRAGE STORAGE PHASE 2 TIGARD, OREGON Gentlemen: In general accordance with your verbal authorization, West Coast Geotech, lnc., has completed a geotechnical investigation at the above-referenced location and prepared this letter report that provides our geotechnical recommendations with regards to foundation design and grading operations for this project. Our letter-report also includes consideration for slope stability concerns as well. This report was prepared for your use in the design of the subject facility and should be made available to potential contractors and/or the Contractor for information on factual data only, i.e., field test pit logs and samples, if any are taken. This report should not be used for contractual purposes or as a warranty of interpreted subsurface conditions such as those indicated by the formal test pit logs and/or discussion of subsurface conditions contained herein. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Based on our review of the Combined Site Plan, received July 10, 2008, via fax, we understand the proposed project consists of the design/build of a new three story mini-storage structure addition (west of the existing building currently under construction) generally located at the northeast end of S.W. Warner Avenue in Tigard, Oregon. The property appears to contain a small house on the site that we assume will be removed to make room for new construction. The property appears to be covered with scattered trees, grass and construction equipment/debris from the original building construction. 19093 South Beavercreek Road,#339 OFFICE(503)632-2316 Oregon City,Oregon 97045 FAX(503)632-2312 Eric Gambee Construction July 25, 2008 Page 2 The ground surface at the proposed building area generally slopes downhill from an approximate elevation of+237 feet, more or less, at the north property line, to an approximate low elevation of +230 feet, more or less, at the south property line at an approximate elevation for an approximate interpolated slope under 5 percent, more or less. A slightly more steep slope (say, about 25 to 30 percent, more or less) appears present off the property past the east property line adjacent to Highway 217 based on our interpolation of the topographic survey map that you provided for our use. Based on our experience with the building currently under construction, the floors for the two to three-story structure are anticipated to consist of a concrete slabs. The lowermost slab is assumed to be a concrete slab-on-grade. The building addition is anticipated to be supported primarily by continuous wall perimeter footings/thickened interior slabs. Based on our experience with similar projects, we currently assume that the preliminary structural loads are anticipated to be on the order of about 3 to 4 kips per lineal foot for the perimeter wall footing/interior thickened slabs and around 180 kips, maximum, for isolated columns, if any. Later, in the design process, if the structural loads are actually determined to be significantly different, we recommend that we be allowed to review our recommendations. The cuts/fills for this project appear to be minimal, say 1 to 3 feet, more or less. We assume that all the stormwater flow will be channeled off of the impervious surfaces such as roofs/pavements in an approved, appropriate way to the regional stormwater system to the satisfaction of the local governing agency. FIELD EXPLORATIONS The field exploration program for this geotechnical study generally consisted of five test pits that were excavated on July 15, 2008, using a backhoe that you provided at no cost to West Coast Geotech, Inc.. These test pits are shown at their approximate locations on the Test Pit Location Sketch, Figure 1, which was taken, in part, from a Preliminary Site Plan that you provided for our use. Do not use Figure 1 for any scaling of measurements. The test pits, designated TP-1 through TP-5, were excavated to 6 to 8-foot depths, more or less. A West Coast Geotech, Inc., Technician was present throughout the explorations to observe the excavations and prepare descriptive logs of the test pits. After the test pits were logged, the backhoe operator backfilled the test pits with the excavated material. No compaction of the backfill was conducted. During construction, if these test pits are found to be located in Eric Gambee Construction July 25, 2008 Page 3 pavement and/or building areas, we recommend that the backfill be completely replaced with engineered fill that is satisfactorily placed, compacted and tested in lifts. Summary test pit logs are presented in Figures 2 through 6. Soil descriptions and interfaces on the logs are interpretive, and actual changes may be gradual. The subsurface soils between test pits may also be different than what is shown on the test pit logs. The locations of the test pits, as shown on Figure 1, are also approximate and based on our pacing measurements from nearby reference points. No elevations were taken at the test pits. Strength or consolidation tests were not conducted for this project nor were any such sophisticated tests determined to be necessary at this time. Such sophisticated tests generally require undisturbed soils that are obtained using a drill rig to investigate the soils; not by excavating test pits. SUBSURFACE INTERPRETATION The analyses, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they presently exist and assume the exploratory test pits are representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site. If, during construction, subsurface conditions different from those encountered in the exploratory test pits are observed or appear to be present beneath excavations, we should be advised at once so that we may review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Topsoil. Based on our observation at the site, the surficial topsoil layer generally appears to vary from 10 to 12 inches thick, more or less,at our test pits. Existing Fill. Based on our test pits, the property does appear to have some existing loose surficial fill. The surficial fill as observed at Test Pits TP-1 and TP-2 generally appears to consist of a loose, rust orange to brown silty clay with some embedded organics overlying a 12" buried topsoil layer. The fill and buried topsoil layers generally appear to be about 2 to 3 feet thick, more or less, at our test pits. This existing surficial fill may likely vary in consistency and thickness and may be thicker in other areas of the project not disclosed by our test pits. If the property was used as staging area during previous construction, it is likely that some areas of the site may have received some non- engineered fill not previously disclosed by our test pits. Please remember that the actual area Eric Gambee Construction July 25, 2008 Page 4 covered by the test pits generally represents only a small fraction of the total area of the project site. We believe that the entire existing surficial fill layer and buried topsoil layers should be classified as non-engineered fill. As such, the existing surficial fill/buried topsoil layers should not be considered to be suitable for the satisfactory support of the foundations, roads, slabs, driveways and other "structural areas". Removal and replacement with engineered fill is strongly recommended. Native Inorganic Soils. As evidenced by our field exploration program, the inorganic soils beneath the existing surficial fill/topsoil layers generally consist of a medium stiff, rust orange to brown silty clay to clayey silt with some gray mottling. This inorganic soil layer was generally observed to present to the bottoms of our test pits. Groundwater. Groundwater was not observed on the day of our field exploration; However, groundwater, if any, from springs and perched water tables, if any, will fluctuate with time and should he anticipated to be at the highest level in late winter or spring when rain storms are frequent and at the lowest level in late summer or fall when rain storms are usually less frequent. GEOTECHN1CAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Soil Survey of Washington County Area, Oregon (USDA Soil Conservation Service) Based on our review of the Web Soil Survey Report, the native soil category is generally mapped at this development as follows: • Quatama Silt Loam (37B; 3 to 7 percent slopes, more or less) According to the USDA Soil Conservation Service, the Quatama series soils are generally characterized as deep moderately-drained soil on old terraces. For house construction, wetness is listed as the primary issues to contend with regards to this soil category. Geotechnical Recommendations Foundation Design Footings. Based on our exploration program and our understanding of the proposed development, we are providing the following recommendations in relation to footing design: Eric Gambec Construction July 25, 2.008 Page 5 • The footings may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot provided the footings are founded on the firm, approved native brown silty clay below any topsoil/buried topsoil and existing non- engineered fill, if any such unsuitable soil/fill are present at the building sites after stripping. • As an alternative, the footings may also be founded on a minimum of 4-feet of crushed rock engineered fill that is placed on the firm, approved native brown silty clay soil below any surficial fill and existing organic topsoil layers, if any. For this situation, the allowable bearing pressure may be increased to 3,000 pounds per square foot.. When sizing footings for seismic considerations, the allowable bearing pressure may be increased by 30 percent. Based on our review of the current International Building Code, we recommend Site Class "D". Based on our interpolation of the USGS web site (Seismic Design Code Evaluation Menu for the 2003 IBC using an approximate interpolated latitude of 45.5006 degrees and an approximate interpolated longitude of 122.5685 degrees), we recommend the following Code values for your consideration: • Ss = 0.947g • Sl= 0.34g • Fa— 1.121 • Fv= 1.72 The current Building Code may be used to determine the minimum widths and depths of embedment for continuous wall footings/thickened slabs and column footings, in our opinion. Minimum footing size may be typically about 24 inches, in width, more or less, for commercial type buildings. Minimum depth of embedment is usually 24 inches deep (below lowest adjacent grade elevation), more or less, for perimeter footings and about 8 inches deep, more or less, for interior footings. Footing excavations should be evaluated (by the Geotechnical Engineer, in our opinion) to confirm suitable bearing conditions and to determine that all topsoil, loose materials, organics and unsuitable soil or fill, if any, have been removed. If such unsuitable materials are encountered at footing locations, we recommend that the unsuitable material be removed. If you desire to raise the footing grade after excavation, the engineered fill should be placed according to our recommendations shown by Figure 7. Eric Garnbee Construction July 25, 2008 Page 6 Footing Settlement. Based on our knowledge of the project and our settlement analysis, total footing settlement is estimated to be, approximately, 1 inch, more or less. Our settlement estimate assumes that no disturbance to the foundation soils will be permitted during excavation and construction. We recommend that the footing excavations be conducted using a smooth- bucket backhoe. All loose subgrade soils and unsuitable fills should be removed. Alternatively, the exposed subgrade, if suitable and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer, beneath footings should be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (AASHTO T-180). For additional new cuts and fills that exceed 2 to 3 feet, we recommend that we be allowed to consider settlements due to large areal load in more detail. We will probably recommend that large fill areas be completed quickly and early in construction grading period so as to preload the native soils and cause a good portion of the settlement to occur in advance of footing construction. We recommend a preloading period of 3 to 4 weeks between the completion of the fill and the construction of footing forms, otherwise, the settlement may be greater than the settlement estimated for footing construction alone. Floor Slabs. All non-basement floor slabs-on-grade, if any, should be founded on a minimum 6- inch layer of free-draining, well-graded sand and gravel or crushed rock with a maximum particle size of '/a to 1-1/2 inches and containing not more than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve (based on a wet sieve analysis). AU underslab granular materials should be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557), or as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. A moisture vapor barrier/retarder is also recommended for your consideration as additional protection beneath the slab (especially in heated areas). Concrete slabs should be designed assuming an effective modulus of subgrade reaction, k, of 50 pounds per square inch per inch for fine-grained soils typical to the surface of the site. This recommendation also assumes that a 6-inch layer of compacted aggregate base be placed beneath the concrete slab and all unsuitable soils/fills have been completely removed and replaced with engineered fills.. Perimeter footing drains and/or underslab drains should be considered especially if a concrete slab is incorporated into the design. We recommend that the drainage issue be considered again after the grading plan is complete. Eric Gambee Construction July 25, 2008 Page 7 Slab underdrains beneath concrete slabs, if any, may need to be considered depending upon the depths of cuts/final grades. The area may experience high perched water tables, on occasion depending upon the rainfall, and concrete slabs may become moist due to the capillary rise of the water from these high perched water tables. Slab underdrains and clean aggregate base material beneath the slab (say, 2 percent passing the No. 200 sieve) are often used to attempt to break the capillary rise of water to the underside of the slab. The slab underdrains also provide a means of capturing and transported free water away from the slab as well. Retaining Walls. At the present time, basement walls and retaining walls are assumed not to be present for this project. Later, in the design process, if such walls are found to be present, we recommend that we be allowed to provide additional geotechnical design recommendations at that time. Grading Operations Subgrade Preparation. The subgrade preparation should include the stripping and removal of all surficial organic soil (sod, topsoil, duff) and unsuitable fill and unsuitable native soil, if any, from the new footing areas, if any is present, as determined by the Geotechnical Engineer. Any additional soft or disturbed areas that are detected should be removed and backfilled with engineered fill. After excavation to reasonably level, required subgrade elevation, the building and pavement areas should be proof-rolled with a loaded dump truck or similar vehicle in the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer. The removal of tree stumps/root balls is also likely to cause- disturbance to the subgrade soils. Any soft or disturbed areas that are detected by the proof-rolling should be removed and backfilled with engineered fill. The actual amount of material to be excavated may need to be determined in the field, and we recommend that the specifications, if any are written, include a unit cost bid item for any over excavation beyond that normally required by contract. Construction operations may need to be modified to minimize site disturbance especially during wet weather conditions when soil moistures are above optimum moisture content such that pumping or rutting of the subgrade is observed by the Owner's representative. Any disturbed soil shall either be compacted to acceptable standards or removed and replaced with engineered fill. Due to the nature of the underlying soils, we recommend that the site work be conducted during the normal summer/fall construction season when subgrade and fill moisture contents are typically at their~ lowest and extended periods of dry, warm weather are usually common. If construction cannot be conducted during the normal summer/fall construction season and if Eric Gambee Construction July 25, 2008 Page 8 pumping/rutting due to construction traffic begins to occur as observed by the Owner's representative, the subgrade should be protected and additional costs should be anticipated. Wet weather grading is usually more expensive than dry summer grading. Wet weather grading generally requires more subgrade excavation and subgrade protection. Wet weather generally limits the type of fill material to non-moisture sensitive type fill material such as clean, granular imported fill material such as crushed rock. More soil may need to be hauled off the site instead of being used for fill material. Engineered Fill. We reconunend that a clean (not more than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve based on a wet sieve analysis) reasonably well-graded crushed rock be used for any new engineered fill beneath footings, if new engineered fill is necessary. Engineered fills within the building area should be placed in about 9 to 12-inch loose lifts for areas that are compacted with large self-propelled rollers or "hoe-packs", and should be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557) or as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. The size of the lifts and the number of passes of the compactor may need to be modified (decreased) by the Contractor to achieve the desired results using the equipment selected especially if small vibrating plates and jumping,jack type compactors are used. The engineered fill should be placed in horizontal lifts commencing on a relatively level, approved subgrade surface. Cut and Fill Slopes. All permanent cut and fill slopes, if any, should be groomed to slopes no steeper than 2 Horizontal (I-1): 1 Vertical (V) for stability purposes. Flatter slopes may be necessary for ground cover and maintenance operations. The engineered till should extend out horizontally from the edge of the footing for at least 5 feet before sloping down to existing ground contours. Existing slopes should be benched prior to the placement of the first lift of till in order to increase stability. Depending upon the amount of new fill, "keyways" at the toe of new fill slopes may also he needed to be constructed in order to "buttress" the fill placed on the property. We recommend that we be called out early in the construction process to develop a plan to properly bench and fill area. Because of safety considerations and the nature of temporary excavations, the Excavator should be responsible for maintaining safe cut excavations and supports, and shall also conduct his work in such a manner that the slope is not de-stabilized by his excavations. Existing Eric Gambee Construction July 25, 2008 Page 9 foundations/slabs/boulder walls designated to remain should also be protected by the Contractor during his work. We recommend that the Excavator incorporate all pertinent safety codes during construction including the latest edition of the OR-OSHA Standards for Construction Industry (Type C Soil). This classification should be verified during excavation by a "competent person" as defined by OR-OSHA. All exposed final slope grades shall be sufficiently revegetated as soon as possible in conformance to the requirements of the local jurisdiction. Underground Fuel Tanks. Underground fuel tanks, if any are known to be present or are found during excavation, should be removed in accordance with Oregon Department of Environmental Quality requirements and hackfilled with engineered fill. ADDITIONAL NOTE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION A successful project does not just start and stop with the submittal of a geotechnical report. You should think of geotechnical engineering/testing services as a process which starts with the geotechnical report and ends with the satisfactory construction of foundations, slabs and pavements. Therefore, site visits during construction (on a part-time, as-called basis unless full- time observation is recommended for specific, specialized conditions) by the Geotechnical Engineer are strongly advised to confirm/verify compliance/subsurface conditions with the geotechnical report. LIMITATIONS It is recommended that close quality control be exercised during the preparation and construction of building foundations, subgrade preparation and placement of fill. We strongly recommend that site visits be conducted by the Geotechnical Engineer on a part-time, as-called basis, to observe the condition of the subgrade preparation of the building site and footing excavations. We also recommend that we be retained to test the engineered fill. Otherwise, without the site visits as recommended, our design may be invalid and/or we may not be able to write a final letter that addresses the Excavator's compliance with our recommendations. Fills and base sections should be observed and tested by a qualified representative of the Owner (preferably, the Geotechnical Engineer). Eric Gambee Construction July 25, 2008 Page 10 If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and the start of work at the site, if conditions have changed due to natural causes of construction operations at or adjacent to the site, or if the basic project scheme is significantly modified from that assumed, it is recommended that this report be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations considering the changed conditions and time lapse. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by merely by conducting two borings. Such unexpected conditions frequently require that additional expenditures be made to attain a properly constructed project. Therefore, a contingency fund is recommended to accommodate such potential extra cost. lac advised that the Local Governing Agency may sometimes require additional geotechnical or other studies in order to approve the project as part of the permitting/planning process. Our Geoteclmical Report does not guarantee that the project will be approved by the Local Governing Agency without these additional studies, if required by the Local Governing Agency, being performed. Expenses incurred in reliance upon our Report prior to final approval of the Local Governing Agency are the exclusive responsibility of the Owner. In no event shall West Coast Geotech, Inc., he responsible for any delays in approval which are not exclusively caused by West Coast Geotech, inc.. We trust that this letter report is sufficient to meet your current needs. If you have any questions, please call at your convenience. Sincerely, �`; ie WEST COAST GEOTECH, INC. 4-44 � ���`a. 1_ 13 d' :•r. • O�aN Michael F. Schrieber, P.E. 4 fi' z0, �R�A,r, . Geotechnical Engineer President r3:W2656.DOC __ __ •- MIMI • a II I ll I I I I I P P I I I 11,1 I I I lird I I 1 11&CI ,-, lir V .: : :II. Alitillikt WI fir ILI a „et EN ...,..„:.,4,,,, ..,: '''''TP-5 1 i If II II ! g 1 ,.4::::: _. w 6 0 0 / II _ ------~_- / / r P-1 [� [� �u �m wire- Ivry.- x 1 LEGEND MIRAGE MINI STORAGE PHASE 2 � | ��~�' `~ | "Tigard,Oregon TP-4 GM Approximate TEST PIT LOCATION SKETCH July,2008 Job No W-2656 I ^ WEST COAST ovmEC^�c� 'NOTE: Test In from taken, part, . o""/""^"/=/c""""v""." F I G # 1 nmvueum,nv,uoo.o,mrm�m m"o""m*on ' ' | 1 _ — Surface Elevation - na 0 Crushed Rock Fill - Gravel rock fill, geotextile fabric —0 .6 Topsoil -Loose, black to brown, scattered large roots, small .6 _ boulder, moist. 2 CLAYEY SILT-Medium stiff, rust orange to light brown with some 2 gray mottling, dry becoming moist with depth I-- I-- w •-• - w w w LL LL Z 5 • -5 Z_ I— - - I- a. a w w 8 No Groundwater Observed 8 COMPLETED 7/15/2008 10-- —10 NOTES: 1. SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2. WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR. MIRAGE MINI-STORAGE PHASE 2 LEGEND Tigard, Oregon S# BAG SAMPLE NUMBER (##%) WATER CONTENT LOG OF TEST PIT TP-1 July, 2008 W-2656 WEST COAST GEOTECH, INC. "SEE FIGURE 1 FOR TEST PIT LOCATIONS Gcotechoical Consultants FIG. 2 Oregon City,OR Surface Elevation -na _ _ 0 Topsoil - Loose, dark brown, very dry 0 2 CLAYEY SILT- Medium stiff, rust orange to light brown with some 2 gray mottling, dry becoming moist with depth W W W W LL LI z 5— - - —5 Z _ 6 No Groundwater Observed 6 - W COMPLETED 7/15/2008 � p 10— —10 NOTES: 1. SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2. WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR. MIRAGE MINI-STORAGE PHASE 2 LEGEND Tigard, Oregon S# BAG SAMPLE NUMBER (##%) WATER CONTENT LOG OF TEST PIT TP-2 July, 2008 W-2656 WEST COAST 0EOTECI-I, INC. "SEE FIGURE 1 FOR TEST PIT LOCATIONS Geoteclmical Consultants FIG. 3 Oregon City,OR Surface Elevation-na —0 —0 Topsoil- Loose, dark brown,very dry 2 CLAYEY SILT- Medium stiff, rust orange to light brown with some 2 gray mottling, dry becoming moist with depth w - - ~ W W W LL Z 5— —5 Z - No Groundwater Observed - W 6 COMPLETED 7/15/2008 6 W C 10— -10 NOTES: 1. SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2. WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR. MIRAGE MINI-STORAGE PHASE 2 LEGEND Tigard, Oregon S# BAG SAMPLE NUMBER (##°/o) WATER CONTENT LOG OF TEST PIT TP-3 July, 2008 W-2656 WEST COAST GEOTECH, INC. "SEE FIGURE 1 FOR TEST PIT LOCATIONS Geotcclmical Consultants FIG. 4 Oregon City,OR _ Surface Elevation - na __ 0 Topsoil - Loose, dark brown, very dry' ^0 1.5 CLAYEY SILT-Medium stiff, rust orange to light brown with some 1.5 gray mottling, dry becoming moist with depth W W W W LL LL Z 5— —5 Z Q.. LLI 7 No Groundwater Observed 17 0 COMPLETED 7/15/2008 10— — 10 NOTES: 1. SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2. WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR. MIRAGE MINI-STORAGE PHASE 2 LEGEND Tigard, Oregon S# BAG SAMPLE NUMBER (##°/) WATER CONTENT LOG OF TEST PIT TP-4 July, 2008 W-2656 WEST COAST GEOTECH, INC. **SEE FIGURE 1 FOR TEST PIT LOCATIONS Geotechnical Consultnnts FIG, 5 Oregon City.OR Surface Elevation- na 0_ _0 Topsoil - Loose, dark brown, very dry 3 CLAYEY SILT-Medium stiff, rust orange to light brown with some 3 gray mottling, dry becoming moist with depth W - W W W u, W Z 5— —5 Z F- - H a a W W O 0 8 No Groundwater Observed 8 COMPLETED 7/15/2008 10— — 10 NOTES: 1. SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND INTERFACES ARE INTERPRETIVE AND ACTUAL CHANGES MAY BE GRADUAL. 2 WATER LEVEL IS FOR DATE SHOWN AND MAY VARY WITH TIME OF YEAR. MIRAGE MINI-STORAGE PHASE 2 LEGEND Tigard, Oregon S# BAG SAMPLE NUMBER (##%) WATER CONTENT LOG OF TEST PIT TP-5 July, 2008 W-2656 WEST COAST GEOTECH, INC. "SEE FIGURE 1 FOR TEST PIT LOCATIONS Geoteclmicnl Consultants FIG. 6 Oregon City,OR J� CONCRETE SLAB UU ///////U//////////U///////U//U/U///U///////////U/////////////U/ • 1 Compacted 2 Fill c NATIVE SOIL MIRAGE MINI-STORAGE 2 Tigard, Oregon LIMITS OF COMPACTED FILL UNDER FOOTINGS July, 2008 Job#W-2656 WEST COAST GEOTECH,INC. Geotechnicel Consultants Fig# 7 Oregon City,OR 15 - Traffic Report May 15, 2009 Project: WA09.014.001 217 Self Storage Project: 9 e Mr. Doug Circosta ENGINEERS Jivanjee Circosta Architecture 9055 Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy Portland, OR 97225 Subject: Potential Trip Generation and Average Daily Trips for the Proposed Phase II 217 Self Storage in Tigard, OR Dear Mr. Circosta: As you requested, I have computed the potential weekday trip generation and Average Daily Trips (ADT) of the site based on standard ITE rates. It is my understanding that the City of Tigard has recommended Condition of Approval from the July 215t 2008 public hearing with a trip cap placed on the site equivalent to the land use with the highest trip generation rate allowed outright under the existing R-12 zoning or 153 daily trips. This was identified in the CTS Engineers study for the Hall Blvd. Rezone, dated April 17th 2008. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed Phase II of the site will add 403 storage units to the 272 units provided in the approved Phase I for a total of 675 units. The applicant is proposing a Conditional Use Review for Phase II. PARKING SURVEY RESULTS The proposed Phase II for the 217 Self Storage was estimated by surveying several facilities that ranged from 5 to 10 vehicles for facilities of 100,000 GSF or 800 storage units performed by CTS Engineers. It was found from these surveys that a mini-warehouse facility should have approximately 5 to 7 parking spaces for customers for a wide range of sizes. It was also found that the average rates were 0.16 spaces per 1,000 GSF or 1.39 vehicles per 100 storage units. Therefore, it was estimated that Phase II of 217 Self Storage would require 5 parking spaces with a total of 13 parking spaces for both phases. _)cott Miller 10724 SW 127'h Court TRIP GENERATION Tigard, OR 97223 The numbers of vehicle trip ends (in and out) of the proposed Phase II for the P 503.750.2816 217 Self Storage were estimated using the Weekday trip rates for Mini- smiller @ctsengineers.cam Warehouse (Land Use Code 151) in the ITE Trip Generation Report (7th CTS Engineers Edition). Trip rates in this ITE publication are based on empirical observations 1412- 112th Avenue NE performed at many similar sized developments located throughout the United Suite 102 States. Based on these Weekday rates, it is estimated that Phase II will Bellevue,WA 98004 generate approximately 113 vehicle trips throughout a typical day, including 8 P 425.455.7622 vehicle trips during the AM peak period and 12 vehicle trips during the PM F 425.462.1374 peak period. It should be noted that this estimate is a worst case scenario for ets @ctsengineers.com Phase II, and that Phase I is significantly lower. Table 1 presents the wwW ctsengineers.com Weekday trip generation estimate for the proposed Phase II of 217 Self Storage. Tigard, Oregon Bellevue,Washington 217 Self Storage Page 2 May 15, 2009 Table 1: Weekday Trip Generation Estimate for the Proposed Phase II of 217 Self Storage Daily Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak 217 Self Storage Trips Hour Hour Total In Out Total In Out 403 Unit Mini Warehouse: 113 8 5 3 12 6 6 ITE Land Use Code 151 CONCLUSIONS Based on the parking results and trip generation described in this report, it is concluded that Phase II for the 217 Self Storage will be considerably lower than the highest trip generation rate allowed outright under the existing R-12 zoning or 153 daily trips required. If there are any questions related to the data or analysis contained in this report, please contact me directly. Sincerely, 6 P Scott Miller Senior Transportation Planner Attachments- Parking Analysis, CTS Engineers Mini Warehouse Trip Generation October 3, 2005 Project: OR0S.050.T15 Mini-Warehouse Engineers Mr. Saj Jivanjee Jivanjee Architecture 9055 Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy Portland, OR 97225 Fax (Original In Mail): 503-297-4635 Subject: Parking Spaces Need for Minl-Warehouse Facilities Dear Saj: This letter present information we have found about parking requirements for mini-warehouse facilities in the ITE Parking Generation Report(3`d Edition) and counts at several facilities In south Beaverton, OR. In reviewing all this information, a mini-warehouse facility should have 5-7 parking spots for customers for a wide range of sizes. First, the ITE Parking Generation Report(3'd Edition) contains parking demand for Land Use Code 151 Mini-Warehouse, which is defined as having a number of vaults or units that are rented for the storage of goods and offered referred to as self-storage facilities. Review of this data (see attached sheets from the ITE Report) reveal that parking demand at sites observed ranged from 5 -10 vehicles for facilities of 100,000 GSF or 800 storage units. The average rates were 0.16 spaces per 1,000 GSF or 1.39 vehicles per 100 storage units. To confirm this, my staff observed parked vehicles in up front customer parking areas at three mini-warehouse facilities in south Beaverton: 1) Public Storage (4 customer spaces provided) located north of Denney Road, just west of Rte 217, 2) Shurgard Self Storage (8 customer spaces provided) located south of Denney Road just east of Rte 217, and 3) Parkside RV and Mini Storage (4 customer spaces) located north of Hall Blvd along Nimbus. Parked vehicles were observed on Friday, September 30, from 10:30 AM to 5:30 AM on an hourly basis (i.e., at 10:30, 11: 30, 12:30, etc). These counts revealed that the number of vehicles parked in these spaces were typically 0-2, but were as high as 4 at the Shurgard facility. Based on the data in the ITE Report and our own observations, the number of parking spaces provided at mini-storage facilities should range from 5 to 10 spaces depending on the number of units provided. 70005 NW /A11ASB00R911 OR. HIlUS00R0 OR 91111 Si ely, '��/� '� ED PROF. PR S03.845393 0 i LNG ,,,- i £X 503.615.5910 Howard S. Stein, P.E. it( 17 /h4 Wnieer J { Attachments �� ✓ OREGON 11)1Y6 • 44/ 19. 19 <i SRO SCOT1 S\ RENEW DATE 7406 Land Use: 151 Mini-Warehouse Land Use Description Mini-warehouses are buildings in which a number of units or vaults are rented for the storage of goods. Mini-warehouses are typically referred to as"self-storage"facilities. Each unit is physically separated from other units and access Is usually provided through an overhead door or other common access point. • Database Description Saturday parking demand was only provided for one site. The site was 172,300 sq. ft. GFA and the peak parking demand ratios were 0.06 vehicles per 1,000 sq.ft. GFA and 0.77 for vehicles per 100 storage units.The peak period of demand occurred between 4:00 and 5:00 p.m. The following table presents a time-of-day distribution of parking demand for three study sites. 4;0004 .ff.i t~,a !�: :r: . Weekday Date Hour Beginning Percent of Peak Period Number of Data Points` 12:00-4:00 a.m. — 0 5:00 a.m. — 0 6:00 a.m. — 0 7:00 a.m. 31 3 8:00 a.m. 24 3 9:00 a.m. 59 3 10:00 a.m. 91 3 11:00 a.m. 100 3 12:00 p.m. 55 3 • 1:00 p.m. 45 3 2:00 p.m. 46 3 3:00 p.m. 40 2 4:00 p.m. 88 1 5:00 p.m. 27 1 8:00 p.m. _ 35 1 7:00 p.m. 27 1 8:00 p.m. — 0 9:00 p.m. — 0 10:00 p.m. — 0 11:00 p.m. — 0 Subset of database Study Sites/Years tt Canada: Burnaby,BC(1991); Coquitlam, BC (1991); Richmond,BC (1991) United States: Santa Barbara,CA(1998) #i L Institute of 7tanspodation Engineers Pv09 O 3(d Edition a2 41',. -,.. .- and Use: 151 Ani-Warehouse : . Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: 1,000 sq. ft. GFA --.. On a: Weekday I _1(:-iift ii419, ."''.' ' .:.'' . ' . ' .Pilrali Pei1011 ifr.diak Period 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.;4:00-5:00 p.m. Iri -limber of Study Sites 5 Vera!e Size of Study Sites 70,000 sq.ft. GFA , u era I e Peak Period Parking Demand 0.16 vehicles per 1,000 sq.ft.GFA --Ward Deviation 0.07 %;efficient of Variation 46% ), - , • c It nge 0.09-0.27 vehicles per 1,000 sq.ft. GFA 1 41. h Percentile 0.20 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft.GFA •"4'1M Percentile 0.13 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA • '11,i-: -: Weekday Peak Period• -• 411; Parking Demand .- . . . ,,..N, O : .o... 30 •oil in IV .. • ' '100 .■•• 1 ' • . pj a 25 .4„.... - , , • -1,.,,,4...c .. ' •• : . - ',Iv 20 - .0- f'' 1 0 / 1 . . - • ,.:' , :),40 - , 1? . 0. . P = 0.07x + 4 2-e------------ --------------T • - . I e R = 0.88 0 , 1 . • 1 k 0 50 100 150, 200 - & = 1,000 sq. ft. GFA - - • Actual Data Points -Fitted Curve ----Average Rain • • • 1.'.;''.... -,...s -v,....,‘,4•4!,;', --,- f-e C;;.::•WAVO,'•' •-•—•%1r:-,7,...1 P.#.AiSt!t"' l ..- ,.-:''%.■[I''.::-..,‘,...f.:ie '1::'. r,:':.,: “-•.A4 •, •I• f:::::-:';.;P: • :-;,:IV!..;;" 01,:,C 3.'C; I.1 *•-■•••97K-Argy,MCMOZTS.17.0.ZWISO■=2N **I ,,. ?_,..,.,•,':.e,_.1_,:,,Cf#7,4z 415....:t 3/4114 0 of'Transportation Engineers - p#' ''' •.,7, ,1: ,:f-,.- 1,,,. ki, N...„.....,23 Pandng Genefation,3rd Edidon —..." t , Land Use: 151 Mini-Warehouse t e 1 Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: 100 Storage Units t, On a: Weekday +i t 's°,1'{ Fir � }' r �� i51','�c: e.�^+.i5-..+t.,,-�t. +- tatiakicl ;: kfil r ; 3 :r ; l.. li 'Y + `i t. , :�S r ,�:��:. >� '�� i��._s : . � .. fit:}=�.� i'efk•�P�Ylodi�e�i�i���;�x4��� s-: '' Peak Period 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p:m.;4:00-5:00 p.m. Number of Study Sites 5 Average Size of Study Sites 660 storage units Average Peak Period Parking Demand 1.39 vehicles per 100 storage units Standard Deviation 0.37 Coefficient of Variation 27% Range 1.05-1.96 vehicles per 100 storage units 85th Percentile _ 1.72 vehicles per 100 storage units 33rd Percentile 1.18 vehicles per 100 storage units ,• Weekday Peak Period } Parking Demand 1 a25 c) c 20 > 15 - __ � ' is � � . ,. , 2 10 ------ • 1' • P = 0.89x + 2.5 a. 5 II r' R2 = 0.92 f,.+ 0 - 1 i f. 0 5 10 15 x = 100 Storage Units • Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ----Average Rate .4 1 ,; Institute of 1Fansportation Engineers 44 Parking Generation,aid Edition TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET AVERAGE RATES Development: 217 Self Storage - Phase II Size: 403 Units ITE Land Use Code: Mini-Warehouse, Code 151 (7th Edition) Variable: Per Unit (U) Total Weekday Trips T = 0.28 x (U) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 57 _ 56 113 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips T = 0.02 x (U) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 5 3 8 Site Distribution 67% 33% 100% Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips T= 0.03 x (U) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 6 6 12 Site Distribution 51% 49% 100% CTS Engineers, Inc. CTS April 17, 2008 Project: OR08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Ms. Kim McMillan City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 SUBJECT: Traffic Analysis for the proposed rezone of the two parcels from R- 12 (Urban Medium-Density Residential District) Zoning to C-G (General Commercial District) Zoning located on the east of SW Hall Blvd approximately 700 feet north of OR 99W/SW Hall Blvd intersection in Tigard, OR Dear Ms. McMillan: Based on your request, CTS has analyzed the potential traffic impacts of a proposed rezone of two parcels from R-12 (Urban Medium-Density Residential District) Zoning to C-G (General Commercial District) Zoning. The site is located on the east side of Hall Blvd approximately 700 feet north of OR 99W/SW Hall Blvd intersection (see Figure 1). The proposed two parcels (0.74 and 0.44 acres) of R-12 zoning are bounded between two large commercially zoned areas C-G and C-P (Professional Commercial). The current R-12 zoning designation for the subject property is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. It is also inconsistent to cut off this residential zone from other residential zones while trying to meet the primary goal of the residential zoning which is to create livable neighborhoods. The existing and planned transportation systems make the subject property more suitable for commercial development. Of the two parcels, the larger parcel I (0.74) currently contains one small single family residence in poor condition and the adjacent smaller parcel II (0.44 acres) is the home of Silver Creek Apartments, a 10 unit complex. For the purpose of the proposed zone change, this traffic analysis was conducted in accordance with section 18.390.040.B.2(e) of the City of Tigard Development Code. In addition, applicable requirements from OAR 660-060 with regard to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment were evaluated. The following two scenarios were analyzed. • Maximum buildout under existing R-12 zoning on each parcel: The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 sq. ft. Parcel I can accommodate a maximum of TEN single family homes, and parcel II can accommodate SIX single family homes. • Maximum buildout under proposed C-G zoning: 5,000 sq. ft. of sit down restaurant space on parcel I and 2,000 sq. ft. of fast food restaurant with drive-thru on parcel II. It should be noted that trips generated from the existing use (1 single family home and 10 units apartment complex) on the site will be deducted from the overall estimated site generated trips under both scenarios mentioned above. The two parcels presently have one access each along SW Hall Blvd approximately 110 feet apart. This traffic analysis includes an assessment of existing peak hour traffic conditions, future IYn75 HILLSB BOOR 97124 2025 � HILLSBOROOR Y71N 2025 conditions with current use on the site, and a comparison of projected 2025 PH 5113.640.811111 traffic conditions with the site developed under both existing and proposed zoning. Pr 51'3.6,5_'y31' Based on the results of this analysis, it is concluded that the proposed rezone to C-G IlLLLSBORO.OR can be approved without adversely affecting the traffic operations or safety BELLEVUE.WA characteristics of the adjacent street system. Specific findings of this study are as follows: SW Hall Blvd Rezone Page 2 April 17, 2008 • Based on the City's development scenario, the existing R-12 zone of two proposed lots can be developed to a total of 16 single family homes which would generate approximately 153 daily trips, including 12 during the AM peak hour and 16 during the PM peak hour. However, after deducting trips generated by the existing one single home and 10 apartment units on the site, it is estimated that full buildout of the site with existing zone would generate approximately 76 net new vehicle trips on the adjacent roadway system during a typical weekday, including 6 trips during the AM peak hour and 9 trips during the PM peak hour. The proposed C-G zone developed with 5,000 sq. ft. of sit down restaurant space on parcel I and 2,000 sq. ft. of fast food restaurant with drive-thru on parcel II would generate approximately 1,442 vehicle trips on the adjacent roadway system during a typical weekday, including 56 trips during the AM peak hour and 56 trips during the PM peak hour. • Based on the City's maximum development scenarios for the existing R-12 and proposed rezoning to C-G, the proposed rezone would generate approximately 1,289 additional new vehicle trips on the adjacent roadway system during a typical weekday, including 44 trips during the AM peak hour and 40 trips during the PM peak hour. • Analysis of existing 2008 traffic volumes found that the study area intersections operate at LOS D or better during both AM and PM peak hours. The only exception is the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W which will operate at LOS E during PM peak hour and LOS F during 30th DHV with a V/C ratio exceeding ODOT's V/C ratio criteria during both PM Peak hour and 30th DHV. The 99W Corridor Study identifies improvements at the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W. For the study area, these 2025 TSP improvements include an exclusive northbound and southbound through lanes and exclusive eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes and an additional westbound U-turn movement. • Projected 2025 traffic conditions without development of the site were analyzed based on 2025 projected traffic volumes with improvements identified in the 99W Corridor Study. Results of these analyses indicate that traffic operations at unsignalized intersections will slightly degrade as compared to the existing conditions and operates at LOS D or better during both AM and PM peak hours. Furthermore, intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W improves to operate at LOS D during PM peak hour and LOS E during 30th DHV. However, traffic condition during weekday AM peak hour degrades to operate at LOS E with a V/C ratio exceeding ODOT's V/C ratio criteria during both AM Peak hour and 30th DHV. • Analyses of total future 2025 traffic conditions with buildout of existing R-12 zoning found that traffic generated by the existing zone will increase traffic by approximately Nine PM peak hour trips along SW Hall Blvd. The study area intersections are estimated to operate similar to the background 2025 traffic condition without development of the site, i.e. unsignalized intersections in the study will operate at LOS D or better during both AM and PM peak hours and the critical intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W operate at LOS D during PM peak hour and LOS E during 30th DHV. Traffic conditions during weekday AM peak hour continue to operate at LOS E with a V/C ratio of 1.04 exceeding ODOT's V/C ratio of criteria of 0.99 during both AM Peak hour and 30th DHV. • Analyses of total future 2025 traffic conditions with buildout of proposed C-G zoning ("worst case scenario") found that traffic generated by the proposed rezone will slightly increase traffic by approximately four percent along SW Hall Blvd. However, the study area intersections with additional traffic from the potential worst-case development scenarios will continue to operate similar to the total future 2025 with buildout of existing R-12 zoning. • The following paragraphs document the study's methodology, results and major findings. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Figure 1 shows the site area and vicinity map. No specific site development plans were analyzed. Instead, potential "worst-case"development scenarios provided by the applicant and discussed with ODOT staff were compared for the existing and proposed zoning. This traffic analysis was conducted to compare potential traffic impacts of the existing R-12 zoning to traffic impacts with the proposed C-G zoning. Maximum buildout under existing R-12 zoning will have 16 single family homes on two parcels, and under proposed C-G zoning will have 5,000 sq. ft. of sit down restaurant space on parcel- I and 2,000 sq. ft. of fast food restaurant with drive-thru on parcel II. Access to each parcel will be provided via independent driveways along SW Hall Blvd. STUDY SCOPE Based on preliminary discussions with ODOT staff, intersections of SW Pfaffle Street/SW Hall Blvd and Hwy 99W/SW Hall Blvd were selected for the analysis during both AM Peak and PM peak hour. Furthermore, ODOT staff also requested analysis of 30th DHV (design hour volume) conditions at the intersection of Hwy 99W /SW Hall Blvd. This study includes analysis of existing conditions and the 2025 long-range forecast year because at this stage, there is no specific site plan. A site buildout scenario will be analyzed following approval of the proposed rezone application. AREA CONDITIONS Study Area Land Uses Land uses in the immediate vicinity of the site include Dental Office and Tigard Plaza to the west, mini-storage to the south, Hwy 217 to the east and vacant land to the north. Site Accessibility Area Roadway System Figure 2 shows the approximate location of the proposed site and the surrounding roadway network. Again, the main intersections in the study area are all along SW Hall Blvd. Table 1 presents the characteristics of these roadways. Table 1: Summary_of Study Area Roadway Characteristics Posted On- Street Name Road Width Speed Sidewalks Bike Street Class (Feet) Lane Parking SW Hall Blvd District 44 35 Yes Yes No Highway SW Pfaffle Street Collector 40 25 Yes Yes Yes Hwy 99W District 80 35 Yes Yes No Highway Pedestrian and Bicycling Considerations Sidewalks and bike lanes exist along both Hall Blvd and Hwy 99W in the study area, except on SW Pfaffle, which lacks bike lanes and has sidewalk. Few pedestrians and bicyclists were observed during our intersection volume counts. Transit Considerations Tri-Met does not operate bus lines along SW Hall Blvd in the vicinity of the site. However, bus numbers 12, 64 and 94 runs along Hwy 99W. The closest bus stop from the proposed site is located along Hwy 99W/SW Hall Blvd intersection which is approximately 800 feet to the south. Existing Traffic Volumes A reconnaissance of the site and its vicinity was conducted. To assess the impact of buildout of the proposed rezone site, traffic operations were analyzed during both AM and PM weekday peak hours because these periods represent reasonable "worst case"for traffic scenarios in the study area. Furthermore, traffic operations at the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W.were also analyzed for 30th Design Hour. Traffic Volumes Figure 3 shows recent weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes obtained at the key intersection in the vicinity of the site. Traffic volumes during AM and PM peak hour within the study area were obtained from actual weekday peak hour manual traffic counts conducted during March of 2007 and March 2008. Counts obtained during March 2007 were within one year at the beginning of this traffic study, however, during the process the counts went slightly over a year. Thus, March 2007 counts were adjusted by 1.0 percent per year for a 1 year growth period, which is consistent with Metro Model. Traffic volumes greater than 25 were rounded upward to the nearest five vehicles. The traffic count data revealed that the morning peak hour typically occurs between 7:30-8:30 AM, and the afternoon peak hour occurs between 5:00-6:00 PM. This study considered traffic conditions during weekday AM/PM peak hours, which represent reasonable "worst case" traffic conditions within the study area. This also corresponds with the time periods that the proposed development would generate most of its traffic. A range of 0-5 percent heavy vehicles is common on the arterial roads in Washington County. Most of the heavy vehicle traffic observed during both peak hours was related to public and school bus transportation in the area. For intersections on state highways, ODOT requires the traffic analysis to represent conditions during the 30th highest hour, which is the hourly volume of traffic that is exceeded only 29 hours over a period of one year (also called 30th Design Hour, or 30th DH). The 30th DH is calculated by adjusting typical PM peak hour volumes with a seasonal factor determined using data from an appropriate Automatic Traffic Recorders (ATR) or, if there is no ATR nearby, from the most current seasonal trend table. The seasonal trend table lists the peak period seasonal factor and bi-monthly seasonal factors for 11 highway types. Based on discussion with ODOT staff, 30th DH volumes were estimated using the "Commuter"trend factors from the most recent (2007) seasonal trend table published by ODOT. The commuter trend factors are as follows: • March 1 factor = 0.9787 • Peak Period Seasonal Factor = 0.9087 The seasonal adjustment is calculated by dividing the bi-monthly factor by the peak period factor. For the March 2008 counts along Hwy 99W /SW Hall Blvd, the seasonal adjustment used was 0.9787 / 0.9087 — 1.08. Figure 3 shows the resulting seasonally-adjusted existing intersection turn movement counts. Peak Hour Traffic Operations Traffic conditions for the study area intersections were analyzed during both AM and PM peak hours and also 30th DH for the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W. Intersection operational analyses were conducted using the procedures in the Highway Capacity Manual (2000) for evaluating signalized and unsignalized intersections, which describe the traffic operations of an intersection in terms of its Level of Service (LOS). For unsignalized intersections, the intersection's LOS is stated relative to the most critical intersection approach or maneuver, typically the left turns from the minor street approach. The LOS criteria are stated as a letter grade, ranging from "A," indicating little or no delay, to "F," indicating that drivers experience long delays. LOS worksheets for the results presented in this study are included in the Appendix. The LOS worksheets for the results presented in this study are attached as an Appendix to this report. The City of Tigard standards require that all signalized intersections operate at LOS D or better and unsignalized intersections operate at LOS E or better (if a signal is not warranted). The 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) uses volume to capacity ratios (V/C) to evaluate mobility deficiencies and needs. V/C is the ratio of peak hour traffic volume to maximum hourly volume of vehicles that a roadway section/approach can accommodate. In other words, V/C measures the percentage of the capacity of the roadway section that is used during the peak hour. SW Hall Blvd. and Hwy 99W is classified as a District Highway under the 1999 State Classification System (1999 SCS). The maximum acceptable V/C ratio for Statewide Highway inside the Portland Metro is 0.99. Tables 2a and 2b show the calculated existing LOS and V/C ratios for the major study area intersections based on the weekday peak hour traffic volumes and the 30th DH shown in Figure 3. These results indicate that most of the study area intersections operate at LOS D or better. The only exception is the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99 which will operate at LOS E during PM peak hour and LOS F during 30th DHV with a V/C ratio exceeding ODOT's V/C ratio criteria during both PM Peak hour and 30th DHV. Table 2a: Existing 2008 Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Levels of Service Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Traffic Signal Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay V/C Delay V/C (Sec/VehL Ratio _ LOS _ (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W 52.2 0.98 D 75.9 1.02 E Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay V/C Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Pfaffle Street 14.3 0.19 B 20.4 0.5 C (Critical Approach: WB) SW Hall Blvd /Parcel I 12.0 0.0 B - (Critical Approach: WB) SW Hall Blvd /Parcel II 11.2 - B 12.6 - B (Critical Approach: WB) Table 2b: Existing 2008 30th DH Levels of Service Intersection 30th DH Traffic Volume Traffic Signal Control Avg Vehicle Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W 99.9 1.1 F Traffic Safety Collision records for the most recent three years of available data (Jan. 2004 to Dec. 2006) were obtained from Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) for the intersections in the vicinity of the project site. These were analyzed to determine if traffic safety problems exist at the study area intersections in the vicinity of the site. Figure 4 shows the location and type of reported incidents. A total of 4 crashes were reported along the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street, which equates to an average annual crash rate of 0.29 crashes per million entering vehicles. A total of 23 crashes were reported along the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street, which equates to an average annual crash rate of 0.54 crashes per million entering vehicles. These numbers and rates of reported collisions are typical of the crashes experienced on similar roadways throughout City of Tigard. Intersection Sight Distances Sight distance was evaluated along SW Hall Blvd at the two access locations along SW Hall Blvd. Photos of these intersections and other intersections in the study area are in the Appendix of this report. Washington County classifies SW Hall Blvd. as a Minor Arterial and ODOT as a State District Highway". ODOT standards require that intersection sight distances conform to AASHTO — A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 2001, which requires that measurements be based on an eye height of three and one-half(3.5) feet above the controlled road at least fifteen (15) feet from the edge of the vehicle travel lane of the uncontrolled public road to an object height of three and one-half (3.5) feet on the uncontrolled public road. Washington County requires that the measurements be taken from an eye height of 3.5 feet and an object height of 4.25 feet above the road with the measurement taken 15 feet from pavement edge at the proposed access location. The City's sight distance standards call for minimum sight distance equal to 10 times the posted speed from driver's eye height of 3.5 feet to an object height of 4.25 feet, measured 15 feet back from the extended curb line or edge of pavement. Among the three, ODOT's criteria are much more conservative. For Hall Blvd., a state facility with a posted speed limit of 35 mph, AASHTO requires 390 feet of clear sight distance be available. A driver's line of sight along SW Hall Blvd. from the two access streets, was measured to be over 400 feet on either side, which exceeds both ODOT and Washington County's criteria. Photos in the Appendix document available sight distance for this intersection. Based on this information and the area, there do not appear to be any traffic safety problems in the immediate vicinity of the site that the applicant needs to address. SW Hall Blvd Rezone Page 7 April 17, 2008 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Potential weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic impacts from the worst-case buildout scenarios for existing zoning and the proposed rezone of the Hall Blvd site were analyzed as follows: • A 2025 background scenario was developed. Future analysis volumes were estimated based on existing traffic volumes, which were factored to 2025 background traffic conditions based on an average annual growth rate from the Metro's Emme/2 regional traffic model for Washington County for the year (2005) and horizon year (2030). • Potential worst-case trip generation scenarios were developed for both the existing R-12 zoning and the proposed C-G zoning, based on the City's site buildout scenarios for each zone. The resulting peak hour trips generated were added to the 2025 background peak hour projected volumes. Total AM and PM peak hour trips both into and out of existing and proposed rezone were estimated using standard trip rates in the ITE Trip Generation Report (7th Edition). • Considering the site's proximity to major roadways, existing traffic volumes in the study area and the metro's Emme/2 information, traffic assignments were evaluated to estimate trip distribution patterns for vehicle trips generated by the proposed development. Based on this distribution, site-generated traffic and pass-by traffic was assigned to the roadway system. • Future peak hour traffic operations at key intersections in the study area were examined under both 2025 background and 2025 full buildout traffic conditions, for both land use scenarios. Future 2025 Background Traffic Volumes This analysis focuses on the potential maximum development scenarios for the parcel's existing and proposed zoning for long-range 2025 traffic conditions. After the proposed rezone is approved, a detailed analysis will be conducted for an actual development proposal that will analyze a near-term site buildout scenario. To assess potential impacts of proposed use changes resulting from a zone change, we first estimated background 2025 conditions assuming development throughout the rest of the City, but with no redevelopment of the project site. Improvements identified in Tigard 99W Corridor Study Preferred Alternative B at the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99 was assumed to be in place. These 2025 TSP improvements include exclusive northbound and southbound through lanes and exclusive eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes and an additional westbound U-turn movement, shown in Figure 2. To account for future growth in traffic due to sources outside the immediate study area, a growth rate of 1% per year was used to estimate 2025 background volumes projected by the EMME-2 travel demand model operated by Washington County for major roadways. The existing volumes shown in Figure 3 were increased by 17 percent (17 years x 1 % per year = 17%). This growth accounts for other future development within the study area and throughout the region that would travel on study area roadways. The resulting weekday future 2025 background peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 5. Capacity analyses of future background 2025 traffic volumes were performed. Tables 3a and 3b show the calculated future background 2025 LOS and V/C ratios for the major study area intersections based on the weekday peak hour traffic volumes and the 30th DH shown in Figure 5. These results indicate that most of the study area intersections operate at LOS D or better. The only exception is the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99 which will operate at LOS E during both PM peak hour and 30th DHV with a V/C ratio exceeding ODOT's V/C ratio criteria during both AM Peak hour and 30th DHV. However, it should be noted that with planned 2025 improvements, LOS and V/C ratios improved as compared to existing conditions scenario. Table 3a: Future 2025 Background Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Levels of Service With Planned Improvements Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Traffic Signal Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay V/C Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W 57.5 1.03 E 50.5 0.94 D Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay V/C Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Pfaffle Street 17.3 0.30 C 31.2 0.64 D I (Critical Approach: WB) SW Hall Blvd /Parcel I 12.8 - B - - - (Critical Approach: WB) SW Hall Blvd /Parcel II 11.7 0.01 B 13.6 B (Critical Approach: WB) Table 3b: Future 2025 Background 30th DH Levels of Service With Planned Improvements Intersection 30th DH Traffic Volume Traffic Signal Control Avg Vehicle Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W 62.1 1.01 E Site-Generated Traffic Volumes The proposed rezone site is located along the east side of SW Hall Blvd approximately 700 feet north of Hwy 99W. Figure 1 contains a vicinity map of the site and surrounding roadway system. This traffic analysis was conducted in accordance with section 18.390.040.B.2(e) of the City of Tigard Development Code. In addition, applicable requirements from OAR 660-060 with regard to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment were evaluated. The following two maximum development scenarios were analyzed: • Maximum buildout under existing R-12 zoning on both parcels: The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 sq. ft. The parcel I can accommodate a maximum of TEN single family homes, and SIX single family homes on parcel II. • Maximum buildout under proposed C-G zoning: 5,000 sq. ft. of sit down restaurant space on parcel I and 2,000 sq. ft. of fast food restaurant with drive-thru on parcel II. R-12 Zoning Development Scenario This development scenario would subdivide two tax lots totaling approximately 1.17 acres into 16 single family residential units. The site currently contains one small single family residence on the larger parcel I (0.74) and the adjacent smaller parcel II (0.44 acres) is the home of Silver Creek Apartments, a 10 unit complex. At this stage there is no specific site plan. However, trips generated from the existing use on the site were deducted from the overall estimated R-12 zoning site generated trips. The site (two tax lots) presently has two accesses, one for each along SW Hall Blvd approximately 110 feet apart. Vehicle trips that would be generated by the R-12 development scenario (shown in Figure 6) were estimated using standard trip generation rates ITE Code 220 for the Apartments and ITE Code 210 for the single family homes from the ITE Trip Generation Report (7th Edition). As shown in Table 4, based on these rates, it is estimated that this development of 16 single family homes will generate approximately 76 net new vehicle trips on the adjacent roadway system during a typical weekday, including 6 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 9 trips during the PM peak hour. Table 4: Estimate of Weekday Trip Generation for Full Buildout With Existing R-12 Zoning Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Trips Total In Out Total In Out 16 Single Family Homes 153 12 3 9 16 10 6 ITE Code 210 Less Existing Apartments(10-Units) <67> <5> <1> <4> <6> <4> <2> ITE Code 220 Less Existing One SF Home <10> <1> <0> <1> <1> <1> <0> ITE Code 210 - Total Net New Site Generated Trips 76 6 2 4 9 5 4 C-G Zoning Development Scenario The estimate for developable area and number of residential units under this development scenario were provided by the applicant. The C-G development scenario includes 5,000 sq. ft. of sit down restaurant space on parcel I and 2,000 sq. ft. of fast food restaurant with drive-thru on parcel II. Again, the site currently contains one small single family residence on the larger parcel I (0.74) and the adjacent smaller parcel II (0.44 acres) is the home of Silver Creek Apartments, a 10 unit complex. At this stage there is no specific site plan. However, trips generated from the existing use on the site will be deducted from the overall estimated C-G zoning site generated trips. The site (two tax lots) presently has two accesses, one for each along SW Hall Blvd approximately 110 feet apart. Due to the nature of retail land uses in the proposed C-G scenario, a discussion of the types of trips generated by retail use is necessary. The majority of vehicle trips to/from a retail use result from vehicles already on the road making trips for other purposes, such as getting to/from work or shopping at adjacent uses. This is particularly true for retail uses along major commuter routes. The first trip type, pass-by trips, comes from drivers who are already traveling along an adjacent street, such as SW Hall Blvd. As they pass by the site as part of their regular travel route, they turn into the site to make a purchase and then continue on their original route. The second trip type is diverted trips from other drivers already nearby (eg, Hwy 99), but who must alter their route to enter the site. After they make their purchase they then return to their original route. The third trip type is totally new trips on the roadway system. These include nearby residents who leave their home or office and drive to make a purchase and then return home without making any other stops. To be conservative, this study treats diverted trips as new trips. Vehicle trips that would be generated by the proposed rezone development (shown in Figures 7a and 7b) were estimated using standard trip generation rates ITE Code 931 for Sit Down Restaurant and ITE Code 934 for Fast Food Drive-Thru Restaurant from the ITE Trip Generation Report(7th Edition). As shown in Table 5, based on these rates, it is estimated that the C-G rezone development scenario would generate approximately 1,289 net new vehicle trips on the adjacent roadway system during a typical weekday, including 44 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 40 trips during the PM peak hour. Table 5: Estimate of Weekday Trip Generation for Full Buildout of C-G Rezone Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Trips Total In Out Total In Out A) Sit Down Restaurant(5,000 GSF) (ITE Code 931) 450 4 3 1 37 25 12 Pass-By Trips (44%) - 2 1 1 16 8 8 New/Diverted Trips (56%) - 2 2 0 21 17 4 B) Fast Food Drive-Thru (2,000 GSF) (ITE Code 934) 992 106 54 52 69 36 33 Pass-By Trips (50%) - 52 26 26 34 17 17 New/Diverted Trips (50 0/0) - 54 28 26 35 19 16 Total Trips 1,442 110 57 53 106 61 45 (A+B) Pass-By Trips (50%) 54 27 27 50 25 25 (A+B) New/Diverted Trips (50%) 56 30 26 56 36 20 Less Existing R-12 Zoning (16 SF Homes) <153> <12> <3> <9> <16> <10> <6> ITE Code 210 Net Increase due to Rezoning I 1,289 44 I 27 I 17 I 40 I 26 I 14 Distribution and Assignment of Site Generated Traffic Trip distribution and assignment was developed separately for each proposed zoning, based on existing travel patterns and land uses in the area. To estimate travel patterns throughout the study area, we analyzed metro's Emme/2 information, traffic assignments were evaluated to estimate trip distribution patterns for vehicle trips generated by the proposed development. Based on this distribution, site-generated traffic and pass-by traffic was assigned to the roadway system. Figure 6 thru 7b shows trip distribution and assignment for the R-12 and C-G zoning respectively. This analysis found that approximately 30 percent of the traffic travels to/from the north and 70 percent to/from the south along SW Hall Blvd. Total Future 2025 Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service Total future 2025 peak hour traffic volumes were estimated by adding the future 2025 background traffic volumes displayed in Figure 5 to the volumes that would be generated by the buildout of existing R-12 zoning and proposed C-G zoning shown in Figures 6 and 7b respectively. The resulting total future 2025 volumes for the R-12 and C-G zoning are shown in Figures 8a and 8b respectively. Tables 6a and 6b summarize the results of the intersection analysis for total future 2025 build-out conditions with existing zoning and Tables 7a and 7b shows with the proposed zoning. Again, improvements identified in Tigard 99W Corridor Study Preferred Alternative B at the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99 W was assumed to be in place. Results of the analysis of 2025 future traffic volumes with buildout of both scenarios indicate that traffic operations at all of the study area intersections will remain approximately the same as compared to future background 2025 traffic conditions, with no redevelopment of the site. Again, the intersection of SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W is estimated to operate at LOS E during both AM peak hour and 30th DHV with a V/C ratio exceeding ODOT's V/C ratio criteria during both AM Peak hour and 30th DHV. All other intersections analyzed met the City's maximum allowable operational thresholds. Table 6a: Total Future 2025 Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Levels of Service With Planned Improvements For Existing R-12 Zoning Scenario Intersection AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour Traffic Signal Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay V/C Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W 57.7 1.04 E 50.8 0.94 D Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay V/C Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Pfaffle Street 17.3 0.30 C 31.6 0.65 D (Critical Approach: WB) SW Hall Blvd /Parcel I 12.0 - B 13.9 0.01 B (Critical Approach: WB) SW Hall Blvd /Parcel II 11.8 0.01 B 13.6 0.01 B (Critical Approach: WB) Table 6b: Total Future 2025 30th DH Levels of Service With Planned Improvements For Existing R-12 Zoning Scenario Intersection 30th DH Traffic Volume Traffic Signal Control Avg Vehicle Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W 62.4 1.01 E Table 7a: Total Future 2025 Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Levels of Service With Planned Improvements For Proposed CC=G Zoning Scenario Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Traffic Signal Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay V/C Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W 58.5 1.04 E 51.9 0.95 D Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay V/C Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Pfaffle Street 18.3 0.33 C 33.5 0.65 D (Critical Approach: WB) SW Hall Blvd /Parcel I 10.3 0.01 B 14.1 0.02 B (Critical Approach: WB) SW Hall Blvd /Parcel H 13.4 0.09 B 14.8 0.06 B (Critical Approach: WB) Table 7b: Total Future 2025 30th DH Levels of Service With Planned Improvements For Proposed C-G Zoning Scenario Intersection 30th DH Traffic Volume Traffic Signal Control Avg Vehicle Delay V/C (Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W 64.3 1.02 E SITE ACCESS AND INTERNAL STREETS Figure 1 shows the site area and vicinity map. At this stage there is no specific site plan for the proposed parcel rezone. Additional traffic analysis should be conducted when a development application is submitted, including on-site circulation, parking and queuing at site access points and key intersections. CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of the analysis described in this traffic study, it is concluded that the proposed amendment can be constructed without significantly affecting traffic operations or safety in the vicinity of the site. Analyses of total future 2025 traffic conditions with buildout of proposed C-G zoning ("worst case scenario") found that traffic generated by the proposed rezone will slightly increase traffic by approximately four percent along SW Hall Blvd. However, the study area intersections with additional traffic from the potential worst-case development scenarios will continue to operate similar to the total future 2025 with buildout of existing R-12 zoning. No specific off-site roadway improvements are recommended to accommodate the buildout of proposed rezone or mitigate its impact in addition to what is planned in Tigard 99W Corridor Study. If there are any questions related to the data or analysis contained in this report, please contact Arshad Syed at (503) 690-8080 x 1174. Sincer y, ,4D PROF • 'obert iorast, P.E, P.T.O.E. Or ■ % V// ,oler- Princip. Transportation Engineer C Attachments • "44.16.10. g4 Expires: 12/31/2008 F re 1: Site Area And Vicinity • C211 iteve-St--ii II i' ill e. • 1 !111_ , ....4,4 lip r iii( ....-,c \ c \ \1 NsN 01 ii ---::- \----- \\\\ . \\\',,,\-\...<0 0 IProposed Rezone Site I ' liev— .. ..... .• • Txvrt. i• r 1,..._..... ; : -ti.:.1,.''. ' '; ,' •1._.:,:- '.'.',.1'.:-::.::-:•';. '..',„,,-'-.."..,..•It..-...,,. - --,:. „.,,.. , , , , „. It.. , .-0, ... •,, • . • • • ,,•• ...\,, •.,,, .,„ 1 + �• {! 3 Ly o iA 4, ,..., ,.... ,, , ,I.,..„:) ,.•., ,,,,....„,... ,.. 4.:„..,..i,:,....:,i1...._,,...,. _...,„„ . . M F N .t_ ..... N t t t I ,, -- t Drawing Not To Scale Proposed Site elt \ (c-r------ ) OR08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Figure 2: Study • a Intersections And Existing ne Configurations ir -i I $ -St-- -' r' T 8 I. p• .$/T a m FIJI - E F f III •j 'L. t''... -- A `ir`. -rig, . ~ ��`% 9W .� I f - -r -rr !ft 1�I�� f 1'+ 11+1 ''_ II I\ 11411( '� ''` 11 r1 '01 ----vx kt,.:: i .. �— Planned 99W A -\--- E— I I� A 2025 Improvements...... F- u � N Drawing Not To Scale v A r Traffic Signal 6 Stop Sign ->L Proposed Site Ei (...c- ) 0R08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Figure 3: F ant Weekday Peak Hour Traff 'olumes In The Vicinity Of Study Area Intersections rAM(PM) �l March 2008 y 0.94 .130(285) (0.97) (-40(60) o ,r r--N --' L----- ! ( 11 ,, y—�,,.,����+.aa t i$YO`Z7i- N v „......, cv 1 , i ..._..2(1) °vo ___, at ... IM 4 III Estimate* /ter 2(1) 1 r 4 ON'Ff ON lir ,SN... .\_. \ 5, .. )\ T� . . � I g \;; 99W r t I S\ � _ �JZ•. •� 'iti L•k\ I I ,ic AM(PM) 0(o) \\- _____.1 /J .jt A, /ii f t- Estimate* r 1(0) `' r i1 �y\ 7:-_-_-. f } s` 1': �" ■ —�t�L�y oo o.N Recent _ ,- t+.r>�6A- ,1 _=1 -)1�.' 30th DHV '` ' j (i64) 00 o (1215) �(1542) 0 ir (23) '(191) .� 0 (205)120 o 98 �95(150) t\ I N .NN t7- M (1115)1615 F-845(1415) (°'98) (_135(175) (21)15--1,41 (207)121.31 k.._96(152) t 0.98 E—853(1429) (1126)1631-� (0.98) AM(PM) (22)15 (136(177) N in March 2007 v—N \ t r Drawing Not To Scale AM(PM) ^N Traffic Signal Adjusted " �� 2008 4:4'A-(NI Stop Sign _II_..`� Proposed Site El AM(PM)Peak flour Volumes (c."._____T 0R08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Figure 4: Tr 'c Crash Patterns Throughout le Study Area (Jan. 2004 to Dec. 2006) RE=2 Fix Ohj=0 Turn=2 Other=0 PDO=1 INJ=3 Crash Rate=0.29 I_I CL-- .r ill j n � titi f. L Iiii l`y r No Crashes Reported I ( 217 + { $,5 F:v < Tig -- `') ti ` 99Wt,• L I '■ III II \\N `4__ _ \ II I�alt , \A - _ .--�\ INS ~� \-, iI No Crashes j~ "`¢- t "-'��" `.� 1-�'x Reported ,f \ " 2 ::,t4-1,:,,-CP---' 4 --- s RE=12 Fix Ohj=1 Angle=4 Other=6 PDO=13 INJ=10 Crash Rate=0.54 Key: RE =Rear-End N S/S =Sideswipe Drawing Not To Scale Fix Obj. =Fixed Object PDO =Property Damage Traffic Signal 6 INJ =Injury FAT =Fatality Stop Sign AL Crash Rate =Average Number of Incidents Per Proposed Site EI Million Entering Vehicles T� 0R08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Figure 5: r ire 2025 Background Weekd T3eak Hour Traffic Volumes In The Vicinity Of Study Area intersections N o'0 ON n to N O it-N 152(333) r47(70) . cq . 1 _t_ i C__L-'--.--'—' I I Irl rf CD _ LO 1 tii ir oLk, ,,,,,1:46,i,„ 7 —2(1) 6 " kN.,'■ iii- 4 _ r 2(1) — co▪ c' rX Lo Tig. 99Wy l I. :rr .: F. N II IIII 1-\ \ f j f o I II '4lllti if o t I I 1 ,y,r.-l y� ,1 /-1(0) t mss/ ' I 'K5t5 ,-:ti' - in a g25 +.ir51� '' � r�ti t. in .. _ .-- .1, • '• rte 0 Tr;c 107----....N..m 0 o N N 30t h DHV vLoN M` A) 1 OD � �cl (191)\ A) 1 (261)— —(18o5) 112(17) (1422)—. 242 142 r(223) (1318)1908 .4-999(i672) (27) f (25),8 , f 16o(207) A ) Tr ° F' " N AM(PM) m Drawing Not To Scale o°,co Traffic Signal Stop Sign Proposed Site El AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes (a- ) OR08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Figure 6: W day Peak Hour Traffic Volum Generated By By i-uil Buildout of Existing R-12 Zoning 1 0(1) foil: 1:91 ti .....1 FI Same as ` +r cl to—Apt Units. kiwis ,�'l• 'f 71 _— o Trips Already u \ on the road 16% t�,' _ l l� r�. Parcel-II 2{1) ` ' ti` l-2(1) `'; � � ra,, , k . l Tig, ' �, P .) A f 1\( ,z4-, \\.....„.......„....._- c \-\,,„,,,-'d10 \ • r' 21 , \ ,,-- , - .,,, Parcel-I 2(2) \ 0 ,- - I ` \5 . r4(2) ° v � -1 Kren-T`- R r i ---- (1)0--I' ~1(2) t ____.) Site Generated Traffic(10 SF) Site Generated Traffic(1 SF) In Out In Out AM Peak 2 6 AM Peak o 1 PM Peak 6 4 PM Peak 1 0 Site Generated Traffic(6 SF) Site Generated Traffic(10-Units) N In Out In Out Drawing Not To Scale AM Peak 1 4 AM Peak 1 4 PM Peak 4 2 PM Peak 4 2 Traffic Signal Stop Sign Proposed Site , AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes OR08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Figure 7a: Week( 'pass-By Peak Hour Traffic V( les Generated By Full ouildout of Proposed C-G Zoning ,tom_ � r e �� ' "} y, � 0 Al g� , 11TH! ?" r" A — �io(9) y - Parcet II 16(8) 1 l 1� L g '' ,y�,'9�9W}t -- IO0 1 ice_ ... ,}� ��y�~ _-----% III'" �ti ti+ \\: �� �1(4) .� Parcel-I o(4) ,`f!f �~ 5 t r},,,,>4`1\ �r Pass-By Site Traffic (Parcel I) In Out AM Peak I 1 PM Peak 8 8 N Pass-By Site Traffic(Parcel II) Drawing Not To Scale In Out Traffic 6 AM Peak 26 26 fic Signal PM Peak 17 17 Stop Sign AL Proposed Site El AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes C'~T� OR08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Figure 7b: We( 3y New And Diverted Peak Her Traffic Volumes Generateu dy Full Buildout of Proposed G Zoning to (-5(6) r L____ ti i ) . :'rte 1,Y . �' CI er l ill! 'i aE --- Parcel-II �18(11) 16% ' I 1-1 cm ti ,. o F: ,,,t1�y`•,1 M S �� :t� N r-\ \t\ A `;\�j I veil C's .z.,.,.-.-- r - � 5 l Parcel-I 0(3) ' `r"`F 22 �; 2 61\ \,,� S tl1 f.�I e___-- o � + � 11 ti) .01., _ r \\ •Tr 01 Lo '0 -) yc (8)7 J IL-8(1O) t CE A New/Diverted New/Diverted N Site Generated Traffic(Parcel-I) Site Generated Traffic(Parcel-II) Drawing Not To Scale In Out In Out Traffic Signal 6 AM Peak 2 o AM Peak 28 26 Stop Sign PM Peak 17 4 PM Peak 19 16 Proposed Site El AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes (�T� 0R08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone `ENGINEERS Figure 8a: TotE ture 2025 Weekday Peak HoeTraffic Volumes With ruIl Buildout of Existing R-12 oning N 1 Lot 152(333) r 47(70) o ve"-Ti- at J a O v I Ni r 0 t 41 kl r F 2(1) 6`•< �YT1•mil- _ r2(1) --- � } — ' y \\.\\ t 0 in ........ <I -' Tig. �� I (99W)----:----- v. \,t1� ` tiny` f nvl �I 171, yti�t it \ i• 'F.; ' ( t ) 11 co ti --y �y �, ti 11 r i'',.. _s` ti 1 �' o OO M v ! ',5 v 2025 99W Corridor 'az - _ Study Volumes ' –_ '� ,Dles._ –#,`-___—, \ / f (120)J (140) 1 ,f (131o)—,..(1.00) <—(2292) 0 000 (4°) R (�4O) iqPig v.. M y t r l-.CSI W d' •[ M M (262) (180 y (1422)— . E—(1805) t13(179) r(223)/ (243)142J (27) (1318)1908— E—999(1672) �� (25)18� r 16o(207) 3od1 DHV T � N v�I c Drawing Not To Scale AM(PM) o Cl m Traffic Signal `�" Stop Sign Proposed Site El AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes (c.:_...L OR08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS Figure 8b: Tot. -uture 2025 Weekday Peak IJ Traffic Volumes With full Buildout of Proposed C-G mooning v v N M O in 0 r N 152(333) r 52(76) t ( L__— I 0 et.=-3 `_ _ la ' i ill gl it in in VI 1 .iT, LI k i 1. 18(14) g 4 TiM 'Mil- 'j 7 ' f r 34(19) t �r i I , 11. I 217 Qi � N `ti in ill. 1 . / .4. i- -,--,, \\II\ 11 I lc:\ co ..i. II 1(5) \T \\ __ --_,..----/- M N . ... ,.. co_00 r . : , M M M M h V4 %�� goth DHV GO,0N Tr � 1L \ -) W (2600 (201) 1 (1422)- <—(18o5) (250)149J 120(187) (27) (223) (1318)1908 F—999(1672) (25)18_,, A r tbo(207) Tr °°CCO N AM(PM) v m Drawing Not To Scale Cl M Traffic Signal 6 tn Stop Sign Proposed Site El AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes Q"._L-- OR08.002.T01 Hall Blvd Rezone ENGINEERS C ENGINEERS TECHNICAL APPENDIX Attached is the Technical Appendix for CTS Engineers traffic impact study for Project OR08.002.T01, Hall Blvd Rezone. It includes the following information: 1) Photos of Proposed Site Access Location 2) Trip Generation Worksheet 3) Collision History Analysis Worksheet 4) Manual Turn Movement Counts 5) Regional Transportation Council EMME/2 6) Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Existing 2008 Weekday Peak Hour and 30th DH Traffic Volumes 7) Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Future Background 2025 Weekday Peak Hour and 30th DH Traffic Volumes. 8) Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Total Future 2025 Weekday Peak Hour and 30th DH Traffic Volumes with Buildout of Existing R-12 Zoning. 9) Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Total Future 2025 Weekday Peak Hour and 30th DH Traffic Volumes with Buildout of Proposed C-G Zoning. STUDY AREA TYPICAL VIEWS Hall Blvd Rezone City of Tigard, OR .a,- ,/ :.;: .1 M 4W !1;/_.Y :;',it,-;;p1„.,:„,.. i _\ .,, ___ .,:... IlJIJ ' / Looking South Along SW Hall Blvd at SW Pfaffle Street �_ fi'',t• F tit _ pF ---- ... J ■I1 - 1'1 , :,..,:--.-T , , . „e0•••••000097. . ...:. .. .. .. , , Looking North Along SW Hall Blvd at SW Pfaffle Street IF •U ti'l l 1� /�� F 4 aH ^. Iry Oil 1 i I f l ifi �' ' Ax , S . . t''• 4 ","..,;•:'_ -.0 ,it a� Looking East Across SW Hall Blvd at Existing Home on Parcel I Photos Taken By CTS Engineers and Google Maps STUDY AREA TYPICAL VIEWS Hall Blvd Rezone City of Tigard, OR l .0;%:},• ii i. ��C` hi PJots ;,f �c�•-,,,,,,ilit ,,If 1 1.,..- -I I 1 j-Ak,c_,,.. ._,_, ,, il st ----- . .,.-,_ -mil Looking East Across SW Hall Blvd at Silver Creek Apartments on Parcel II } a, l . ' B y' pi ...• M 1 n , v gT.. 11F '0 Sight Distance Looking North Along SW Hall Blvd from Potential Site Access 4,4, '., ' ' ,,,, .! .,,,,,,,..ivi, 1.,. if/ tug, , l .tr itli,- , N .� • 44401, A. ab At- . ..' Sight Distance Looking South Along SW Hall Blvd from Potential Site Access Photos Taken By CTS Engineers and Google Maps STUDY AREA TYPICAL VIEWS Hall Blvd Rezone City of Tigard, OR h 49., ,.. , 3 .�i 3 '♦h fix..' Looking South Along SW Hall Blvd at Hwy 99W �y Ij1 _j e - 1 4 Looking North Along SW Hall Blvd at Hwy 99W jli • • _� sw !fit Hwy NE is + . Looking West Along Hwy 99W at SW Hall Blvd Photos Taken By CTS Engineers and Google Maps TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET RATES Development: Hall Blvd Rezone Size: 16 Homes ITE Land Use Code: Single Family Homes, Code 210 (7th Edition) Variable: Number of Homes (H) Total Weekday Trips T = 9.57 x (H) Enter Exit Total - Vehicle Trips 77 76 153 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips T =0.75 x (H) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 3 9 12 Site Distribution 25% 75% 100% Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips T = 1 .01 x (H) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 10 6 16 Site Distribution 63% 37% 100% CTS Engineers, TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET RATES Development: Hail Blvd Rezone Size: 10 Units ITE Land Use Code: Apartments, Code 220 (7th Edition) Variable: Number of Units (U) Total Weekday Trips T = 6.72 x (U) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 34 33 67 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips T = 0.51 x (U) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 1 4 5 Site Distribution 20% 80% 100% Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips T = 0.62 x (U) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 4 2 6 Site Distribution 65% 35% 100% CTS Engineers, . TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET RATES Development: Hall Blvd Rezone Size: 5,000 GSF ITE Land Use Code: Quality Restaurant, Code 931 (7th Generation) Variable: Per 1,000 GSF (G) Total Weekday Trips R =89.95x (G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 225 225 450 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% 44% Pass-by Trips 99 99 198 18% Diverted Trips 40 41 81 38% New Trips 86 85 171 450 Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips R =0.81 x (G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 3 1 4 Site Distribution 65% 35% 100% 44% Pass-by Trips 1 1 2 18% Diverted Trips 0 1 1 38% New Trips 2 -1 1 4 Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips R = 7.49 x (G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 25 12 37 Site Distribution 67% 33% 100% 44% Pass-by Trips 8 8 16 18% Diverted Trips 3 4 7 38% New Trips 14 0 _ 14 37 CTS Engineers, TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET RATES Development: Hall Blvd Rezone Size: 2,000 GSF North ITE Land Use Code: Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Code 934 (7th Edition) Variable: Per 1,000 GSF (G) Total Weekday Trips R = 496.12 x (G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 496 496 992 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% 50% Pass-by Trips 248 248 496 25% Diverted Trips 124 124 248 25% New Trips 124 124 248 992 Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips R =53.11 x (G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 54 52 106 Site Distribution 51% 49% 100% 49% Pass-by Trips 26 26 52 26% Diverted Trips 14 14 28 25% New Trips 14 12 26 - - - IOo Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips R = 34.64 x (G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 36 33 69 Site Distribution 52% 48% 100% 50% Pass-by Trips 17 18 35 24% Diverted Trips 8 9 17 26% New Trips 11 _ 6 17 69 CTS Engineers, TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET RATES Development: Hall Blvd Rezone Size: 1 Homes ITE Land Use Code: Single Family Homes, Code 210 (7th Edition) Variable: Number of Homes (H) Total Weekday Trips T = 9.57 x (H) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 5 5 10 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips T = 0.75 x (H) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 0 1 1 Site Distribution 25% 75% 100% Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips T = 1.01 x (H) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 1 0 1 Site Distribution 63% 37% 100% CTS Engineers, Collision History Analysis Worksheets Project: OR08.002.T01 -Hall Blvd Rezone Crash Analysis Worksheet Jan 2004-Dec 2006 Intersection: SW Hall Blvd/SW Pfaffle Street Percent Percent Property Rear End 2 50% Damage Only 1 25% FixObj 0 0% Injury 3 75% Turn 2 50% Fatality 0 0% Ang 0 0% Total 4 100% Other 0 0% Total 4 100% PM Peak Hour 1,405, ADT 12,773 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Crash Rate= (Number of Crashes/3)/(ADT x 365)*1,000,000 Vehicles Crash Rate= 0.29 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles Intersection: SW Hall Blvd/Hwy 99W Percent Percent Property Rear End 12 52% Damage Only 13 57% FixObj 1 4% Injury 10 43% Turn 4 17% Fatality 0 0% Ang 4 17% Total 23 100% Other 2 9% Total 23 100% PM Peak Hour 4,259 ADT 38,718 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Crash Rate= (Number of Crashes/3)/(ADT x 365)* 1,000,000 Vehicles Crash Rate= 0.54 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles CTS ENGINEERS AM and PM Peak Hour Manual Turn Movement Counts Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume INTERSECTION: SW Hall Blvd--Pacific Hwy(99W) QC JOB#:10240043 WEATHER: DATE:3/15/2007 412 304 0.2 2.0 l a 88 * I Peak-Hour:7:25 AM --8:25 AM I a * 0.90 139 205 0.0 0.0 0.5 951 ♦ 117 1 k'92 • 1071 ( Pacific Hwy(99W) ] 5.6 ♦ 1.7: { Y t 1.1 ♦ 5.5 10.97 1 1614• 0.98 •845 1 0.93 I 4.0 • • 5.9 1746 * 15 .+ r 134 •2114 _ 3.9 ♦6.7 .� r 6.0 a. 3.7 7'f • r► ////// h • e. 7 38 95 295 ( 7.9 3.2 4.1 0.93 I 1\ 1.1 * .�''.� a * 288 428 _/ 3.1 4.2 [ SW Hall Blvd ] `` IjjII(fI ;�II7777II [ISW Hall Blvd j ♦, .1. J I' ,v7-7S- d • 4 L i E 0 t..s.,,,1(>t 1 * CRO • ♦► r ti r• * 7 6 p I NORTH 7 14 4 4 _1 41.1+ L 4— 4— # L— 1 Cr Oyy`9O * ® - • ro -14.41 p 7 1-- 7 , F 'SEE LEGEND SHEET 5-MIN COUNT SW Hail Blvd SW Hall Blvd Pacific Hwy(99W) Pacific Hwy(99W) HOURLY PERIOD (Northbound) (Southbound) (Eastbound) (Westbound) TOTAL TOTALS BEGINNING AT Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U 7:00 AM 5 5 9 1 6 3 0 3 137 2 16 47 2 0 236 7:05 AM 1 1 5 8 11 1 0 8 136 3 8 58 4 0 244 7:10 AM 0 9 34 9 6 6 0 10 131 1 11 52 2 0 271 7:15 AM 3 1 20 16 11 6 0 4 146 0 14 65 6 0 292 7:20 AM 4 11 29 9 6 5 0 8 137 1 9 57 2 0 278 7:25 AM 3 4 22 16 13 6 0 5 140 2 11 78 9 0 309 7:30 AM 3 8 32 15 9 4 0 8 133 1 12 66 2 0 293 7:35 AM 3 5 20 23 13 4 0 6 140 1 5 84 7 0 311 7:40 AM 3 11 26 14 12 6 0 10 125 0 15 72 7 0 301 7:45 AM 1 7 22 21 20 1 0 8 148 2 11 75 8 0 324 7:50 AM 2 10 26 17 14 6 0 15 117 1 17 75 9 0 309 7:55 AM 2 8 28 14 10 5 0 9 142 1 15 68 2 0 304 3472 8:00 AM 4 6 20 20 14 8 0 15 123 1 9 62 16 0 298 3534 8:05 AM 1 10 22 21 7 7 0 9 153 1 5 70 6 0 312 3602 8:10 AM 4 10 30 10 9 8 0 14 113 4 16 58 12 0 288 3619 8:15 AM 3 8 25 18 12 9 0 4 145 0 7 65 7 0 303 3630 8:20 AM 9 8 22 16 6 4 0 14 135 1 11 72 7 0 305 3657 8:25 AM 5 6 14 11 10 8 0 6 113 0 4 63 6 0 246 3594 8:30 AM 3 13 18 11 7 4 0 7 104 3 9 69 4 0 252 3553 8:35 AM 1 7 17 15 16 5 0 4 104 1 6 72 5 0 253 3495 8:40 AM 3 3 11 15 7 10 0 9 115 3 8 67 4 0 255 3449 8:45 AM 4 4 9 15 5 4 0 12 119 4 6 68 3 0 253 3378 8:50 AM 5 4 15 10 6 9 0 18 101 1 16 65 .7 0 257 3326 8:55 AM 0 10 22 9 12 4 0 15 112 3 11 91 8 0 297 3319 PEAK 15-MIN Northbound _ Southbound Eastbound Westbound FLOW RATES Left Thru Right Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right U TOTAL All Vehicles 20 100 304 0 208 176 48 0 128 1628 16 0 172 872 76 0 3748 Heavy Trucks 4 4 20 0 0 0 8 80 0 8 56 0 180 Pedestrians 0 4 0 4 8 Bicycles Railroad Stopped Buses Counter Comments: Report generated on 3/5/2008 SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(hap://www.qualitycounts.net) Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume INTERSECTION: SW Hall Blvd--Pacific Highway(99W) QC JOB#:10240044 WEATHER: DATE:3/1412007 473 596 3.0 18 i[0.851* I Il Peak•Hour: 5:00 PM--6:00 PM I i. i 89 176 208 3.4 4.0 1.9 d i 4. 0 4 14. 1627 4 202 1 t.149 ♦ 1733 [ Pacific Highway(99W) ] 3.1 ♦0.5 r t 6.0 4 3.2 L0.92 I 1113♦ 0.98 *1412 1 0.93 I 4.2 • �' 3.0 1336 4 21 C 172 ♦ 1600 ��_ 3.7 ♦4.8 �, /r 2.3 4 38 7's 4 I. /' `l 7 126 245 279 ( - l 4.0 0.4 3.2 3690.866 ,. \...t� -4 2.3 [ SW Hall Blvd ] [ SW Hall Blvd ] _1 io L ...,,...r-.i, ) I ("�( _1 L 18 • 10 t J t 7 9 NORTH F 14 I, "1-- _1 la+ L 4— L ___,.. 4,4,e.,06 ®®' -1 41-+ 1---- —1 i ri-- 7 . F •SEE LEGEND SHEET 5-MIN COUNT SW Hall Blvd SW Hall Blvd Pacific Highway[... Pacific Highway(,.. PERIOD (Northbound) (Southbound) (Eastbound) (Westbound) TOTAL TOTALS BEGINNING AT Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru R ight U 4:00 PM 8 14 24 14 14 6 9 85 1 8 128 7 318 4:05 PM 8 9 21 24 15 6 24 93 2 23 122 11 358 4:10 PM 4 15 15 19 13 7 6 118 1 10 154 9 371 4:15 PM 3 19 20 14 11 4 11 85 1 14 121 13 316 4:20 PM 6 17 21 19 14 1 13 98 2 11 125 10 337 4:25 PM 5 11 10 21 16 3 9 67 1 14 120 10 287 4:30 PM 6 14 32 14 18 11 12 93 2 9 123 9 343 4:35 PM 7 32 31 13 16 8 14 94 2 14 114 12 357 4:40 PM 10 22 31 11 13 9 18 90 5 20 102 15 346 4:45 PM 5 1 14 4 4 1 0 95 5 17 162 15 323 4:50 PM 6 21 20 20 16 8 18 72 1 16 121 10 329 4:55 PM 9 19 21 19 20 4 16 100 2 15 121 11 357 4042 5:00 PM 7 21 28 0 22 19 11 0 17 81 1 0 12 117 11 0 347 4071 5:05 PM 12 17 30 0 26 18 5 0 15 95 2 0 14 110 18 0 362 4075 5:10 PM 10 32 32 0 21 16 4 0 19 95 2 0 5 93 10 0 339 4043 ' 5:15 PM 6 22 25 0 17 16 5 0 25 88 2 0 17 117 13 0 353 4080 5:20 PM 13 14 16 0 15 14 7 0 16 108 2 0 19 133 8 0 365 4108 5:25 PM 15 14 14 0 12 10 8 0 16 105 1 0 15 125 17 0 352 4173 5:30 PM 11 12 17 0 20 6 9 0 10 62 1 11 120 13 0 292 4122 5:35 PM 12 13 19 0 24 13 11 0 16 107 1 17 133 16 0 382 4147 5:40 PM 11 20 29 0 12 15 10 0 19 82 4 14 113 12 0 341 4142 5:45 PM 9 39 24 0 11 17 7 0 16 79 2 15 106 9 0 334 4153 5:50 PM 10 18 27 0 11 16 6 0 22 94 1 18 114 14 0 351 4175 5:55 PM 10 23 18 0 17 16 6 0 11 117 2 15 131 8 0 374 4192 PEAK 15-MIN Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound FLOW RATES Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U TOTAL All Vehicles 136 200 220 0 176 160 80 0 228 1204 20 0 204 1500 152 0 4280 Heavy Trucks 0 0 4 4 12 4 0 64 0 8 48 4 148 Pedestrians 8 20 8 8 44 Bicycles Railroad Stopped Buses Counter Comments: Report generated on 3/5/2008 SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(h8pJ/ w.qualitycounts.nel) TRA FSTA TS ,I / PO Pox 13699 Tel:(503)646.2942 Salem,OR 97309 Fax:(503)526-0620 Intersection Turning Movement Summary Report Location SW PFAFFLE ST AT HALL BLVD Date 3/11/2008 Day of Week Tuesday Time Begin 7:00 Reviewed By: LT Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Time Period Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Totals 7:00 - 7:15 0 0 0 13 0 4 7 32 0 0 76 30 162 7:15 - 7:30 0 0 0 12 0 2 7 46 0 0 98 42 207 7:30 - 7:45 0 0 0' 29 0 13 3 52 0 0 101 34 232 7:45 - 8:00 0 0 0 29 0 14 3 72 0 0 91 54 263 8:00 - 8:15 0 0 0 39 0 7 8 67 0 0 93 39 253 8:15 - 8:30 0 0 0 30 0 5 10 79 0 0 78 44 246 8:30 - 8:45 0 0 0 19 0 9 3 51 0 0 63 21 166 8:45 - 9:00 0 0 0 23 0 10 9 49 0 0 75 29 195 Movement Totals 0 0 0 194 0_ 64 50 448 0 0 675_ 293 1724 Enter Totals 0 258 498 968 Exit Totals 343 0 642 739 Two-Hour Totals Light Trucks 0 0 0 8 0 2 2 22 0 0 17 6 57 Medium Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 %Trucks NA NA NA 4.1% NA 3.1% 4.0% 5.6% NA NA 2.7% 2.0% 3.5% Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 South West East North Pedestrians 0 0 1 2 3 Peak Hour Information Peak Hour 7:30 8:30 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Totals Movement Total 0 0 0 127 0 39 24 270 0 0 363 171 994 Peak Hour Factor NA NA NA 0.81 NA 0.70 0.60 0.85 NA NA 0.90 0.79 0.94 Enter Totals 0 166 294 534 Peak Hour Factor NA 0.90 0.83 0.92 Exit Totals 195 0 397 402 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 NA 0.91 0.88 Light Trucks 0 0 0 7 0 0 2 11 0 0 9 3 32 Medium Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 %Trucks NA NA NA 5.5% NA 0.0% 8.3% 5.2% NA NA 2.8% 1.8% 3.6% Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 South West East North Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 1 TRAFSTA7TS Intersection Turning Movement Peak Hour Diagram Location SW PFAFFLE ST AT HALL BLVD Date 3/11/2008 Day of Week Tuesday Time Begin 7:00 Reviewed By: LT PHF=0.92 Al T=2.4% Peak Hour Starts 7:30 534 PHF=0.91 Peak Hour Volume 994 0 363 171 fi V 397 SW PFAFFLE ST Peds=0 127 v PHF=0.90 PHF=NA 0 T=4.2% 0 166 Peak Hour Factor(PHF)=0.94 o Truck Percentage(T)=3.6% 0 " a 39 a a / 0 0 E> PHF=NA T=NA 195 PHF=0.88 0 Peds=0 4i2 402 Ift 1T . -J J 0 270 24 CO J J PHF=0.88 294 Q Z PHF=0.83 T=5.4% A ' TRA FSTA TS �� , PO Box 13699 Tel:(503)646-2942 Salem,OR 97309 Fax:(503)526-0628 Intersection Turning Movement Summary Report Location SW PFAFFLE ST AT HALL BLVD Date 3/11/2008 Day of Week Tuesday Time Begin 16:00 Reviewed By: LT Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Time Period Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Totals 16:00 - 16:15 0 0 0 45 0 12 21 112 0 0 80 33 303 16:15 - 16:30 0 0 0 52 0 7 21 101 0 0 88 51 320 16:30 - 16:45 0 0 0 50 0 10 7 97 0 0 81 40 285 16:45 - 17:00 0 0 0 43 0 9 17 112 0 0 98 33 312 17:00 - 17:15 0 0- 0 61 0 12 17 103 0 0 95 52 340 17:15 - 17:30 0 0 0 74 0 14 20 113 0 0 94 43 358 17:30 - 17:45 0 0 0 77 0 18 8 102 0 0 109 42 356 17:45 - 18:00 0 0 0 70 0_ 16 16 110 0 0 94 32 338 Movement Totals 0 0 0 472 0 98 127 850 0 0 739 326 2612 Enter Totals 0 570 977 1065 Exit Totals 453 0 1322 837 Two-Hour Totals Light Trucks 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 12 3 20 Medium Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0_ 0 0 0 0 0 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 %Trucks NA NA NA 0.6% NA 1.0% 0.0% 0.2% NA NA 1.8% 0.9% 0.8% Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 0 6 South West East North Pedestrians 0 0 1 3 4 Peak Hour Information Peak Hour 17:00 18:00 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Totals Movement Total 0 0 0 282 0 60 61 428 0 0 392 169- 1392 Peak Hour Factor NA NA NA 0.92 NA 0.83 0.76 0.95 NA NA 0.90 0.81 0.97 Enter Totals 0 342 489 561 Peak Hour Factor NA 0.90 0.92 0.93 Exit Totals 230 0 710 452 Peak Hour Factor 0.83 NA 0.95 - 0.89 Light Trucks 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 Medium Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 %Trucks NA NA NA 0.4% NA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA 0.3% 0.0% 0.1% Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 4 South West East North Pedestrians 0 0 0 2 2 0 TIM F'STATS W t:13099 TM:t601)0w•19Q L4m,OR 977W ram tun)510.0610 Intersection Turning Movement Peak Hour Diagram Location SW PFAFFLE ST AT HALL BLVD Date 3/11/2008 Day of Week Tuesday Time Begin 16:00 Reviewed By: LT PHF=0.93 T=0.2% Peak Hour Starts 17:00 fi 561 PHF=0.95 Peak Hour Volume 1392 0 392 169 g 710 SW PFAFFLE ST Peds=2 282 PHF=0.90 PHF=NA 0 T=0.3% 0 342 Peak Hour Factor(PHF)=0.97 Truck Percentage(T)=0.1% cl /00/-07712 .2i a 60 a a. 0 0 E PHF=NA T=NA 230 C* PHF=0.89 0 5 Peds=0 452 (Lfic > JILo 428 61 CO J 'J PHF=0.89 489 a I PHF=0.92 T=0.0% Regional Transportation Council EMME/2 e u 3u m A Hour V b hdes select Zone 962 (1-,, i--,51-R,60-r/0/9 7 ,r , .-\,.. . , \,,, _ \ \ 17 33 14 ,- 04 3, 0,42 IM, cb° '2) Nr „,0, „„, Ps■ 01' 19 Vt. g 2 3 3 -4 # 117 1 VS;165 5.'1,,t,8 thik 2 2 26- raj> i 6 91.1i7UP 2 7 i 7 1pp, MINI:!IIIC 4 .? 6' r17■ if 0,L''''-9:71.i. 7 6 1111P' MI I o, r 5, ,c3 13 16 ria \ , „ 70 76. 80 7.5. 075, es 0) 4•3' 9.0 n, m 0 3 15 6 6 ccib 3 lik\\3 3 3 11:\ ct. •:1 Inv 7 9:41 \ 1 Washington County TSP Network 2030 selectzone962 pm2 2030 PM1 Hour Vehicles Steve L Kelley 1 :16853 2005 mfi 1 Hour \ 1 r .,....0 C c p1 p rt Zone one 96 _ r 1j.)1 .-7-. akyr-101.0, T _ \ .. n, / I ii, 10 ft 41.444.\_44 5 ,- CV Lri.. .All m. 3 4,) n. ZE 1 3' ■11711,50014W S NIIIIIk1 7 lal CD 7 6 ',I' 40 EMI t■t' ,-, 0 27 27 /20 MI ,,,s ■ c,2 r..--,. 2.07. . i 1 14 03\o Ts 109 06 1T) ?6, 96 9.1111iVp; n, 44 r-":lis-1„AP-1 0 / 0 3 3 Mil o .)6. , 11 NO 43 I$ r S PP LEI o 21 Ilhi. /111176H') 4 ...„ 1 1 12 12 2,7 MI "-sr rk, "3 n, A'1k 0 13 &0 3 7 ,? mW 4 4 4 94 7 Washington County TSP Network 2005 selectzone962 pm2.v 2005 PM1 Hour Vehinles Ste"P L Kailey 1159 k 1 ,.ell,! c r4P-t, ,. 041 , i, fr.', ,1 c, .... \ /,•. . ' . , , , ,. , c /t 1 zl, 1.4,- ii,,,;ri LI 1,--ii t ;., ri r \.,,,,, La r1,2 r,r b c..1 c:::-_, if- ,=.., ,,....,v b ii \:.,' Li !.: ii i:v,...,'v....I,R .0 -•\...•--,t 1 ti 6 :.....#El`....P. 4....J 4POWTH t-13-ab P , _ r.... r•-.. co isti Tr, Cn CV cra, 346 0 6.9,9 390 581 407 CT 237 220 456 cr) cr, Rii 0) CO a, to n) N 03 Cn to. 0,4ti N- 43 1 od 6'4 7...'; ..• \. N1C5 422 649 145 321 \ ---:-- cvl 295 cr) 85,6, 294 ( 231 / 222 1-3 N r) 0 NO as.,..,\-‘......-----' /'•-•4 co 6' t'' to CD I,- r•- •-- •— . CD c0•5;)• Nb13 , •■___...--- 68/ '2"NiNCD CP .... N op70 ,,-• , ..0 ., - .02,b is) C.) N cx co Cn :f \ , NO) . \-1-5° grio 388 334 279 279 p- ..., 328 326 ., I, 1 4;1 to' trj, Tr 0,1 4) 04 co Z oc■,' co CD es.t o 0 9, s 215 ,■° 4'; 1>e 9.': s-b N. co 70 g g, N. •ogy. 475 475 15'1.) 433 . 216 216 'V Washington County TSP Network 1( , 61 ti 2005 washco 612 regio 2005 PM1 Hour Vehicles Steve L Kelley 1 :10902 r el c -)el TSP fr-: E-14 tk AI rl P,-.-1, 'r='. ,"3 ri* \ i 0.%itn ;rkl.1 e''''‘1- 5' U ''' 1 ..-' r,=''' r 711 Hour V Z:071 fiLeel .'''L haa. ' %...V 4.0 . %...,; ' c ti , L el .,..,-*,....41 ei a %di 7 Ro tA9 77--/ PA-e.gz,4. 0 03 .-- 448 452 •a- N 0 • 569 394 (9,0 `9? CO 739 322 298 521 361,:''' D• .E.3 G a co •4 Mm .97 MM 0 -.4 .324 37(9 N 0) CO 6s1 I:\' NC3C3 co ,... rl. rb •-- co ,s,06. NC3 481 753 n ig c3 87 286 I ao co ., 1 -.1 \-....___ ,,"3(7, NC361,„ r0 7c)649 (7r—) \Cr\ c0 227 265 N \223_2 207 c, 1 N \T' MCD N10 1 i' CO .. i■cpl. N-31 1CD6) . 607 ..," '90 M to 72 •ct d) 7 cr, .... 4 Ng69' 155 cn 40 0 , 0_, 305 305 •a- ,,, 7.? Nc0 r.) 0 cy, •■5' o r .... , . 9> 9 N 737 m cn N a ov ,,.. n) ■\ 877 vr, .96. '717 NN ,'55 0 .li 03 M (.4 107 469 4e5. - CY- N`l• 123 c)co cn 7 2 & 630 693 693 Ots, .._ r... 481 . Cob' N 330 454 t' cle Washington County TSP Network 2030 washco 612 TSP 1 2030 PM1 Hour Vehicles StevA I KellPu 1 '1101g Tigard 99W 2025 Mitigated Alternative B 13: South Highway 99W#3 & Hall Blvd. HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -* •N c c 4- t 4\ 1 P \* 1 Movement __ ... :_ EBL -E-AT OR_WBU _;,N L WBT :WEIR NBL ._.NBT_: NBR SE4 :.S13Ti Lane Configurations vi +4 r li ft+ r ) :I, r ti at Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Total Lost time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow(prot) 1950 3320 1426 1950 4771 1413 1676 1950 1950 1950 1980 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow(perm) 1950 3320 1426 1950 4771 1413 1676 1950 1950 1950 1980 Volume(vph) 120 1310 40 30 210 2292 140 180 340 350 300 270 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Factor(vph) 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% Adj. Flow(vph) 114 1244 38 32 200 2177 133 171 323 332 285 256 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 17 0 0 0 47 0 0 121 0 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 114 1244 21 0 232 2177 86 171 323 211 285 256 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 8 5 5 8 1 2 2 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 1 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.0 57.8 57.8 18.0 66.8 66.8 17.2 25.0 25.0 22.2 30.0 Effective Green, g (s) 10.0 59.8 59.8 19.0 68.8 68.8 18.2 26.0 26.0 23.2 31.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.43 0.43 0.14 0.49 0.49 0.13 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.22 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 139 1418 609 265 2345 694 218 362 362 323 438 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 0.37 c0.12 c0.46 0.10 c0.17 c0.15 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.06 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.88 0.04 0.88 0.93 0.12 0.78 0.89 0.58 0.88 0.58 Uniform Delay, dl 64.1 36.7 23.3 59.3 33.3 19.3 59.0 55.6 52.0 57.1 48.7 Progression Factor 1.42 0.61 0.17 1.16 0.93 1.28 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 32.9 6.4 0.1 12.0 2.8 0.1 24.1 26.6 6.7 27.5 5.6 Delay(s) 124.2 28.8 4.1 80.5 33.7 24.8 83.1 82.2 58.7 84.6 54.4 Level of Service F C A F CC F F E F D Approach Delay(s) 35.9 37.5 73.0 64.3 Approach LOS D D E E Intersecfion=Summary _ __ . . 1 HCM Average Control Delay 45.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 101.6% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group DKS Associates Synchro 6 Report 3/3/2008 Page 1 Tigard 99W 2025 Mitigated Alternative B 13: South Highway 99W#3 & Hall Blvd. HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4, Movement SBR 1 Lan+Configurations Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1800 Total Lost time(s) 3.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Frt 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow(prot) 1479 Flt Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow(perm) 1479 Volume(vph) 180 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Growth Factor(vph) 95% Adj. Flow(vph) 171 RTOR Reduction (vph) 115 Lane Group Flow (vph) 56 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 30.0 Effective Green, g (s) 31.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 327 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.17 Uniform Delay, dl 44.1 Progression Factor 1,00 Incremental Delay,d2 1.1 Delay(s) 45.2 Level of Service D Approach Delay(s) Approach LOS Intersection;Summary 1 DKS Associates Synchro 6 Report 3/3/2008 Page 2 Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Existing 2008 Weekday Peak Hour and 30th DH Traffic Volumes MITIG8 - AM Peak Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:14 :14 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ***** ******************************************************** ***************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.977 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 52.2 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: D ******************************************************************************* Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 15 Mar 2007 << AM Peak Base Vol: 40 95 295 205 140 70 120 1615 15 135 845 95 Growth Adj: 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 Initial Bse: 40 96 298 207 141 71 121 1631 15 136 853 96 User. Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 41 98 304 211 144 72 124 1664 15 139 871 98 Deduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 41 98 304 211 144 72 124 1664 15 139 871 98 PCE Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 41 98 304 211 144 72 124 1664 15 139 871 98 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.99 0.99 0.85 0.97 0.97 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.90 0.90 Lanes: 0.30 0.70 1.00 0.59 0.41 1.00 1.00 1.98 0.02 1.00 2.70 0.30 Final Sat. : 555 1317 1615 1096 749 1615 1805 3573 33 1805 4593 516 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.07 0.19 0.19 0. 19 0.04 0.07 0.47 0.47 0.08 0.19 0.19 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.11 0.11 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.34 0.15 0.48 0.48 0.08 0.41 0.41 Volume/Cap: 0.65 0.65 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.13 0.46 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.46 0.46 Delay/Veh: 58.0 58.0 92.8 88.8 88.8 27.1 48.1 47.3 47.3 123.4 26. 1 26.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 58.0 58.0 92.8 88.8 88.8 27.1 48.1 47.3 47.3 123.4 26.1 26.1 LOS by Move: E E F F F C D D D F C C HCM2kAvgQ: 6 6 16 18 18 2 5 38 38 9 9 9 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. t****k************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIGO - PM Peak Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:38:04 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.023 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 75.9 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 " Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 15 Mar 2007 << PM Peak Base Vol: 130 245 280 210 180 90 205 1115 21 175 1415 150 Growth Adj : 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 Initial Bse: 131 247 283 212 182 91 207 1126 21 177 1429 152 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PH? Volume: 134 253 289 216 186 93 211 1149 22 180 1458 155 Feduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 134 253 289 216 186 93 211 1149 22 180 1458 155 PCE Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ML? Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 134 253 289 216 186 93 211 1149 22 180 1458 155 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.83 0.95 0.95 0.83 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.86 0.86 Lanes: 0.35 0.65 1.00 0.54 0.46 1.00 1.00 1.96 0.04 1.00 2.71 0.29 Final Sat. : 629 1185 1568 968 829 1568 1736 3398 64 1736 4448 472 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.12 0.34 0.34 0.10 0.33 0.33 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.21 0.21 0.31 0.22 0.22 0.34 0.12 0.34 0.34 0.10 0.32 0.32 Volume/Cap: 1.02 1.02 0.59 1.02 1.02 0.18 1.02 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.02 1.02 Delay/Veh: 99.7 99.7 36.8 98.2 98.2 28.1 121.5 67.6 67.6 122.5 69.3 69.3 User DelAdj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 99.7 99.7 36.8 98.2 98.2 28.1 121.5 67.6 67.6 122.5 69.3 69.3 LOS by Move: F F D F F C F E E F E E HCM2kAvgQ: 20 20 9 21 21 2 12 30 30 11 29 29 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - 30th DHV Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:19:16 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 30TH DESING HOUR VOLUMES (30TH DHV) OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ****k*************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.104 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 99.9 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 I II II II I Volume Module:30th DHV Base Vol: 130 245 280 210 180 90 205 1115 21 175 1415 150 Growth Adj: 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 Initial Bse: 142 267 305 229 196 98 223 1215 23 191 1542 164 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 145 273 311 234 200 100 228 1240 23 195 1574 167 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 145 273 311 234 200 100 228 1240 23 195 1574 167 PCE Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • MLF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 145 273 311 234 200 100 228 1240 23 195 1574 167 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.83 0.95 0.95 0.83 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.86 0.86 Lanes: 0.35 0.65 1.00 0.54 0.46 1.00 1.00 1.96 0.04 1.00 2.71 0.29 Final Sat. : 629 1185 1568 968 829 1568 1736 3398 64 1736 4448 472 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.23 0.23 0.20 0.24 0.24 0.06 0.13 0.36 0.36 0.11 0.35 0.35 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.21 0.21 0.31 0.22 0.22 0.34 0.12 0.34 0.34 0.10 0.32 0.32 Volume/Cap: 1.10 1.10 0.64 1.10 1.10 0.19 1.10 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.10 1.10 Delay/Veh: 124.8 125 38.3 123.3 123 28.3 146.0 92.5 92.5 145.6 97.4 97.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 124.8 125 38.3 123.3 123 28.3 146.0 92.5 92.5 145.6 97.4 97.4 LOS by Move: F F D F F C F F F F F F HCM2kAvgQ: 24 24 11 25 25 3 14 35 35 12 35 35 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:14:46 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) *******************k******************* **************************************** Intersection #2 SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 3.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: BE 14.3) ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd SW Pfaffle Street Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 270 24 175 365 0 0 0 0 40 0 130 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 270 24 175 365 0 0 0 0 40 0 130 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 PHF Volume: 0 287 26 186 388 0 0 0 0 43 0 138 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 287 26 186 388 0 0 0 0 43 0 138 I II II I I I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4. 1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I II II II I 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 313 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1061 xxxx 300 Fotent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1259 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 250 xxxx 744 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1259 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 222 xxxx 744 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.15 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.19 xxxx 0.19 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxx 0.7 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 25.0 xxxx 10.9 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * D * B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.3 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. *****#******************************************###*#*************************#* Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:13:15 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) 0808.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 6.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 20.4) ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd SW Pfaffle Street Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 430 65 170 395 0 0 0 0 60 0 285 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 430 65 170 395 0 0 0 0 60 0 285 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 PHF Volume: 0 443 67 175 407 0 0 0 0 62 0 294 Feduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 443 67 175 407 0 0 0 0 62 0 294 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 l II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 510 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1235 xxxx 477 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1065 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 197 xxxx 592 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1065 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 172 xxxx 592 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.16 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.36 xxxx 0.50 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.5 xxxx 2.7 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 37.3 xxxx 16.9 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * E * C Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 20.4 ApproachLOS: * * C ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:39:08 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-1 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 12.0] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-1 Access Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx xxxxx I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 700 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 409 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 409 xxxx xxxxx Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 466 456 xxxxx 512 456 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 12.0 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * B * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 12.0 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:38:50 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-1 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 0.0] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-1 Access Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 495 1 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 495 1 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 495 1 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 495 1 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 495 1 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 951 951 496 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 291 262 578 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 291 262 578 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 420 375 xxxxx 420 375 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 0.00 0.00 I II II I I I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 0 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * * * ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffic. 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:39:00 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-2 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: BE 11.2] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 PHF Volume: 0 314 0 0 431 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 314 0 0 431 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 745 745 314 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 385 345 731 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 385 345 731 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 446 440 xxxxx 494 440 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 0.00 0.00 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 589 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 11.2 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 11.2 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:38:39 Page 1-1 EXISTING 2008 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) 0R08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-2 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: B( 12.6) ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 495 2 2 455 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 495 2 2 455 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 495 2 2 455 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 PHF Volume: 0 510 2 2 469 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 510 2 2 469 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 512 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 985 985 511 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1063 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 278 250 566 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1063 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 277 250 566 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 359 364 xxxxx 408 365 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 0.00 0.00 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 475 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 12.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 12.6 ApproachLOS: * * * B *********************************************.*********************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Future Background 2025 Weekday Peak Hour and 30th DH Traffic Volumes MITIG8 - AM Peak Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:26:03 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE 0R08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.035 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 57.5 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 15 Mar 2007 << AM Peak Base Vol: 40 95 295 205 140 70 120 1615 15 135 845 95 Growth Adj: 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 Initial Bse: 47 112 349 242 165 83 142 1908 18 160 999 112 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 47 112 349 242 165 83 142 1908 18 160 999 112 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0. 98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 48 115 356 247 169 84 145 1947 18 163 1019 115 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 48 115 356 247 169 84 145 1947 18 163 1019 115 PCE Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 115 356 247 169 84 145 1947 18 163 1019 115 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.91 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 5187 1615 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.06 0.22 0.14 0.09 0.05 0.08 0.54 0.01 0.09 0.20 0.07 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.06 0.13 0.21 0.13 0.20 0.37 0.18 0.52 0.58 0.09 0.43 0.56 Volume/Cap: 0.45 0.48 1.03 1.03 0.45 0.14 0.45 1.03 0.02 1.03 0.45 0.13 Delay/Veh: 57.5 50.3 105.0 119.6 43.2 24 .9 45.3 59.0 10.7 135.9 24.2 12.3 User DelAdj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 57.5 50.3 105.0 119.6 43.2 24.9 45.3 59.0 10.7 135.9 24.2 12.3 LOS by Move: E D F F D C D E B F C B HCM2k95thQ: 5 9 33 25 11 4 10 74 1 19 18 4 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:27:20 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.938 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 50.5 Optimal Cycle: 152 Level Of Service: D ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II -I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I II 11 II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 15 Mar 2007 << PM Peak Base Vol: 130 245 280 210 180 90 205 1115 21 175 1415 150 Growth Adj: 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 Initial Bse: 154 290 331 248 213 106 242 1318 25 207 1672 177 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 154 290 331 248 213 106 242 1318 25 207 1672 177 User Adj : 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 157 295 338 253 217 109 247 1344 25 211 1706 181 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 157 295 338 253 217 109 247 1344 25 211 1706 181 PCE Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 157 295 338 253 217 109 247 1344 25 211 1706 181 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ] 900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.91 0.91 0.82 0.91 0.88 0.82 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1753 1845 1568 1753 1845 1568 1736 3473 1554 1736 4990 1554 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.09 0.16 0.22 0.14 0.12 0.07 0.14 0.39 0.02 0.12 0.34 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.14 0.17 0.30 0.15 0.18 0.34 0.16 0.41 0.55 0.13 0.38 0.54 Volume/Cap: 0.64 0.94 0.72 0.94 0.64 0.20 0.89 0.94 0.03 0.94 0.89 0.22 Delay/Veh: 54.2 83.9 42.7 88.6 49.2 27.9 77.9 45.8 12.2 94.8 40.6 14.7 User DelAdj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 54.2 83.9 42.7 88.6 49.2 27.9 77.9 45.8 12.2 94.8 40.6 14.7 LOS by Move: D F D F D C E D B F D B HCM2k95thQ: 12 26 22 23 16 6 22 48 1 21 41 7 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - 30th DHV Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:25:28 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 30TH DESING HOUR VOLUMES (30TH DHV) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE OR08.002 T01 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.013 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 62.1 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module:30th DHV Base Vol: 130 245 280 210 180 90 205 1115 21 175 1415 150 Growth Adj: 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 Initial Bse: 166 312 357 268 230 115 261 1422 27 223 1805 191 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 166 312 357 268 230 115 261 1422 27 223 1805 191 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 169 319 364 273 234 117 267 1451 27 228 1841 195 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 169 319 364 273 234 117 267 1451 27 228 1841 195 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 FinalVolume: 169 319 364 273 234 117 267 1451 27 228 1841 195 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.91 0.91 0.82 0.91 0.88 0.82 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1753 1845 1568 1753 1845 1568 1736 3473 1554 1736 4990 1554 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.17 0.23 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.15 0.42 0.02 0.13 0.37 0.13 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.14 0.17 0.30 0.15 0.18 0.34 0.16 0.41 0.55 0.13 0.38 0.54 Volume/Cap: 0.69 1.01 0.77 1.01 0.69 0.22 0.96 1.01 0.03 1.01 0.96 0.23 Delay/Veh: 57.1 104 46.1 108.8 51.6 28.1 94.3 62.2 12.2 115.6 49.4 14.9 User DelAdj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 57.1 104 46.1 108.8 51.6 28.1 94.3 62.2 12.2 115.6 49.4 14.9 LOS by Move: E F D F D C F E B F D B HCM2k95thQ: 14 30 25 27 17 6 25 57 1 23 48 7 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Wed Mar 19, 2006 11:26:12 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 4.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: C( 17.3) ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd SW Pfaffle Street Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 270 24 175 365 0 0 0 0 40 0 130 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 316 28 205 427 0 0 0 0 47 0 152 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 316 28 205 427 0 0 0 0 47 0 152 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 PHF Volume: 0 336 30 218 454 0 0 0 0 50 0 162 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 336 30 218 454 0 0 0 0 50 0 162 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 366 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1241 xxxx 351 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1204 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 195 xxxx 697 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1204 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 168 xxxx 697 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.18 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.30 xxxx 0.23 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.2 xxxx 0.9 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 35.2 xxxx 11.7 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * E * B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 17.3 ApproachLOS: * * * C ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. I MITIG8 - PM Peak Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:27:29 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 8.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: D( 31.2] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd SW Pfaffle Street Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 430 65 170 395 0 0 0 0 60 0 285 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 503 76 199 462 0 0 0 0 70 0 333 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 503 76 199 462 0 0 0 0 70 0 333 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 PHF Volume: 0 519 78 205 476 0 0 0 0 72 0 344 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 519 78 205 476 0 0 0 0 72 0 344 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 597 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1444 xxxx 558 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 989 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 147 xxxx 533 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 989 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 123 xxxx 533 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.21 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.59 xxxx 0.64 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.9 xxxx 4.6 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 69.0 xxxx 23.2 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * F * C Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 31.2 ApproachLOS: * * * D ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:26:21 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE 0R08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-1 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 12.8] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-1 Access Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 I I II II II I 1 Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Growth Adj : 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1. 17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx xxxxx I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 819 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 348 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 348 xxxx xxxxx Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 417 414 xxxxx 464 414 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx I II II II 1 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 12.8 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * B * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 12.8 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:27:46 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-1 **************-****************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 0.0] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-1 Access Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 495 1 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 579 1 0 532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 579 1 0 532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 579 1 0 532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 579 1 0 532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1112 1112 580 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 233 210 518 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 233 210 518 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 370 331 xxxxx 370 331 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 0.00 0.00 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 0 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:26:30 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-2 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: BE 11.7] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Growth Adj : 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 PHF Volume: 0 367 0 0 504 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 367 0 0 504 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 871 871 367 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 324 291 683 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 324 291 683 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 396 397 xxxxx 445 397 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 0.00 0.00 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 539 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 11.7 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 11.7 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:27:53 Page 1-1 FUTURE BACKGROUND 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH NO DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************k************************************* Intersection #4 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-2 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.6] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 495 2 2 455 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 579 2 2 532 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 579 2 2 532 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 PHF Volume: 0 597 2 2 549 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 597 2 2 549 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 599 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1152 1152 598 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 987 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 221 199 506 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 987 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 220 199 506 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 310 320 xxxxx 358 321 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 0.00 0.00 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 420 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 13.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.6 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Total Future 2025 Weekday Peak Hour and 30th DH Traffic Volumes (With Existing R-12 Zoning) MITIG8 - AM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:18:41 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.035 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 57.7 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 15 Mar 2007 << AM Peak Base Vol: 40 95 295 205 140 70 120 1615 15 135 845 95 Growth Adj: 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 Initial Bse: 47 112 349 242 165 83 142 1908 18 160 999 112 Added Vol: 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 47 112 349 243 166 84 142 1908 18 160 999 113 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0. 98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 48 115 356 248 170 85 145 1947 18 163 1019 116 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 48 115 356 248 170 85 145 1947 18 163 1019 116 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 115 356 248 170 85 145 1947 18 163 1019 116 I II II II -- I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0. 91 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 5187 1615 I II I I II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.06 0.22 0.14 0.09 0.05 0.08 0.54 0.01 0.09 0.20 0.07 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.06 0.13 0.21 0.13 0.20 0.38 0.18 0.52 0.58 0.09 0.43 0.56 Volume/Cap: 0.45 0.48 1.04 1.04 0.45 0.14 0.45 1.04 0.02 1.04 0.45 0.13 Delay/Veh: 57.5 50.3 105.2 119.6 43.1 24.8 45.3 59.2 10.7 136.2 24.2 12.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 57.5 50.3 105.2 119.6 43.1 24.8 45.3 59.2 10.7 136.2 24.2 12.3 LOS by Move: E D F F D C D E B F C B HCM2k95thQ: 5 9 33 25 11 4 10 74 1 19 18 4 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:18:59 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING 0R08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.940 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 50.8 Optimal Cycle: 153 Level Of Service: D ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 15 Mar 2007 << PM Peak Base Vol: 130 245 280 210 180 90 205 1115 21 175 1415 150 Growth Adj: 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 Initial Bse: 154 290 331 248 213 106 242 1318 25 207 1672 177 Added Vol: 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 154 291 331 249 213 107 243 1318 25 207 1672 179 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 157 296 338 254 217 110 248 1344 25 211 1706 183 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 157 296 338 254 217 110 248 1344 25 211 1706 183 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 157 296 338 254 217 110 248 1344 25 211 1706 183 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.91 0.91 0.82 0.91 0.88 0.82 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1753 1845 1568 1753 1845 1568 1736 3473 1554 1736 4990 1554 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.09 0.16 0.22 0.15 0.12 0.07 0.14 0.39 0.02 0.12 0.34 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.14 0.17 0.30 0.15 0.18 0.34 0.16 0.41 0.55 0.13 0.38 0.54 Volume/Cap: 0.64 0.94 0.72 0.94 0.64 0.20 0.90 0.94 0.03 0.94 0.90 0.22 Delay/Veh: 54.1 84.2 42.7 88.8 49.1 27.9 78.3 46.1 12.2 95.2 40.9 14.8 User DelAdj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 54.1 84.2 42.7 88.8 49.1 27.9 78.3 46.1 12.2 95.2 40.9 14.8 LOS by Move: D F D F D C E D B F D B HCM2k95thQ: 12 26 22 23 16 6 22 48 1 21 41 7 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - 30th DHV Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:19:09 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 30TH DESING HOUR VOLUMES (30TH DHV) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.014 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 62.4 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module:30th DHV Base Vol: 130 245 280 210 180 90 205 1115 21 175 1415 150 Growth Adj : 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 Initial Bse: 166 312 357 268 230 115 261 1422 27 223 1805 191 Added Vol: 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 166 313 357 269 230 116 262 1422 27 223 1805 193 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 169 320 364 274 234 118 268 1451 27 228 1841 197 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 169 320 364 274 234 118 268 1451 27 228 1841 197 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 169 320 364 274 234 118 268 1451 27 228 1841 197 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.91 0.91 0.82 0.91 0.88 0.82 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1753 1845 1568 1753 1845 1568 1736 3473 1554 1736 4990 1554 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.17 0.23 0.16 0.13 0.08 0.15 0.42 0.02 0.13 0.37 0.13 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.14 0.17 0.30 0.15 0.18 0.34 0.16 0.41 0.55 0.13 0.38 0.54 Volume/Cap: 0.69 1.01 0.77 1.01 0.69 0.22 0.97 1.01 0.03 1.01 0.97 0.24 Delay/Veh: 56.9 104 46.1 109.1 51.5 28.1 94.8 62.6 12.2 116.0 49.9 14.9 User DelAdj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 56.9 104 46.1 109.1 51.5 28.1 94.8 62.6 12.2 116.0 49.9 14.9 LOS by Move: E F D F D C F E B F D B HCM2k95thQ: 14 30 25 27 17 6 25 57 1 23 48 8 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:19:22 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) **************#*****#*****#******************#********************************** Intersection #2 SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 4.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 17.3) ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd SW Pfaffle Street Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 270 24 175 365 0 0 0 0 40 0 130 Growth Adj : 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 316 28 205 427 0 0 0 0 47 0 152 Added Vol: 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 317 29 205 427 0 0 0 0 47 0 152 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 PHF Volume: 0 337 31 218 454 0 0 0 0 50 0 162 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 337 31 218 454 0 0 0 0 50 0 162 1 II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 368 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1243 xxxx 353 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1202 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 195 xxxx 696 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1202 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 167 xxxx 696 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.18 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.30 xxxx 0.23 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.2 xxxx 0.9 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 35.3 xxxx 11.7 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * E * B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 17.3 ApproachLOS: * * * C ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************## Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. I MITIG8 - PM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:20:00 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 8.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: D[ 31.6) ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd SW Pfaffle Street Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 430 65 170 395 0 0 0 0 60 0 285 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 503 76 199 462 0 0 0 0 70 0 333 Added Vol: 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 504 77 199 463 0 0 0 0 71 0 333 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 PHF Volume: 0 520 79 205 477 0 0 0 0 73 0 344 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 520 79 205 477 0 0 0 0 73 0 344 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 599 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1447 xxxx 559 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 988 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 146 xxxx 532 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 988 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 123 xxxx 532 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.21 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.60 xxxx 0.65 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.0 xxxx 4.6 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 70.5 xxxx 23.3 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * F * C Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 31.6 ApproachLOS: * * * D ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:34:14 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-1 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 12.0) ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-1 Access Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II . I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1,17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 345 1 1 474 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 345 1 1 474 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 FinalVolume: 0 345 1 1 474 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 1 II II II 1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 346 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 822 822 346 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1224 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 347 311 702 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1224 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 346 311 702 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 415 413 xxxxx 463 413 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 0.00 0.00 I II II II 1 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 521 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 12.0 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 12.0 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:35:10 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING OR08.002 T01 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************+************* Intersection #3 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-1 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B( 13.9) ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-1 Access Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 495 1 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1. 17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 579 1 0 532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 579 5 2 532 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 579 5 2 532 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 579 5 2 532 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 584 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1118 1118 582 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1000 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 231 209 517 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1000 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 231 208 517 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 319 328 xxxxx 368 329 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 0.00 0.00 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 407 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 13.9 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.9 ApproaChLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:34:33 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-2 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B( 11.8] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Growth Adj : 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Added Vol: 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 347 0 0 475 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 PHF Volume: 0 369 0 0 505 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 369 0 0 505 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 874 874 369 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 323 290 681 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 323 290 681 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 395 396 xxxxx 444 396 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 0.00 0.00 1 II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 538 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 11.8 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 11.8 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:34:52 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER R-12 ZONING 0R08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-2 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: B( 13.6] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 495 2 2 455 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 579 2 2 532 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Added Vol: 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 580 2 2 534 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0. 97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 PHF Volume: 0 598 2 2 551 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 598 2 2 551 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 601 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1155 1155 599 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 987 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 220 199 505 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 987 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 219 198 505 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 309 319 xxxxx 358 320 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 0.00 0.00 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 419 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 13.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.6 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Total Future 2025 Weekday Peak Hour and 30th DH Traffic Volumes (With Proposed C-G Zoning) MITIG8 - AM Peak Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:00:43 Page 1-i TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING 0R08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ************************************************** ***************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W **************************************************************.****************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.039 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 58.5 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 15 Mar 2007 << AM Peak Base Vol: 40 95 295 205 140 70 120 1615 15 135 845 95 Growth Adj: 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1. 18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 Initial Bse: 47 112 349 242 165 83 142 1908 18 160 999 112 Added Vol: 0 5 0 7 4 6 7 0 0 0 0 8 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 47 117 349 249 169 89 149 1908 18 160 999 120 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0. 98 0. 98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 48 120 356 254 173 91 152 1947 18 163 1019 123 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 48 120 356 254 173 91 152 1947 18 163 1019 123 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 120 356 254 173 91 152 1947 18 163 1019 123 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.91 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 5187 1615 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.06 0.22 0.14 0.09 0.06 0.08 0.54 0.01 0.09 0.20 0.08 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.06 0.13 0.21 0.14 0.20 0.38 0.18 0.52 0.58 0.09 0.42 0.56 Volume/Cap: 0.45 0.50 1.04 1.04 0.45 0.15 0.46 1.04 0.02 1.04 0.46 0.14 Delay/Veh: 57.6 50.7 106.5 120.0 42.9 24 .3 44.9 60.6 10.8 137.4 24.9 12.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 57.6 50.7 106.5 120.0 42.9 24 .3 44.9 60.6 10.8 137.4 24.9 12.7 LOS by Move: E D F F D C D E B F C B HCM2k95thQ: 5 9 33 26 11 4 10 74 1 19 18 4 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:01:57 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING 0R08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.946 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 51.9 Optimal Cycle: 157 Level Of Service: D ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 15 Mar 2007 << PM Peak Base Vol: 130 245 280 210 180 90 205 1115 21 175 1415 150 Growth Adj: 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 Initial Bse: 154 290 331 248 213 106 242 1318 25 207 1672 177 Added Vol: 0 6 0 5 3 4 8 0 0 0 0 10 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 154 296 331 253 216 110 250 1318 25 207 1672 187 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 157 302 338 258 220 113 255 1344 25 211 1706 191 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 157 302 338 258 220 113 255 1344 25 211 1706 191 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 157 302 338 258 220 113 255 1344 25 211 1706 191 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.91 0.91 0.82 0.91 0.88 0.82 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1753 1845 1568 1753 1845 1568 1736 3473 1554 1736 4990 1554 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.09 0.16 0.22 0.15 0.12 0.07 0.15 0.39 0.02 0.12 0.34 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.14 0.17 0.30 0.16 0.19 0.35 0.16 0.41 0.55 0.13 0.38 0.53 Volume/Cap: 0.64 0.95 0.71 0.95 0.64 0.21 0.91 0.95 0.03 0.95 0.91 0.23 Delay/Veh: 54.0 85.2 42.5 90.0 48.8 27.5 80.5 47.2 12.4 96.9 42.5 15.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 54.0 85.2 42.5 90.0 48.8 27.5 80.5 47.2 12.4 96.9 42.5 15.1 LOS by Move: D F D F D C F D B F D B HCM2k95thQ: 12 27 22 24 16 6 23 48 1 21 42 7 ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - 30th DHV Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:02:27 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 30TH DESING HOUR VOLUMES (30TH DHV) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) **************•k***************************************************************** Intersection #1 SW Hall Blvd /Hwy 99W ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 120 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.020 Loss Time (sec) : 16 (Y+R=4.0 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 64.3 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Hwy 99W Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 I- II II I I I Volume Module:30th DHV Base Vol: 130 245 280 210 180 90 205 1115 21 175 1415 150 Growth Adj: 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 Initial Bse: 166 312 357 268 230 115 261 1422 27 223 1805 191 Added Vol: 0 6 0 5 3 4 8 0 0 0 0 10 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 166 318 357 273 233 119 269 1422 27 223 1805 201 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 PHF Volume: 169 325 364 278 237 121 275 1451 27 228 1841 205 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 169 325 364 278 237 121 275 1451 27 228 1841 205 PCE Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 169 325 364 278 237 121 275 1451 27 228 1841 205 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.92 0.97 0.83 0.91 0.91 0.82 0.91 0.88 0.82 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 1753 1845 1568 1753 1845 1568 1736 3473 1554 1736 4990 1554 I-- II II I I I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.18 0.23 0.16 0.13 0.08 0.16 0.42 0.02 0.13 0.37 0.13 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.14 0.17 0.30 0.16 0.19 0.35 0.16 0.41 0.55 0.13 0.38 0.53 Volume/Cap: 0.69 1.02 0.77 1.02 0.69 0.22 0.98 1.02 0.03 1.02 0.98 0.25 Delay/Veh: 56.8 105 45.8 110.3 51.1 27.7 98.1 64.4 12.4 117.8 53.1 15.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 56.8 105 45.8 110.3 51.1 27.7 98.1 64.4 12.4 117.8 53.1 15.3 LOS by Move: E F D F D C F E B F D B HCM2k95thQ: 14 30 25 27 17 6 26 57 1 24 49 8 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:01:34 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 4.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 18.3] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd SW Pfaffle Street Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 270 24 175 365 0 0 0 0 40 0 130 Growth Adj : 1. 17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 316 28 205 427 0 0 0 0 47 0 152 Added Vol: 0 4 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 320 32 205 432 0 0 0 0 52 0 152 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 PHF Volume: 0 340 34 218 460 0 0 0 0 55 0 162 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 340 34 218 460 0 0 0 0 55 0 162 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 374 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1253 xxxx 357 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1195 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 192 xxxx 691 Move Cap. : xxxx xxwx xxxxx 1195 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 165 xxxx 691 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.18 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.33 xxxx 0.23 1 II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.4 xxxx 0.9 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 37.4 xxxx 11.8 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * E * B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.3 ApproachLOS: * * * C ***************************,.**************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:02:04 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING OR08.002 T01 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 SW Hall Blvd /SW Pfaffle Street ****k*************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 9.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: D[ 33.51 ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd SW Pfaffle Street Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 430 65 170 395 0 0 0 0 60 0 285 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 503 76 199 462 0 0 0 0 70 0 333 Added Vol: 0 3 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 506 79 199 468 0 0 0 0 76 0 333 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 PHF Volume: 0 522 81 205 483 0 0 0 0 79 0 344 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 522 81 205 483 0 0 0 0 79 0 344 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I I I II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 603 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1455 xxxx 563 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 984 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 145 xxxx 530 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 984 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 121 xxxx 530 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.21 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.65 xxxx 0.65 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 4.6 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 77.4 xxxx 23.5 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * F * C Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 33.5 ApproachLOS: * * * D ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:01:42 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-1 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: BE 10.3] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-1 Access Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj : 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 19 1 1 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-By: 0 -1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Initial Fut: 0 363 2 1 492 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 363 2 1 492 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 363 2 1 492 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 365 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 364 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1205 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 685 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1205 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 685 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 402 401 xxxxx 450 401 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 10.3 LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 10.3 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:02:11 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING 0R08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-1 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: BE 14.1] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-1 Access Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 495 0 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj : 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1. 17 1. 17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 579 0 0 532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 13 11 6 11 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 Pass-By: 0 -4 4 4 -4 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 Initial Fut: 0 588 15 10 539 0 0 0 0 7 0 5 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 538 15 10 539 0 0 0 0 7 0 5 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 588 15 10 539 0 0 0 0 7 0 5 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 603 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1155 1155 596 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 984 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 220 199 508 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 984 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 218 197 508 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 304 314 xxxxx 356 319 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.02 0.00 0.01 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 407 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 14.1 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.1 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - AM Peak Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:01:48 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (AM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-2 ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.4] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << AM Peak Base Vol: 0 295 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj : 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 345 0 0 474 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 19 9 1 0 0 0 0 18 0 8 Pass-By: 0 -10 10 16 -16 0 0 0 0 16 0 10 Initial Fut: 0 335 29 25 459 0 0 0 0 34 0 18 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 PHF Volume: 0 357 31 27 488 0 0 0 0 36 0 19 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 357 31 27 488 0 0 0 0 36 0 19 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 387 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 913 913 372 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1182 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 306 275 678 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1182 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 301 269 678 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 362 369 xxxxx 423 377 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.02 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.09 0.00 0.03 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 486 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.4 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 13.4 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.4 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. MITIG8 - PM Peak Thu Mar 20, 2008 17:02:17 Page 1-1 TOTAL FUTURE 2025 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (PM PEAK) WITH BUILDOUT OF SITE UNDER C-G ZONING OR08.002 TO1 - SW HALL BLVD REZONE Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 SW Hall Blvd /Parcel-2 Average Delay (sec/veh) : 0.5 Worst Case Level Of Service: BE 14.8] ******************************************************************************** Street Name: SW Hall Blvd Parcel-2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I-.- II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 11 Mar 2008 << PM Peak Base Vol: 0 495 0 0 455 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 Initial Bse: 0 579 0 0 532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 1 13 6 6 0 0 0 0 11 0 5 Pass-By: 0 -9 9 8 -8 0 0 0 0 8 0 9 Initial Fut: 0 571 22 14 530 0 0 0 0 19 0 14 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 PHF Volume: 0 589 23 14 547 0 0 0 0 20 0 14 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 589 23 14 547 0 0 0 0 20 0 14 I II II II I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 I II II II I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 611 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1176 1176 600 Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 977 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 213 193 505 Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 977 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 211 190 505 Total Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 291 307 xxxxx 350 313 xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.06 0.00 0.03 I II II II I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx, xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 402 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.3 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 14.8 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.8 ApproachLOS: * * * B ******************************************************************************** Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 7.9.0415 (c) 2007 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to CTS ENGINEERS, INC. (,4 re on Department of Transportation „ ,i 11h 1 Region 1 Tech Center Theodore H.Kulongoski,Governor 123 NW'Flonders Porliand.Orsoon 97209.4012 Telephone(503)731.8219 Fax(5031731.8259 March 3, 2008 File: Arshad Syed CTS Engineers 19075 NW Tanasbourne Drive, Suite 160 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Subject: Traffic Impact Analysis Scope of Work Proposed zone che.rtge on SW Hall Blvd in Tigard, Oregon The purpose of this letter is to define the scope of work for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), which evaluates the impact for the proposed zone change for the property located at 11600 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, Oregon. The property subject to the proposed zone change is located on the east side of Hall Blvd (Highway t41, M.P. 4.81) approximately 500' north of OR 99W and south of OR 217. SW Hall Boulevard is classified as a District Highway with a maximum volume to capacity ratio of.0.99 and OR 99W is classified as a Statewide Highway with a maximum volume to capacity ratio of 0.95. Scope of Work, I. General: Executive Summary: Provide a'description of the development, site location and study area (including a site map). Briefly describe the purpose of the analysis, principal findings,. recommendations and conclusions. Analysis Study Area: Provide a text description (including tax-lot descriptions) of the proposed development; and a graphic showing the intersections and accesses, identified by highway milepost,to be evaluated as part of this analysis. The signalized intersection analysis for this study shall include the.SW Hall Blvd (MP 4.69) and OR 99W (MP 8.82) intersection, and the unsignalized intersection analysis.for this study shall include the site access with SW Hall Blvd and the SW Pfaffie and SW Hall Blvd (MP 4,89) intersection Queuing analyses should be performed on all site accesses and study area intersections. Washington County currently has a project under development which will add an additional northbound lane on OR 99W through the Hall Blvd intersection and will provide separate right, thru, and left turn lanes on both Hall Blvd approaches to the intersection. These improvements should be included in the analysis for the scenarios in which they win have been completed. The scope of work for this TIA should be coordinated with the City of Tigard before the study is conducted since the City may require that additional analysis be made on area intersections and site accesses. iL Traffic Data: Traffic Counts Manual turning movement counts shall be made at all study area intersections and approaches. The counts must be at least 2-hours long with 15-minute breakdowns hi the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. An attempt shall be made to quantify the unserved demand at the OR 99W Intersection by comparing the queue lengths on all approaches at the beginning and end of the peak hours and adding the difference to the counts. Raw traffic volumes will not be accepted for use in traffic analysis. All traffic volumes shall be seasonally adjusted to represent 30`" Highest Hour Volumes (30HV)for Current Year and Year of Opening "background traffic''conditions. For guidance, please refer to the Developing Design Hour Volumes document. http;//wwimoregpn._ oq y{aDpTlTpElciacslTAPM/apmichtl.pdf Site Trip Generation. Distribution and Assignment: Site trip generation shall utilize the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual to estimate daily and peak hour trip volumes originating from and destined to the proposed development. All assumptions and adjustments shall be documented and discussed in the TIA, or in an appendix, This analysis should use available transportation models in conjunction with the City of Tualatin as well as current Transportation System and Comprehensive Plans to estimate traffic distribution patterns. Approved computer models, such as Traffix, or manual calculations may also be used for determining trip assignments for site- generated traffic volumes on roadways within the study area. III. Analysis Procedures: Capacittr Analycsis: Capacity analysis of signalized intersections, unsignalized intersections, and roadway segments shall follow the established methodologies of the current Highway Capacity Manual (HCM2000). For signalized intersections, the overall intersectionV/C shall be reported. For unsignalized intersections, the iighest approach V/C shall be reported, along with an indication of its corresponding movement. Attached Table 3.3.7 lists the ODOT default values for use in signalized intersection analysis. If multiple intersections are analyzed, the traffic volumes shall be balanced between intersection nodes. All intersection capacity analyses shall include heavy vehicles percentages by approach, as determined from manual counts. Planning level mobility results (V/C) from the TIA will be compared against Highway Mobility Standards(Policy 1 F)and the Maximum V/C Ratios provided in Table 7 of the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP). Application of Computer software shall closely follow ODOT-approved analysis methodologies; HCS2000 and Synchro/SimTrafflc are examples of accepted analysis software. For further guidance, contact TPAU. Queue Length Analysis: Intersection operation analysis shall include the effects of queuing and blocking. Average queue lengths and 95th Percentile queue lengths shall be reported for all study area intersections. The 9e Percentile queuing shall be used for design purposes, and will be reported to the next nearest 25 foot increment. Any methodology used to determine queue length shall be approved in advance by either TPAU or the Region. IV. Analysis Reauirements: Intersection Sight Distance: Adequate intersection sight distance shall be verified for all proposed intersections and highway approaches as required in ODOT's 2005 Highway Design Manual. For guidance, please contact the Region Access Management Engineer lhttp:/fwww.oregon.aav/ODOT/HWY/ENGSERVICES/hwy manuals,shlml Right & Left Turn Lane Criteria: Proposed right or left turn lanes at unsignalized intersections and private approach roads shall meet Installation criteria contained in the current Highway Design Manual (HDM). For turn lane evaluation procedures, refer to htlp:f/www.oregon:gov/ODOTrrDlTP/TAPM.shtml Traffic Signal Installations & Modifications; Analysis of signalized intersections shall be based on existing signal timing. Analysis and recommendations related to new and/or modified traffic signals shall follow ODOT's Traffic Signal Policy and Guidelines, and all subsequent revisions. These documents can be found on the web,at http://www.oregon.pov/ODOT/HWY%TRAFFIC-ROADWAY/tublications traff c.shtml New signal proposals for Day of Opening shall show, but are not limited to, the. following: • A clear indication of need for a traffic signal; only after other enhancements to nearby signals are shown to be insufficient to mitigate the new highway related impacts resulting from the proposed development. • An assessment of the ability of existing, planned, and proposed public roads to accommodate development traffic at another location. • A detailed description how the proposed development will affect existing and proposed study area intersections. • Documentation of traffic volumes and signal warrant satisfaction; if a new signal is determined to be the correct solution. Clearly show how one or more of the eight warrants identified in the 2003 edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Chapter 4C, Sections 1 through 9 are met, consistent with the requirements of OAR 734.020.0490. Traffic signal spacing requirements shall conform to the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan. Progression analysis shall meet the requirements of OAR 734-020-480. If applicable; complete time-space diagrams for each of the.analysis scenarios, including the existing coordinated system will be provided. They shall demonstrate that the proposed signal system is capable of maintaining adequate progression band widths for through traffic on the State Highway on the most critical roadway segments within the study area. Any recommendations for traffic signals to be installed as part of future mitigation should meet preliminary signal warrants(MUTCD Warrant #1, Case A& B). All future proposed signals shall still need to meet the need and warrants as described. For guidance, please contact TPAU or the Region, or refer to the Preliminary Signal Warrant Guidelines. http://vvww.oregon.gov/ODOT/rD/TP/docs/TAPM/aprn/pswForm.pdf NOTE it is ultimately up to State Traffic Engineer to approve all signal installations, modifications and deviations. Just because an Intersection may meet the MUTCD Warrants does not.insure it will be approved by the State Traffic Engineer. Access Management: Demonstrate how the proposed access, or accesses meet the minimum spacing criteria of OAR 734-051; or how it coincides with the current access management plan/strategy, or how a deviation from the spacing standard could be justified based on OAR 734-051 regulations. V. Analysis Output: Existing Conditions: Identify current year site conditions at the proposed development location. This includes, but is not limited to the following: • A description of the site location, zoning, existing use(s),.and proposed use(s) of subject property. • A description of surrounding land uses. • A graphic identifying existing lane configurations and traffic control devices at the study area intersections. • A graphic showing existing 30HV traffic; reported as AM (7-9 a.m.) and PM (4-6 p.m.) Peak Hour Volumes (PHV),and also as average daily traffic (ADT), Also include in this graphic a list of heavy vehicle percentages by approach. • An analysis of existing intersection operations, reported in terms of both Volume to Capacity(V/C) and Level of Service (LOS). • An analysis of at least 3-years worth of crash data; including information on all SPIS sites within or adjacent to the study area. Traffic Volumes & O era,tions- Year of 0•ealin• with & without Proiosed Development If a specific development is being proposed, an analysis shall be made of all study area intersections in the Year of Opening, for both "background Eraflid"and "total trallid' conditions. "Background traffic" volumes equal the seasonally adjusted existing traffic counts, factored up to account for an appropriate background annual growth rate, plus the anticipated traffic volumes from approved but not yet constructed developments in the area. "Total traffic'conditions are considered "background traffic''volumes plus site generated trips. This analysis should provide the following: • A graphic showing Year of Opening:"background traffic" and "total Eraflid' volumes. • A graphic or table showing SIC and LOS analysis results for both "background traffic"and "total traffid'volumes. • A graphic or table itemizing storage length requirements for all approaches, rounded to the next nearest 25 foot increment. • If applicable, a discussion of progression performance along the analysis corridor. Traffic Volumes & O•erations o Future Year' with Worst Case Existin• and Proposed Zoning Scenarios: An analysis shall be made of all study area intersections for a 15-year horizon, for both "reasonable worst case, existing zoning' and "reasonable worst case, proposed zoning'scenarios. The proposed worst case development scenarios shall be approved by ODOT and the City prior to the analysis being performed. This analysis should provide the following: • A graphic showing Year of Opening "background traffic' and "total traffic' volumes, • A graphic or table showing VIC and LOS analysis results for both "reasonable worst case, existing zoning'and "reasonable worst case, proposed zoning" scenarios, • A graphic or table itemizing storage length requirements for all approaches, rounded to the next nearest 25 foot increment. • If applicable, a discussion of progression performance along the analysis corridor. Planned transportation system improvements anticipated to be funded and constructed within the 15-year horizon shall be incorporated into the Future Year analysis. Do not incorporate improvements that are proposed as mitigation for the development. For guidance, please refer to the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR): OAR 660-012-0060. http://www.orocion,gov/ODOT/TO/TP/doesITPR/aelopt042005.,scii Analysis Variable Inputs: A summary of traffic analysis variable inputs shall be provided in an appendix. In Syn.chro, the Int; Lanes, Volumes, Timings report is the output source for this Information. TIA's submitted without an input summary will not be accepted by the Department. Conclusions and Recommendations Summarize existing and future conditions and discuss the proposed development's impacts. Identify any operational or safety deficiencies and recommend mitigation along with the effectiveness of the mitigation. Summarize how the proposed development complies with all operational and safety standards in the applicable approval criteria. Note: Signal timing adjustments will not be considered as mitigation. Sincerely, Martin R. Jen old, P.E. Region Access Management Engineer cc, Steve Schalk Seth Brumley Marah Danielson Kim McMillen, City of Tigard Revised Development Review Guidelines Table 3.3.7 Table 3,3,7: ODOT Default Parameters for Use With Default Signalized Intersection analysis Methodologies Signal Parameter $ Total Lost Time 4 seconds per phase minimum for typical intersections, more for large or complex intersections. Peak Hour Factor For future year analysis: • 0.85 for local and collector street approaches • 0.90 for minor arterial approaches, • 0.95 for major arterial approaches, unless better information is available, such as for a school or industrial use. Ideal Saturation Flow Field measurement should be consistent Rate with methodology laid out in the FICK Saturation flow rate worksheets must be included In the documentation. Where fiefd measurements are not done, • Outside of MPO urban areas, 1800 passenger cars per hour of green per lane (pcphgt)shall be used • Inside MPO urban growth boundaries, 1900 passenger cars per hour of green per lane (pcphgl) may be used, unless one or more of the following conditions are present, in which case 1800 pcphgl shall be used • Parking • Greater than 5%trucks • Other than ninety degree intersection skew angle • One or more approach(es), with a combined volume in excess of 5 vph, are present downstream of the intersection within the functional area, or upstream within the length of the standing queue • Poor signal spacing or observed queue spilibacks between signals during the peak hour, or • Less than 12 foot travel lanes 1 2 3 4 .......4 -'4.,,,70L., R _ - -- !1 A 1 RECYCLE AREA FOR PHASE I AND II ��1 1 'TZG 21 _- ERTmO iGxwA� N° T �� _ -- ������ JivanjeeCircoslaArchitecture,LLP EAV f� t3 wAY CU MANAOERSAPMTMENT — �� Architecture•Planning •Urban Design —————— —1 .` . 9055 SW Heevaroo-HiBWle Hwy.%rand,OR 97225 —1� LAfDSCAPING TYI+. S 3 'S� —— Phone 503797.5160 Fu 503-297.1635 — r — .a44 1 ION Mai IN mi ,U MODIFIED y - ���iiiii�i �► ,, Z TYPE T3' &./�E�6A- ®P1 EASING TRANSFORMER TR7sN -. - --- ----- 0 J. o NEW FIRE HYDRANT •.4 5 _ ■M- `'BUFFEg./....— ,,.. 4 I EXISTING — �F ,, t` x Y. 11`` tiii. i "SHARED HM• '�°`�— sit 3S4;�DRIVEWA n r,PERMEABLE PAVING. •fit i•iS \. I - AMI {, EMERGENCY r'• d e III min■mmm NO 10 ACCESS ONLY N / 1`�•i`•'i� �i \rte _ w2 I . - / AIM SC ill / 5'•••''•!:'��iy'"w \\t- II,YINI JIII I` IIIIIIVIA I r■ B / 2 `�'•'iei•i�i•t•seieilJ it OUSTING ��� iiiii '���'�":e i•V=hid 4 ASPHALT PAVED I �CONTROL _ I / '.�������_; FRE DEPARTMENT DRIVEWAY 6 CONC.CROSS e _ / , •, r CONNECTION Wax CONC.W 1 ���� MYl1 WepeN )2V * *:! =7 10'MODIFIED TYPE 97 BUFFER EXISTING 8'NIGH N T " 0 1r 4.4._ �/ / (5' h1 WOOD FENCE LINE N / I :40'4* /// • D NEW B HIGH WOOD FENCE TO MATCH / /�� / 4,}mJ I EXISTING c3°d 9 �'�� �/� �� — Fi':Iii,$s; gi I w� �I / 1 h. . .,,1 P , ,,.1. 0e JUN 0 3 2009 41///1 I I �� CITY OF TIuARD / i I;�j.g; I 1 •I.ANN1��"t;/ENI�INFERING 'GRASS CRETE' °� IFS_- '_•!i S-Q' : LANDSCAPING TYP. I __ ---' Sheet Revision c••��.,_ _ EASEMENT III -7-----, PERMEABLE •�441 �( �4 _ eol EAMERGFNCY W 1:01:1:14 ---y„, _ _ iL�6�6����'t�"�����= MI- ACCESSONLY I p1�iiiii;.•e� - �.�:• ;,r-11111` - 1111`_ r. QE • .e. 1 . -: . 7!0114441:1111a1 iLI 8 ■ 4,I CGiii= l i1 a L' - ,..., FASEMENTaE6`' KEN■A■�� el. - ° I ;Riefs'.t.+ I° 01 J "K sw rraFS I: 8r / I. 1 ■ ` I •II*♦-:.'♦21 I to 4X I ,,,.� - let* EASEAE: AE5\ \ ` \ ��i:��1�:1;:tt -r ' "h} ® I ENT ��\ \ :10:4 ACCESS CONTROL GATE WITH FIREMAN'S KNOX \\ ■ S, e ISDx \ \ \ \ •T,'•' or \ c \` I •SEE SURVEY DRAWINGS FOR EASEMENT DESCRIPTIONS _ ` \ yV °\ I\`\ DEDICATED RIGHT OF WAY ,� - —,\ \ - �\ \° �� I „>,. +a, `elf Storage � -`; J COPYRIGHT \ A �Y I , ase II \ ` , ` ` �\ 4, "�},° EASEMENT PLAN HENRY Y. LOUIE 5 t \\:\ ♦ \ — $ e. PROJECT INFO. O SCALE:NTS 13885 SW 130TH PLACE■ \ \� \ \ /1 EMERGENCY--,-.° ` ,, ` 1 V 17 QO,f, SHE ADDRESS SW HALL BLVD..T1GARD-.-0R--- oa DRAWING INDEX TIGARD,OREGON 97223- \ ----ACCESS r TM LOT No.191350D00100 \\f ., ` \- r ONLY ` ` I pP 1 a, 1.100 SURVEY DRAWING SITE PLAN AND INFO LL \ � 9i q ZONED=CG(GENERAL COMMERCIAL) 1 OF 1 SURVEY IXtAWINb T e 1.4 217 SELF-STORAGE fOJ \ \ '1/ I\ _ ° '• ` e LOT BILE AREA.0.14 ACRES(32218.71 S F).100% COVER SHEET PHASE n \ \ 1/ \.•`1 S // ''• BUILDING FOOT PRINT AREA=1. 1%(18%%(B5%MAX) CO 37 FALONG IILLBVII \ \ V w LMDSCAPE AREA•II SF.O S.F.=16%(15%MW.) CI SITE PLAN CONDITIONS PLAN 11800 SW HALL BLVD. D \ ALONG HALL BLV� \ \u PAVED AREA=758B11 9 F.•2A% SITE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN TIOARD,OREGON 87227 IT CONCRETE=174.51 S.F.•1% �o- �cuaxATloN. \ �� 217 Self Storage, ,— s C4 STORM SEWER PLAN I • 8 \ \ B SANITARY SEWER AND WATER PLAN \ ` \ Phase I 0 TOTAL BUILDING.FRONT,(THREE STORIES).19485 S.F.SF.■3=seals SF. - / p SETBACKS•0 F.T.FRONT,MAX.MA REAR SETBACKS PROPOSED ED CO STORM FILTER CATCH BASIN DETAILS SITE PLAN \ - \ ` \ a '� ,Ilw\ Tp BUILDING Y�GHT=16 FT AX.BUILDING 1ffJCiiT PROPOSED•3{•-TAE o• \ �` \\ tl''1u DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE PROJECT,PARKING.LOADING.ORNEWAY,ACCESS, L-100 PUNTING PLAN gN F P AND RECYCLING WILL BE COMBINED BETWEEN PHASE II MA ADJACENT PHASE I. ARCHITECTURAL m �\ "' A-101 FRET FLOOR PLAN CONDITIONAL USE ^`' \ v'\ _ i 1ST F FLOOR 19,435 S.F. A-102 SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR PLANS APPLICATION A-201 BUILDING ELEVATIONS AND SECTION Project Number /� w 00 � zFD FLOOR 19.485 S.F. 0790 H -I = VICINITY MAP 3PD FLOOR 19,485 S.F. 0790 Oate: `. \ O O TOTAL 403 S.F. LIGHTING 1•=20 'APR S,09 SCALE:NTS TOTAL STORAGE UNITS PROVED 403 09-27 44948 EXTERIOR UGHTING I I I -_- - x\ \ -- - ---- -- - --- - LEGEND: ABBREVIATIONS. \ x o \ \ __ __ BOUNDARY OF SITE AC ASPHALT CONCRETE ADJC4NING OR INTERIOR PROPERTY UNE AP ANGLE POINT .t \ • FOUND MONJMENT AS DESCRIBED BEG BEGIN :0UN0 5/8'A NTH WC o! I ?CP ELEY.-711.8\ Li CONTROL POINT SEC BOTTOM FACE OF CURB I EXISTING APARTMENT '61 - - - RIGHT-OF-WAY CENTERLINE BC BUILDING CORNER 2 m? I BUILDING 231 Y \ '(;" w WATER UNE C8 CATCH BASIN vi 1 / \t II, G GAS UNE CC CURB CUT / \ \ S SANITARY SEWER LINE CLFL CHAINUNK FENCE L'NL U "1 CONC CONCRETE i �(u!Yu of u11 urf urfr IIf II IIrIIII/230 V. \4 \ s T UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNE(GTE) STORM DRAINAGE UNE I 'ti \ �9 �O P UNDERGROUND POWER LINE CIXR CORNER H ER <n / S\ \ ? DBYL DOUBLE YELLOW TRAFFIC LANE LINE Q, .*I CS 9 \ t{1 *V DEC DECIDOUS c I II '}, r\ \ -OP OVERHEAD POWER UNE Qv`S y� .} EC EDGE OF CONCRETE ¢ I I - I I Ra• \ f FIRE HYDRANT Ib \4 (A�.T EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT Y w� i I `sd'. \ 'f(�1 IXI WATER VALVE FC FACE OF CURB U }�^ ` 4. 9 0+ WATER METER FC6 FACE OF CURB W71II 6"EXPOSURE z I 228 �4" /sv ` �A�d ~ TRAFFIC FLOW DIRECTION CA FD FOUND GRADE BREAK S hg I 2'5 I° IT N �\ ''\ �\ Q - CATCH BASIN GL GAS UNE - Rd I 2 Ip$' N• ® ti, \ rqo\ �'ff^ ® STORM MANHOLE I I / \ LA\ ✓, V CURB UNE GR GRAVD RAIL FOUND 5/8' BEYTT GR VL GRAVEL —� I / \ '� i/ii//TT/i 7i 7// BUILDING UNE IE MvERT ELEVATION I I I TOP ELEV..'7 S 27'41'08" E .} \ 1 I N t 5.04 4gti "+' — EDGE O.PAVEMENT R IRON ROD I I N t i8 + p\ `'9 j_ lP UGH7 POLE I o tS : ' \ G�, !- --_ -o- - EDGE OF gRAVEL \ LS LANDSCAPED AREA •SITE AR A G Fly\ STREET SIGN MB MARL BOX Z { F MH MANHOLE O O I I I 226—�- / e -. 'F` \\\. '2,216 SCI''(. } \ \ - - TCP OF HIGHWAY CUT SLOPE NG MANHOLE GROUND ;U I W ` / �' e 74 CCTe' �0 \ ® SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE oc _ I • I• I �`al 1- h5 a } ROUND 5/e'm rn TH \� r \ -0- POWER POLE OP OVERHEAD POWER y K O 'I I • I yb _4. loP r1EV-776.27 \ \ \ �— POWER POLE GhY ANCHOR PP POWER POLE U1 > 0 111 �p + F./e / i \ .} FOJND S/8'IR MW YPC >. ~ 0.h. C } �- r \ �� TOP ELV..1!1.16 © OECIOOUS TREE WITH UTAMETEH SMH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE D_ Z } {1 s k� ' \ \ SW CONCRETE SIDEWALK ,�I ~ E0.8 6�- i'F' .RJP� �' Y 1 -} '} \ FIR TREE vA TH DIAMETER SOUL SINGLE WHITE TRAFFIC LANE 0 0 U u 1 I I" SSW ; �' 0 fi _} r \\ C•p \\ \ -o - o- WpOD FENCE LINE TOE TOE OF SLOPE Z Z x N L SI 'GRPJF- /// C`�. , \ 9L `\ } I I/ \ 0--- CHAIN LINK FENCE LINE TOP TOP OF SLOPE (r F I- K I C I 1 T!ei�' R. /i ' \ \ } -: O LIGHT POLE 7FC TOP FACE OF CURB U Z F I 1 y 0 \ v r Wr F 1 1 y -i \.- / TF 'v1 \ \F N .} N \ TP TELEPHONE PEDESTRAL = 2 o , 1 I ■` I •N �' .�'�.Ii \ - \ \ .D S \ UP UNDERGOUND POWER Q O 3 0: C-•1I 4 +T,' \9h2 $\W �`\ s \ �• t \�U. \ Uv UTILITY VAULT Z . i los t N 0 'i ' : ,/ ♦\ \\ .} CV, '1�. } Nt WATER UNE \E EA ` I' __\ Ext nNC , \ NN \\ cD ,1�� \F \ w WT WATER METER r HOUSE \y ` ,,� \ \ `,A •\\\.1G (U WTL BrIE FENCE UNE Z W'\8" WV WATER VALVE�II , II ���� r4I�' 221 \�s\\ .t \\gy�,ITO. E"�`O`)`'�`' a` `'>rs-h _} \ YPC YEL OW Pl STIC CAP k'o ipINO 3/{°BRASS WASHER A STUD.NF10 W ' e� '• D 5/8" N WiN YPC V U j 1 I I l I (FODND 5/8'IRA RED CAP N TF09'37•E 0.28' \''a \ �(, ` '0P ELER..737.19 \ p F 1 H[1D CORNE6) T`'./ \ \ Pt ' 1 \ II I I I I p /o r �s C' 31 , J �( I ` `' 1 - ` ` i 1 �`!1 / 7!S} \\ LEA \ - a O`!F'0 \ �. 9'� \ / 1 o 219 \ \( ` s• p�Op9`' sti _ I. r3 � , �v r �' N \ YLA \ °o M 1 n 1 ,° 94 W I / s 0 P (I 1 t SS 1\55 OP�6 \\ ° 22S pROp,�\N P�F, Op.PGO\al \ REGISTERED V / , FO., '9 c'C \`�tO\)E,t PROFESSIONAL m '� `ll S,TI- �r Yp ays \ LAND SURVEYOR m ; 1 / �(�\s E Y ,+q. J` LJNO \ GARY W t*11CKMAN w ; 1 \ W8 v U \ \ RENEWAL DATE: 06/30/09 ` i \ S /' \ OATC GF SIGNATURE: 02/09/OA -� \ '• \ \ v l '. \ NB' i N \Lt._prrj.. ` SURVEYOR'S NOTES: \ s \ \ 1) ALL BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY ARE BASED UPON WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEY NO. 29809. 2) THE BOUNDARY LINE OF THE SITE IS BASED UPON WASHINGTON GRAPHIC SCALE COUNTY SURVEY NO. 29809. ---- _ \ ,Ba \\ TGARD BENCHMOARK NO. 126 AU THEYNORTHWESTD ORNERIOF OF (IX FEET 1 �b�- HALL BLVD. AND HIGHWAY 99. ELEVATION OF BENCHMARK = o I IRen zo n .00 \ 206.48. ` z J \ \ 4) 1` CONTROURS WITH EVERY CONTOUR INDEXED. FIN Patn: O:\DWCO8\ \ Fle Name-8DA03.DWG \ \ Plot Dote: 08-08-2008 __ Plot Tme: 5:05 pm ICSE !6T I • Ruched DUI-LOGO M I RAG E M I N I ST 0 RAGE P HAS E 2 D L JOKAMI „C4001XI0 DESIGN GROUP INC, JC400IX50 S 10700 SW BEAVERTON UnresoIved TIGARD, OREGON ""s°655"" BEAVERTON,OR 97005 1503)644-4628 ` J . m m m p~n 2 I 4. I FMVNFB 2I4pp ' H H PROJECT SITE I �'` ..•o — _ I I I I I I \. y~sP . ,,,t,;;,■, t , . ; W ASE TWO �{ .Z\10111.- ....Z 40 d' ob .„1411 I 0 +� \ W 1 0 ..,)� 111 U z � � Q/ c� w Y • "s T o w U)LA � /� - f— o w \`\`` PHASE ONE >0 \ ' z 1 5 25 0 0' \ SCALE.' } 50' \ \ \ VICINITY MAP SITE MAP W NOT TO SCALE SCALE: 1"=50' (3 Q GENERAL NOTES SHEET INDEX Cr D I. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO CURRENT STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS, CITY OF CO COVER SHEET 2 PLANNER TIGARD, (LEAN WATER SERMCFS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, UNIFORM BUILDING CODE APPENDIX JIVANJEE CIRCOSTA ARCHITECTURE, LLP PUBIC IM ROW Eros AND THE OREGON SPECIALTY PLUMBING WCODE. SEE SPECIFICATIONS CONSTRUCT C1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN 9055 SW BEAVERTON HILLSDALE HWY PROHOED. PORTLAND, OR 97225 C2 SITE PLAN 2. THE EXCAVATOR MUST COMPLY MATH ALL PROVISIONS OF LIPS 757.54? TO 757571,INCLUDING ssEV. DATE BY NOTIFICATION OF ALL OWNERS OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AT LEAST 48 HOURS,BUT NOT MORE C3 GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN THAN 10 BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE COMMENCING ANY EXCAVATION. D SUVERYOR 3 THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTROLLING SEDIMENT TRANSPORT WHIN THE PROJECT C4 STORM SEWER PLAN LIMITS, USING RECOGNIZED METHODS FOR EROSION CONTROL AS APPROVED BY CITY OF TIGARD. HICKMAN AND ASSOCIATES INC C5 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER PLAN 17590 SE TROGE ROAD 4. DIE CONTRACTOR IS TO LAVE THE PROJECT fREE OF DEBRIS ANO UNUSED MATERIALS UPON HAPPY VALLEY, OR 97089 COMPLETION. C6 STORM FILTER CATCH BASIN DETAILS (503) 482-5687 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION OF THE UTILITY SYSTEMS SUCH AS 5. POWER, TELEPHONE, GAS CABLE TV, ETC., MOTH EACH INDIVIDUAL UTILITY COMPANY, PRIOR TO FINAL INSTALLATION OF DIE SYSTEMS 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AND PROTECT EXISTING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITY LINES AND OTHER PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL PUBLIC PROPERTY TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. -` D C I V I L ENGINEER 7. TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL METHODS MUST REMAIN IN PUCE AND BE MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL METHODS ARE IN PLACE AND OPERATIONAL. PROJECT DL DESIGN GROUP, INC. NUMBER JCA001 ti 10700 SW BEAVERTON HILLSDALE HWY SUITE 655 8. ALL AREAS TO RECL16E FILL SHALL BE STRIPPED OF ALL VELETA DON AND OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIALS ALL SUCH MATERIALS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM SITE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S Dale: 1001A6 PORTLAND, OR 97005 EXPENSE (503) 644-4628/FAX (503)-644-8965 Scale: ASSiONR+ CONTACT: GARY DARLING, P.E. 9. ALL NONMETALLIC SANITARY AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LATERAL PIPING SHALL HAW AN g ELECTRICALLY CONDUCTIVE INSULATED 12 GA. GREEN COPPER TRACER 1MRE THE FULL LENGTH OF Drawn By. PTB VE THE INSTALLED PIPE PUBLIC LATERALS ARE TO HAVE MAGNETIC TAPE BURIED 18'ABO PIPE, Y AND LABELED SEWEA OR STORM. Designed BY GID 3 10. NO MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS OR DESIGN CHANCES SHALL BE MADE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION OF % THE ENGINEER AND THE CITY OF TIGARD. ,nn,xed BY: GI, II. A FULL SET OF THE APPROVED PLANS MI TN ALL CURRENT REVISIONS AND AMENOMIENTS SHALL BE I MAINTAINED ON THE SITE AT ALL DUES DURING CONSTRUCDON. 11. C FILL n O THE!TO 5X LN I TY T SHALL BE TOR L lE'EMPLOY AND SHALL CA CO COMPACTED GIN T 7ti ST ALL FILLED DENSITY. TEST CONTRACTOR L SHALL EMPLOY A (O•-THE ENGINEER TO TEST ALL f1LLID LOTS TEST REPON75 SHALL BE SULTMlTIED TO THE COUNTY AND 6 TO THE ENGINEER. • . DL _ _ , . . . DESIGN GROUP INC. 10700 SW BEAVERTON HILLSDALE HY • W \ Suite 655 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 \ (50316444628 •\ r f1N IAECEND. ABBREVIATIONS: i g gfMNr a WE Ac AVM.CUNMEIE AWNS a 11W HtMB1r If 4, -* \NO we • • • • nMaf maim AR OEM. KO Nvrt • I.01•x\ .' ® 1ENT4-w CEN.PE c MEMO COMER°� Ea•ENE6 a-1,-0p MONO APARTIEHT • M- IO U[ a alw 1151 /l M ALMO 231 • 0-NW 18* a CUM our i �pJ■7 • • E WA O .fern U[ M MANN(PUNS UE �i 230 j� • T UNOaNOI1M.NO maq[{NE l4rn COMMIE ■ "lam T---LICO OD UR COMER 1■i( _ I I I 2.9 • • \�\ \ Nj�Ow, • • MMfrMfO POWER l/f : LAW WE Ui -, S\• 1> 011.00•5552 IK ▪ $85 d aMNMfIE i 1 EC NE 1111:~1. O Nf[O MOMENT �sp �• I 2 b+ f''.7 , \ fC.9/.1 • • V M>u • s uu a s MN r owaiu ^R W . \ I'V • WPM R S NBTMN u 2N p tt� N ata WS a NwraE fIMNI f 5g .111. `I*. 0`rr a fNMY M15NM! a a1NO�iAa �], vNUNt ..' SW'41'p!'E • may.. r 4�G_ � � ▪ MMtE1LV1110M `��"N t2. `J • �,4: /t \ • 1`Qa\ 'i`9�. a w�r u uiasurm NNU In WEN \ 218 T MST NmrNr art ELOPE M. = i§ 8 Om NO NATURAL OROUM Flit 2=6 A 74 oc E C'�� S raN1 rac �• s OPERMAP POO. & t_r- ''^•°�° b Vett•IV[an ANNNMI w Pau raE .4e W Z 1�N _ .Aw e amble T. MEN MMAIO fN 0551*EWER MM.. Nf r . M 9Kil WOE TfMG NAK \ / 7 r. \ V F 0- AAA', • t�iy •, A, \ . -' MmNS MU NI! M M�! O O / / -J Ly ♦ N \ Q UM11 rML y( .' 'S\ l5C w rAQ a M5a W •r \ ,� W NIMNSY VA*T z �9 st•P`.4 \ • ' \ a amt NNE _ ,u N . �, ........""""°,7.v....,""T 0 0 Cr 0 big IRI i A.�► y Na\ ■ ,-f NIR N•M 5.1X5 OW 1t �i 2! , "•a • \ /I, • '� •A,I( y. m r.uw Nnmc CAP {�� e F1❑� ��N•�1• 4. .,..._warPSaY.NA. *611/11111 -4.-* 7 Q • cep ( ,.�N ,�. -.07s.- "%.231 \ Z L'• 219 \ • 1 \ . - _ 1, it. \ • \_____,..- / rivr T.Z �I� - �S'��• i `� �r[�1¢M*�'4''°wr .j- ` "\ ,NCa,M_ a V Ea- •� PROFESSIONAL 1 W \ t \ -- \ \ \ N711rx�aWNN1 JO' IS' 0 30' t � � \\ ,\,..,,,,I \ DA a•au( _N3 L \ i SCALE: 1"=JO• MI w r \ rL]Np (N 21.50 E MHAN N / sl_ \ \ �_" fw REV. DATE BY SURVEYOR'S NOTFS: '@\ 1)ALL BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY ARE BASED UPON \ WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEY NO.29809. GRAPHIC SCALE \ 2)THE BOUNDARY UNE OF THE SITE IS BASED UPON WASHINGTON 1 T COUNTY SURVEY NO.29809. 3)ALL ELEVATIONS FOR THIS SURVEY ARE BASED UPON CITY OF N(St UM Na I • `\ TGARD BENCHMARK NO.126 AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF R _ MALL BLVD.AND HIGHWAY 99. ELEVATION OF BENCHMARK - \\ 208.48. , g _A \ \ 4)1•CONTROURS WITH EVERY CONTOUR INDEXED. 1�-'aC3\•:_' \ \ [::I:I...,..>> \ L* Irr:trt_ \ \ \ \ \ PROJECT \ NUMBER JCA001 l \ DAM: 10(31/08 \ \ Scab: AS SHOWN \ \ DNewn By: PTB \ NOTE: \ SOME UTILI TY INFORMATION WAS INCLUDED FROM °e.t.a Br GIG \ FIELD INSPECTION AND DESIGN DRAWING \\ FIELD SURVEY RECOMMENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION Checked By.. GO o a DOCUMENTS a e 3 c1 I • w£61 • Atha,*1 XA00101 D L A... DESIGN GROUP INC. 5,..vso srwfre>lo ' 10700 SW BEAVERTON•un�.d --- HILLSDALE HWY `�- Suite 655 l-' BEAVERTON,OR 97005 _°t- (5031644-4628 _, -— -- //7///////////77i////////////// �E.,01,,,,..-..R,EPRO, —� I PHASE 1 "'w ' — ' pAVICUT EXISTING I VMMS V-31-09/ DOS1 CURB �_— i T PHASE 2 AJ A W \ FF 229.50 f DOSING 00. PARKING ; ; Q 20. / / 8 a. FF 227.50 % W / / I V Z I < O Z - g I X w KW' \ \ J I 0 O Ii \1 -- -- -- -- -- -- j 0 iii EL 000aoogg, I \ 1 1 , Z ♦— PJIPJ!o!: I I I I 0 0 —{ 0°05550°i EASEMENT I 1 0005°0°54 1 EASEaIE/vr I 1 - - - - o°o°o°o°` I_GRAss LWE7E I - -- CENTER LINE R. N. 0000000, I T 0 0°0° ° ` I .0000000' „ogog.gog Et 0 0 o I I 0 0 0 I�OO°o°o°° 0 0 0 �0o00oao0 5.5' 1R0' 0.5' 0 0 0 5°0.05 1 600 00000 2'CLASS C'A.0 ON PLANIING S \ 1 °oO0°o°5 1 I 2'/ 2'CLASS$'AC. 1. 1 O e°o°oOOOo I I 4b,� 2.SX 2X 5;1 MAX REV. DATE BY / COWLREIE SIDEWALK ■ ■` I i°0°0°°0e. ROW I l."COMMA COURSE•_0• 'EY ;50.43 \` 0 I IZ'COMPACTED 1 1/2"-0" CURS S BASE COURSE \ y4C I zo' 0 20 SW HALL BLVD �` I • SCALEr=8 " 20' PROJECT ■ \ ` ::;4.17 .... \` ` I �• 4' NUMBER JCA001 - J Mew 10/3101\■ \ Scale: AS SIIO'" I N Pi \ Z.SX _ Down es PTE 2.5X N Designed By G® I J'OF CL C"AC ON crbckae By G10 2"0143b/4"-0"RQdI COMPACffO 95.T MSNTO T-99 COMPACTED St./SCRAPE `. ..` 6'COMIPAC/ED 1 1/Z 0' �` COMRACIET!CAYISNED ROCY ��s........... PRIVATE DRIVEWAY C2 SCALE: r=8' 1 AMY UST I D L • r;il i2 DITCH BOTTOM JC400Ix60 ^� ' ' 10 700 SW BEAVERTON .xAWGXRI l+�1'� Q HILLSDALE HWY I III RAGS1 sTO .0 _,�IG MID 217 , _ 2sr SECTION A-A BEAVERTON,OR 97005 ��� 15031844-4828 •E NV-VI 01 tt1GKTN*NI __ , DRAIN _ B ST p ere MAY BE USED SHORT TERM % ��yED PROIFf — -� a� 3 PHASWO a ORK Of'M/T A A ` Vr°4 b.4'�n . teIJ ; , FLOW 228,20 I � , 1111111, W':1 iLJ � I I.DA __.-- - .' l ? I ExPRE6 tta1-o.•2� 1, ii( PLAN " 1 i-- 229•38 ' al�rwE• CATCH BASIN 1 DITCH INLET - I1 FF = 229.50 22D.JB % � ' 1 _'�_ 1=Or----1 O TEMPORARY BIDFILTER BAGS W 2251 Je 231.5 I � ell rN.T.S. U) J 229 22a : 228. . Q o I -J ilik.1- � rrHdllinill 22852 I 2q P►� ,40° W o 0\ -. - _ .22500 .', '® ®*� �� -`,- a �" O Z 2270 '� / �. ��' I r •_I I • ice• 1 I/.� , 01°A ♦ .v�1 s p. Il.l 22E.60 .-' • �'• • • D v 1 n /// 25'MW • a Cr 0 —`�•' lb-. / GLEAN PIT RCM/OR r-M4 US GRA MM •a' Cr / ��' ,�I( ST.BdUOE RENFORCE ENT rA W ,, _ 227.00 ' . p' 3` GM'OTEXALE;AS REQUIRED B" r n Q Q 1 22720 h . DEPTH NNN"'___ �V/}I ° Z 00°0a 5 II : L. V� o — 22 oU N 227.20 °000°000 N _� P20'M/N.FOR SINGE FAANLY ANO DUPLEX RESIDEJYTUL 000°°°° GRA Ifl.CONSTRUCTION N W 0 0°•� °° �""'"� 2 GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 2 z .°°O°°O °000000 SEDIMENT FENCE 0 I N.T.S. W 0 9999°°° c� �T� M1� 00 000:0 224 _ _ 4 V 0 0 0o°ogogo0 GRASS CRETE BAGS 0 0 0 E f 00000 CJ 225 o0°-OO°o it FLIER FABRIC MATERIAL FA/FR USE STITCHED LOOPS 1 ••°0000° 36•Mm£ROLLS FABRIC OM?2"x 2"POSTS 2 0 o MATERIAL \ 224 0000000 • 0 0 0 0 I b C......„,.., �� oo °000 ti 1 li 0°000'. p N • N REV. DATE BY 0 0 0° i I \ 0°000000 j • ' 1_�'• P\ / \� �/ \ ��I /��l4 . \ \ oo°QOOao 1 F °0°,•••oo I 1h� E'(If TVI SPAL'MY;) � I:a� � i�•.°°•° , }�tONT VIEW SIDE VIEW \ \ \\ \ \I ° I 20' 10' 0 20' A�� S 2'L I ANGLE BOTH ENDS FILTER FABRIC 1. BURY BOTTOM OF FILTER 5 SEDIMENT FENCE SPACING \ I.y' l4 ^ • ` ♦ FENCE TO ASMIRE SOY.IS TRAPPED ♦ FABRIC B'4ERAG4LLY ON SLOPES SHOULD BE QI 9 SCALE: 1"+<20• BELOW FINISHED GRADE GREATER DISTANCE �L ..�o 2.2"x r FA PINE OR MO. SPACING[FT) \ L IlL ` . . . STEEL FENCE POSTS�\\ L7 j� 18-20 150 PROJECT 1 \ \ ` p� r INTERLOCKED r POSTS /•• J THSTAIlLDL00Ht*CL 2R-3016 50700 NUMBER JCA001 I "--.. `� AND ATTACH )50X 25 DW: 1d17g8 SIDE OF SLOE Jl-30x 25 \ \ TOP VIEW 4. TER COMPACT Scaler AS SHOWN A ARE4S OF \ SEDIMENT FENCE — FTB CJ N.T.S. D..I•aaBY• GO ■,,eked By OID ` NO 1E• g `` EXISTING GRADES HERE CREATED FROM TOPOGRAPHIC HIC d5 SURVEY AND FROM DESIGN INFORMATION. FIELD ` - SURVEY OF DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION PARKING AREA RECOMMENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS______ C3 9 _.. 1__ _ D L • Irmolved__ : DESIGN GROUP INC. R710Q,X,. — + ooix• JSO10 10700 SW BEAVERTON SNOOD HILLSDALE HWY �rs1M ,�— Suite 655 • ___-— BEAVERTON,OR 97005 .r` 15031644-4628 — - -_�—` S1 clxe f'EXIST EH °-�,_ �' PHASE 1 0 °� ., ;, �� 80 L.F Q-SO H:%Ml.s vac. - 5-0.02 /////// //////////1// °'i ° ° PHASE 2 .• £ DOSE , w �i IN II. 48.2x71]LF/ (n ° "Co FF 229.50 :: DE7E,NTxk! / 4 •• / JJ LF.-s•• , .. //IN NI .01 ' Q• IN SYPHON C8 / / v' RIM 226.50 / I �1 E ; I O. .OM W z FF 227.50 "• ER 2-CAer CO;• Q-sD IEI224..7 / I V z • 45 LF 6-••raau .PE N 221.17 ,2 ■ E our'r a \ ■ ■ ■ ■ EJOST kH(607 � W •\ , 1PQf 224..4 I 0 O CARTRIDGE STORY R8I h-71.7ER 2 OH :Info ,R��AII�22y2y5.p.0 , , ,V/.�I \ -- 855!.F 6-SO -- -<gotf Iftek- -- Ha �� EXISTING Q-WATER Q ,��I 50.02 SEE SHEET B , �`-S 2 S CO v l�llr - 2-90 LF PIPE N N ihi-------i " ∎ 5 �6 7� 1 DETENTION IX 5.0.002 UmII r�� �f ^' F I CAPACTIY 1242CF I 8 I I W 36 L.F 10"STORY PNE __ -- __-_-. __.._-_ - __ -- _ _ �y- I I CONNECT R)EXISTING TM V DOSING SIN RIM 2210 1E IN 21..80 < ` I - IE OUT 276.80 ix I °\ \ I I I \ I I if I REV. DATE BY ■ � ■ I .... I/ 'IN* C1w, 3'. \\ i 20' 10' 0 20' \\ 6'444 _ 5�1� 1•-20' 6 & 4 fr„ a \�� PROJECT E. `�`_` NUMBER JCA001 DPW 10f31/08 .. 1 \\ Q �� sa. AS SHOWN R Or..n By. P 5 E ` Die ey OD a ° F Checked By cO C 4 • MI6 EDT Lead. i ________idwohyd D 0i11-1.000 J01001100 .JGP0 J DESIGN GROUP INC. XN000130 JG001X70 ��t 10700 SW BEAVERTON VALVE, IGj3w A 1 r _ -� HILLSDALE WY fh..eh.d TjG AR'0 2�7 I 1 _ _ _�r—— 1 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 AV�R�p H1GKW AY N - ETOST FN _-131, 5TA ////////,,,„/,/////rim//rri/ ��SOPROf(J - ��4.1e1 -*.S i PHASE 1........--r- /-- 8LF 1-Vj'WAFER ' \ 1 / - I - `� / I EkEa1E8 •t�]40], „„„, ,„„,„„„,` ''' 120 LI 6'SAH 6 WYE 1 __ _ / / __ '1-4�'BEND / • PHASE 2 %,' -=• _ C j//d;, . .. 2°24, / w d MI MI.. £ / In • .. I v! Z FF 229.50 :I ... PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT ti . / / Z 411t..69 LF B'WATER , — _,<ll .. 120 LJ"1-Ile'.roe 1 I 1.1� N All .. / CI Alm FF227.50 , 6X4 w1E / 0 z Q ‘... '11414 ,k_._._._._.,„,._.____„ . riff It 11.1 41 1, ♦ EMST 6”WAFER 1 0 O LL •\ 7-- -- -- -- -- - �► �/ ��s I Q W 185 LF 6.WAFER I 4'ODC LB 6X8 VAULT N ��' ♦♦ S~� V_ W I 1l23 6"BEND 1111H TRAFFIC RATED LLD - " II 1 I I f8LF6'WATER �� • '."mot I"' u) I 1 I 80.6.BEER W I kiN•1 — .ISl.F6'WAFER Q I I V V V ix 43'6'BEND I cawVECrro 1,I F- ---.........„ I I I CONNECT TO EXTST WATER I IDOST SFMER - - - - IJ..1 /-34-TAP -- - - - - Z _ I �---- a u) \ 1 1 1 I I I 70 IRRIGATION PREWNTER SYSTEM 1"!)BC CHECK REV. DATE BY ` \ I 1I 411111* I WATER METER \ 11494`p \`` I SCALE 1 20' 1.1. 2 \ BL V \° ``' sss PROJECT `\ NUMBER JCA001 `. ` • Dsb' 1231/08 I 11 ` Scab. AS SHOWN ` .._ Drawn By. PTB a \ I / BT GID DeWDd By GID 8 WATER CONNECTION Chedred DETAIL SCALE: 1"=2' C5 .1 I ........,_. . , __ _ . . • Wit.. LR-- - D L Resokwf__OLD-4000 FOR PDISHAIDI OUR CHIME( EVE STA(�) t '°' t""D"O` ' i:) DESIGN GROUP INC. uinia•d ruwwww.w 3 10700 SW BEAVERTON _,�� z HILLSDALE HWY• _�1R11 I I 1 TO 655 '�� Illli;=11'II�a�'S°y:� BEAVERTON,OR97005 ~=_ i ' (503644 4625 2� ■ Ii-_1IJJii i'�� RAlST � 3.)EXTERNAL PPM AND COUPLINGS TO BE PROVIDED BY OIIW. L.-TNG EYE(") ow � i.)FLE:IKE COIR)RG TO BE TIBER AT HILT n OIIRET.HMCO OR Damn rPPla•ED. J n-3/.'X n-]/i• �T 21-2/4T x 27-3/4-5)s1010B'LTEA DES REPAM IMNRRMICE REFER TO CPERAIION AHD MO NfFHWCE -J ION Ns N�°A SAW(BYSOIC) s t Ln 0.J�Bo w+MRa WRTER STWJC)URIL SPEC:MAIMS: '_ S ,'a�''' LOeD NOM 28000 L6 •W.,j 1 I.OP S'''''' cron. girt-FATE CATCH BASIN STORYEILTER-PLAN VIEW 1 RI11r 11OpfR B30 1& w:2O1 I Exvitts 12-31 09 BILT GATE: WORE:NON 1 loins au CB PERBETER STAB REQUIRED n W NZt O Z<Z m h F Ow Plrtlils i<< = 2 In 114it CREST N•E»TEII.N. ,. 6 N..*JUAN. N11 01 131 Ud A lorE WIN ♦NO MOW 1010119 WOD10 PMETER%M J]p00 PSI CONCPELE 1/OE (m CONTRACTOR) rmE Rl 2-14 REKwaMC aws rt // ill ,,, .... ....,, .. .. 4 o. U z CO .r: r-.11r I ! ,� I max. 1- - r-.fir U mivounn Pomp 1:s. II.OMR(STD) _ jjU 0 1-- SRA=ANEW O ENNO - I t� O a N a,L,BLG11 RN 31111 0 CATCH BASIN STORIIFILTER -SECTION VIEW 0 CATCH BASIN STORYFETER-SECTION VIEW 0 _ 31111 g 0 Q it MALL ..a 109x5 vi J_ LL. ct STEEL CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER {WI.1' SPECIFICATIONS v DATA BLOCK Q F- TWO-CARTRIDGE STEEL r��: •„ CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER ...,..OF..._.,.•..,r _ STRUCTURE CALLOW I �..:rs i EITI +. �,i 2r�rr .w WATER QUALITY LT'S) ,r._...rirr..____.. rat CONVEYANCE FLOW( ) RETURN PERIOD OF PEAK FLOW :tea r.rrr••.r.�ra '*� MT:.TN.LQ.=LT; MEOU TYPE • .-.. RIO ELEVATION (GUCC r-E-OUT.1d) LE OIMIETER •••∎••_ wC wa Ow 4...W a .... INLET STUB _ ►o r-.-1.i rw tim •��~��y�•�^�W� —m�•F RP., D4T- BY OUTLET STUB .....rs•a.r.r.—r..rlo .••rr'ns' CONFIGURATION: •�- �`---=sue:.- -:-. 7 0 II .s .�` 1 I N E = � r...r.�.r.... ■ �� �w _L .vP,ONS(4V41>UlF.Br EXTRA COST)- �r`_ My .rrr.� ❑ 0,1E7 SUIT . WHET TH.44 B.DAVE lL■ ...0 , ..•••...••.w...•. .r++.—�r.w.. — ❑ .NLTSUa �������� PROJECT NUMBER JCA001- .......al=.A.- .., ^C ',".'..' � '9U OTHER . .iL"...t:":=.1..w`r..'=_ • __ _`..`.'}♦.: Ii.1e: 1031AB I� •� a7Z� `r•s •r= AZI j r r.0 r...r saK AS SHOWN STORMWATER �'��'� = ��v C � PM •_ MANAGEMENT INC. Y°_V"a`�""""`ta"`+ _ DeiywO h GA 12021 M.E.MAORI WAY PCRRAM OR 01220 U w..1r,.=.."..r=.ri.••�•r a• (30.7)110-330.7•PAX:(002)210-2333 Y u. r hacked ET GO © =_ =.. 1at1 Yan1'5 l3 MR alai OWN BIOAPXRA / /_ 2 = y -I N Ruu NOR NPA... m •��� Y[rdirAnora Nw_w. � ■\`/� E/V•` �liil�Ir-•i�{fPaM�>AN� ©..r �-�,-?1r+l�Iri......Yii� J 1 I 3 I 4 59 _ \ �I `�• �� — iY_ EXI5TIN6 SEGAIOIADENDRON 6I6ANTELM 4"CAL(TYPJ —, �� )L, ► - - - _ - - iu�uii --40 -&-.• -,- i _____.„---■■,,. i - 114 N.-14* __-------=--.. .01,,".• ,i4 ___.. ...-.5 e it i t...i.,.....,_- _— , 1060,, + • A 0 I I k■04111141 10 A 111' `,, �� __ .r:�F �e='-, j ;•_ u v v 1STEfi' - \ -/��� � .� !(1 \I_(� I� �� -- -- -- -- r hr v v v a,5 ill• \\l _ �. / .• . �I - 111111111111111111111111 _ 2� OREGON ��v ,i� _ ,;"tea �� OE AR III \3 J — -- - - - — - ( F NOTES.. PLO ' i II �_ e at= ��I J -�s � � , 1 ;44L _ IIM 11 1n_ 1 IA / 141-.44 ■ ktitO-AlPt III, ----- 111•111111111•111111M , / :4711 ' PJPF 1 I ■■11111,111 B N- ® \ PLC- % _ J j•O= �,,; �:r..... :,M.e...e.e e.lf _._. a '• .8L bb /• ...tl.l rn..<..ol 1 ft8 HIGH TOB6 EXISTING STREET TREES— ® �' WOOD FENCE LINE 1 • (6).' I S.W./ 4... ® ego *****4 I a, WARNER AVENUE 1. I ,/ 1 P o `f • > STREET LIGHT -- Sheet Revision I � PO 1 Iliiill� I 4. l' I `5-g.p9 O.\ , % a P I A P° 0 ■ \ '� 0 ■ Re,• \ ' P96D COPYRIGHT-2008 _ _ I \ PLANT LEGEND HENRY LOUIE \ \ -3x31 i \ \ ` \ \ \ \ \ srM. s BOTANICAL COMMON SIZE �' \\�"� I ECV 9 8 ERICA CAARNEA VELLII" SPRING IEATIWR I GAL 6'Off. Project p/� \ \. ■ \1446\ . \ per_ FCC 95 PYRIY CALLERYANA CAPITAL' GOLLTAlM FLONERN6 PEAR 2 INLN CAL 21 7 SELF-STORAGE MS. PLO 69 PF055 L•OTTO-LUMEN. OTTO-LLITKEN V�1REL 15-19 IN r 8 — RCEC24 260 PoIBU-CALYCINOIDES"EMERALD CARPET' EMERALD CARPET 4 IN 24'OL. PHASE N \ 1\\ , \ J \�_ \•1\ TOE6 294 TNU.JA 0.EMERALD GREEN EMERALD GREEN ARBORVITAE 4 FT-5 FT QJ \ J 11600 SW HALL BLVD. -. 9S7 \ 41 ` PO6 I PH 15 LAPONICA TINK F"61960' ' SLENDER DAOKI CYPRESS 5 FT-8 FT TIGARD.OREGON 97223 �J \ S PE? 3 FIER19 JAPONICA"PINK FLAMINGO" AId7ROM¢DA 5 GAL D _ ` \ - RP 5 RHODODENDRON"P.JM.• P..IM.RHOOY 2 6AL \ \ \ `\ \\� 56 I SEOt101ADEf47RON 616AHTBM DYVARF 61 HARBOUR 4 2 GAL INCH CAL Orewing Tole \� PLANTING PLAN \_ \ \ \ `\� 55'O'CALIPER REPORT TO MITIGATE REMOVAL OF DOUGLAS FIR \ \ AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM \\ \� SEE ARBORIST REPORT 9-1a-pg(ANC) SHALL BE INSTALLED 0 10 20 Q• \ \ NINE GIANT SEQUOIAS AT 4'CAL REQUIRED IIMMMI ` \ PLANT TREES IN ROSS TO ODOT"INDUSTRY STANDARDS" CONORIONAL USE ATTENTION:Oregm law require.you w follow rules adopted by the APPLICATION Oregon Utility Notification Ceokr.Those mks are not forth in OAR 932 \.....```� --- -001-0070 through OAR 952-001-0090.You may obtain copies re the Project 0791�bef L-100 of SCALE B7 FEET tWa by coiling the center.(Nok:the telephone number for she Oregon 4 Urtliy Notification Center 4(503)232-1987). Scale: Dale: ,•=m OCT 1.08 I 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 Jivanjee Circasta Architecture,UP Architecture•Planning•Urban Design 90535W Reeveondab Hwy. PmPWod0,3 O-R 19-4726 27 5 o Q o Q o Q Q o 2200 0 o Q Q Q ° Ptwne 303-2913160 A Iva 0r Iva 104 20-17 204• ma 204• 2007 204- 204• 112-117 26,2* @ • fiii0 —'-1----�----I— -1---------1— --- —f-----'--- ------ --- ---------1-- -I.,- .�-. ♦ rc� osTA,r --I---------1---__I______ 1— — 1 — —1— — — — —I— —I— — — — — — — �kfl–_'� �` ) a I I I I I I I 869 S.F. .I I b to � , , APARTMENT I to I I I I I I _-■ I i _ / I— cl i-- I? — —_il)x2�10xt0 I — J a I I I I �" �" TYP l t I I �- 10x10' b~ _ — 1,' coNaw EEL 8T ® I 0- I "" " TYP. 5z5' IIIII' -- - -- - --'— --- --' 10x6' _ li't� _ h I--_=J"--- + -4014D'--sue' -- TYP. --- -- _ SXR— _ . ` Q r—� Y 10x10' yt. "A):1;,. r 6 TYP. —_—_ - - _� I I 002 S.F. I CIRCULATION \\ F I y 5x6 - - 5x6' 1 — - ---- --�� l�tl , TYP TYP. I 10x13' 10x13'^ 12,14E .F. 1 87 S. TYP. TYP. 1 F f � I I STORAGI LOAgInG AREA l �I a ,,>_ 1- UJ 5 J 1JJL - _o 4 \ •' JETLJJI; TL___Fi ..._ r---- _ _1r, i 0 - - --- -- — — — — — — I - — _°� I 593 S.F. — I I I I I I I OFFICE 4 1 111111 � I 4 II I I �1 I I �e ,I COPYRIGHT-2009 BOLLARD 10a 1'-4• Ida 100 20'{2' 2007 200' YD'-0' 200 ® 200 200 15'a 25''2 w~ •" '. 220e I Clint / (3 HENRY LOUIE OREGON Project •O O PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN STORAGE UNIT MIX 1st FLOOR AREA 217 SELF-STORAGE PE 11 SCALE 1.6104• 5 x 5 3 STORAGE AREA 12,146 S.F. 11603 sw HALL BLVD- 5 X6 8 CIRCULATION AREA 4,002 S.F. TIGARD,OREGON 97223 I D 10 x 5 3 LOADING AREA 1,875 S.F. Drawing Tak 10 x 8 18 OFFICE AREA 593 S.F. 10 x 10 39 APARTMENT AREA 869 S.F. FLOOR PLAN 10 x 15 14 TOTAL FIRST FLOOR AREA 19,485 S.F. 10x20 9 20 x 20 7 NUMBER OF UNITS 1ST FLR 101 TOTAL UNIT TYPES 101 NUMBER OF UNITS 2ND FLR 151 APPLICATION TION NUMBER OF UNITS 3RD FLR _ 151 Project Number H-101 NUMBER OF UNITS TOTAL 403 0790 AS NOTED—F:1,5---,7 09 I I I 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 Ok Jivanjee Circosta Architecture,LLP Architecture•Henning•Urban Ddign 9053 SW 13nvamrHilledele Hwy.PaUmd,OR 97223 Maw 503-297-5160 FR 303-297-4635 0 0 0 0 © Q 0 0 0 0 O © © 0 A / Tad' t, 7-4 I, +0.0 I, 1a-0• t 20,0• I, 20-0• 20 O 20aY 1, 200 200' , 20'-0• t 10,3 29-z `Gj� Y� 1 T T 1 1 i t .gi gONIS1• Uoa rose= A I I 1 I I I 1 I 0 g . .....•311•• loxte 'c',;:.-. 1TY1P b OF �6 p i — —i- - - -i— i- - - - -i- - - - -i- - - -i •�1 _ �, - - 1 �f 13 I I I I I I 1�•* b027 0x5' e • • 3 --- Typo.1932 — O 1111 e I ••—••T Jt-, L L- -a I –_–I– -o 4 I I I •� 1ox1a If II II b P. • - - .�`_ TYP. --- -- -- -- --'----- ----- --- - -I--- ---- --1- 10x8'1 '� b B �•••T NP. 5x5' 1� 1 r II -- -F �/ 5 '— �eae-- TxR. 5 4 �•• j�• it 11 II 3 4 0 j 'Kew' — ] --�--- 1 -1 d -1(), 2Dxie rrh. 5,536%,F. II II II CIRCULATION a. 5x6' 5x6' I I a NP. NP. ,7 TT131 13,94' ..F. I 1-41133.. I_ - 11 II • STORAG •EA i 11-11 I 9 0- / i I, ! !d L - ---•-------TYP. -- -- -- ----- - - ---------------- -i - 1 O J_ It I • f---'—'---L. -__- --_ -_'�--�' 1 --- 1.......-t T_T-- _--___ 1(IxN'TYP L T L NP_ 1 TYP.1 ! i 11 i I lr NP 1 T 10r 7' 5x7 10x7 (t ' f YP. II I L® —; L JL JL :i �� J )ILJL J__ _ ; iL J I J j, �!' ;o.,z' I, .il \/ c 1 1TYP. rum NP._ 16xte ! e ♦ I I I 8 II F COPYRIGHT-2009 10d• �.4• 3OO I0.0 20,0• 2Od' L 10'-0' I, 2Pd 20.0 I 200 1, 20,0" I- 15'd I, 25,2• f '.,�a,.•..—....e..•....�...ru.w.....o....e.IL 4 T 220.d• "ff �f 7 CUM HENRY Y LOU IE O O O CO 0 O 0 0 O 0 O 0 13ee6 sw 130TH PLACE 7x3680,ORECION Proled STORAGE UNIT MIX 217 SELF-STORAGE _ED PROPOSED SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR PLAN (PER 2nd AND 3rd FLOOR) 2nd&3rd FLOOR AREA PHASE II SCALE:I..10,0. 5 x5 3 STORAGE AREA 13.949 S.F. ++o SW HALL BUM 5 x8 a CIRCULATION AREA 5,538 S.F. TIaARD,oReoord 93225 D 5x7 4 TOTAL FIRST FLOOR AREA 19,485 S.F. Dreweq Tide 10x5 1 10 x 7 29 FLOOR PLAN 10x8 24 10 x 10 58 10x 12 1 10 x 13 14 CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION 18x10 e 07N90 A-102 TOTAL UNIT TYPES 151 • e: AS NOTED APR 6,09 I I .\Ir 1 2 3 4 C) 0 0 0 ® 0 Q 4 0 • O 0 0 p a� AF.F. -_--,. 'y`� / STANDING SEAN METAL ROOF - .I .11.�,� �„11,,,� �1111� �,,,,,�/ 1 ' 'I I �-� —...._ -_.- _.. - i I I1 i 1 ! r _I li JAArrc�hitec ieer•Planning•Urban Design d ' �. N I II I I I + 1 I I I 9355 SW BaV elm-WII..I.HW.eatlyd.oa 97227 I I Sli■, ! / METAL PANEL SIDING ILme503-297-5IE0 Pn 7.297+MT5 a2V-0•AF.F. I !. 1 .4 !t : 6 I A 1 �li' { PAINTED CND WALL I . dl�' ' •:I IiINI!.��IIh1 I!.i III li'. i ,I'_ 111`III IL 14, „:I� lh III rl I I:I'�I 1 I ��II��I �Id�+.1� III II '�II II lip I_ail4 I1 _.ililll 11 II -d II II I, lil .L.. II. . . C aXOST* ND FLOOR - #i•.':234313V_ _ si��L IitS�R� ri S_..__v°°_° 'SRi'iiT11iGT°° __�7CL�7�-77W:01;Si�'i.�� �� __ _ �__. illF;r1 • z 2 ti_:-°_:_°_ t a.-r.� =__s_-r°_"=�s-_�:rrrrs�a°.:la= �s�.r � re nir.�°_ __R e_,,-, ssrra— sY� rEr o ° 'L I�Oe"_°7 °- M a.?M 'IM�` ii- M =_=°°°.sei_ _ __ j, °"E. Willi r � ��'__a_ _ - C�IIi1Cr ��s.-mvs��� � --4=�jr:rr _r_-r°� `�_�rl „� t FEL:61°s_=-`1 elOa^i iitej t_ L_ a_:r_a 1S_i s?u a °-r ay ____ __ OF % 1ST FLOOR °11�.i=ce roar-Nei'7Y _I:4I I 'II• ELI; I.� I=I- I r i Z S��'.� �'.'r__ ®' �aI�,L°i:S�iS°°°° o ��74 aL.2E �1 I _:I E�I ...111 I I I' - N 'I -"6. S 74 a1L'. °_ rB / EAST ELEI/ATIOfV I i I I I __-_ ,; O _ SCALE I..1V-0' STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF O © © O ® O (1-0--- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +39'-7'AF.F. r l- II 1 - C I��1"1' „�„I 1 i I i 9 I II. RIDGE F I I I f , 1 I .- r � GUTTERS AND D.S. I I N J T-, METAL PANEL SIDING u I I ' I� i!lII__ +20 0'AF F. \ II �' I: I ' .I II 9 I Ii. 16 1 ', I B ' I �q{� , 1 „I. .,, ll II��I,IIp II Il�llf Ii 111 l�1 hr�� ��. II pJ@ I 1 II61 VI 3RD FLOOR ]1tiI 181. III, 11j 'I, ■ II !I :I: 1' I'llll .IIII 1.I if 4' 1� P9 IIp 'I .I 'i� , �I!I II ilf' 1� �PN�N SO•AFF� : .. i1111l.Nil, , I1II Awn I I.:Il l'., u : II I:� I I ,. I �_--: .___.. -. 2NDY FLOOR - - _° °-°_ r°r°_ SY.�•_�r�i LL°°'�iiCT y — —_ t rS Y'L.'� __ I' L_S�1S� Y 17. r� °r_S.IT!°_°��R°'L' � .z it ,,,,r,._._,..-,4L, � .1'_ r rr-0er P-3111 rx-l•It?i '_111 = �'a'si_ c r__° _.. _as(.•ir_a - r N t i 1TS',.c+.L re... --° - _ J.,.."...______ __ -a ' ?:: �__z El =_-..,, sr.IS'�0:ri5 s... qlr= ..... -or.' z s('Lv i -' :i - .. z,L.� '_-__ _.'j ���� .s °=-�i _ ° °— rl °_ran rrs_ _�7•r__t�r�i: Er_ _terrace°°°r•° 18f FLOOR - — -- — -- — — - — — - — -- — -- — -- — - O SCALE,EST ELEVATION 0 0 0 STANDING BEAM MEIN:ROOF Q\Q Q Q QQ +34'-7'R AIDFG V ■ i —�e' I 'II lPI I I I '''111777—" .29-9.AFF. .28,0'AFF. a_I ' II F I1- 1 EAVE.V �EAVE 1 it I 1 I II 1I 1,1 I p'' Sheet Revisbn 1 ' III Ili ", � ', I!. I I II , I■ III 'I METAL PANEL SIDING—, 1S i I III IL I I{ III I I :II 1 I, I ■ +23'-0"APP. ! ` I t .IIII 1 1 I I I'I I I II ' I i ILILHLIIJ I I I. il'' 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 PAINTED CMU WALL .. '.I i jill I �!iflJ 1 I I;I I I I. I: ∎ 1 I! I I '.1i�� .11 :' a1U-0'AFF. O O _� __.i:__° —:2 _ ' 2ND FLOOR _r_�SSSrS �r.E �t�9 �Yd�_ YL '9�T. - _ - ra° l..,.___°��'r'l �Y I aR-0`&FF. 9�f GRACE BTgi b y"-'" _ •� a'iijal'L:.ii1 1ST FLOOR SLYMtFGE 5100. BFOIL STORAGE. STORACT CORK sTOM1 STOIC STORAGE NORTH ELEVATIE�N -2-0'AFF. I•�I■ %\ • Nit 4 3 I 2 I 1 . �16� wru: morn=osON 011 TO If o4TTnmI AT ao.s:T[ITT oreas.woes - 90 ��j 11� s:a.T 10111 2Tm m 0 NOT 81[.T TO 0121.111 Of Furor[ III 6oer.C.• Calculation Summary Luminaire Schedule 21 SALM rem wiE o NOT 6Roa Teo 444142 ro Of.BIIDWm.x.26 MPA. 3)ACM.ME .. mow=.a1i[mT.a T.OTG1w1.e9 Wm. Oaw[. _ ACM.eT.1.WO wr r44,.[mala.n or.wr.em.N 1141 m, Label CaIcTyPe Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Symbol p Label Arrangement Lumens LLD LDD BF LLF Description Txoa.WOES or ass,o[arwcri.sa,vuwrima x.unscr.e�s city P 0' 4)A Qim a 6C .x '1:.8,r:m MD TILT 66,,16 TEL C11s.x.. GRID Illuminance Fe 3.71 7.6 1.2 3.09 6.33 g AA15 SINGLE 12000 0.75 0.9 0.95 0.641 A2P-150-A _ �'III 3)us tatafr e`T.e'fD1r.c nui=/A e.�acT or Tmaim/am,.r;. mew a...Qi.Trm SMALL GRID Illuminance Fc 5.08 6.9 2.4 2.12 2.88 II TILR ANGLES (LW,TES xmllwie4 am a[m.cx.rxm am).w ras 8.61.sr 24708 tee1. ': a's ILO 16 JOS e.[.ir1.. _ RESIDENTIAL LIMITS Illuminance Fc 0.27 0.34 0.02 13.50 17.00 ,o Ts.116 1 man um./rearm "`'� 4721.114721.11.0.22 m.w c.""r""o oz au.T.mi .."" 6. 1 RESIDENTIAL LIMITS 1OFT Illuminance Fc 0.08 0.09 0.02 4.00 4.50 .-. 6-66_6 0 wmwlxe.. Is An [T TS LL.or.ltmm. �� :--. 61 I.a.mOxe..e PDT TO emu. D ' I -- Tat b1M�gbtl rePebnbWar'mad.rids zero Wing akned straight 4.3 4:2 6.5 p a.en.4117114 Una r.PeT.varwrm D ...ter F-5.be,EFFEEFa.ilY,Til Lts, -- - ..a Ann.Eclipse fidvo,and they an 5.8 5, 6 Peneel to Me reb«ti.g awe m me AMn featly Rama[. C '15 8 0 5. 6.9 2.' I �- 90 jTilt=35 4 5.9 2. I - 180 -= 0 I b--• 7 r T 1 r T r -r - L --- --- - 2.7 4.2 1: ORIENTATION --- ANGLES 1.6 1.8 2.7 1A 270 11.4 1.4 2.2 1.3 ��-� Opnyy6.b MnpN the fi.Webspuq 1 Nn of right,.ra.W Its rso nt Fmue Qer.i�a V--- - -- ry1..vb.).imr.ns AKTRA 2 CUT-OFF „e„gwnO,P,a JL - 1.6 1.7 2.6 1.4D�NaM� vebd en with napeet r 2.5 2.7 3.9 1.9 - -- ,=.' , -r- -r-: -- r--1 1--1- -- T`-'--> r--r F---I -- r--, - fi-1- I---, r -LI I I I El EXCLUSIVE NOTICE THIS DRAWING IS THE I 4.4 5.7 2.2 EXCLDSIVE PROPERTY OF 4.4 WIDE-UTE n3 ACCEPTANCE _ __ _ _ __ CONSTITUTES AN AGREEMENT '- -H - THAT THE DRAWING WILL BE -- - 5.9 5.6 6.9 2.7 TREATED A9 CONFlDENTIAL. C THIS DRAWING IS TO BE C - AA15 INFORMATION AS CONCERNING AA15 DETAILED N MH=18 - 6.1 6.0 7.0 2.8 THE OPERATION OF UNITS - - FURNISHEDBYWIDE-LITE AA15 1 Tilt=35- as 5s 2.3 CORPORATION.THATISTOBE -.- - _ 1. _4.81 RETURNEDUPONREOUESTAND M H=18 I DISCLOSED OR COMMUNICATED, 2.7 2.9 4.2 2.0 As EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED BY Tilt=35 1 WIDEIITE H ® ® '1--' 1.8 1.8 2.7 1.4 NoncE.THE INTENT OFTHIS -. `--' '-'1 4--- �� � -. r-+ Y-'--. -`-+- ---t- LIGHTING LAYOUT IS TO 3.9 5.9 6.8 I - - - SUGGEST THE BE T POSSIBLE II 1.4 �i.� 2.2 1.9 ll�� PRODUCTS USE .A IT IS GUIDE-, \3.8 5.5 6.3 ®_ - - - - ._ I__=1 i- 1 i-_, (LLlf Jf - - USE AS n IS FURNISHED NI IN r71, PREPARING ELECTRICAL PLANS. ■ f -- 1: 2.6 1.14 /I I\ ITS USE FOR ANY OTHER \ 6.6 6.9 '=}�7I �,\\\ 1? U BY PURPOSE SEISE.OT AUTHORIZED L'i ear 2.4 2.7\`3.9 1:8 2.4 2.7 --- - AA15 1 MH=18 r 4:4 4.30 5.7 2.2 F• \ Tilt=35 1 5.9 5.7 6.8 2.6 Fr AA15 AA15 AA15 AA1 �1� iiF AA15 s.o 5.9 6.8 2.7 i 1 B MH_18 MH=18 MH=18 MH=1= 1 MH=18 - B - TIIt=3'��1 W r„ Ti -35 Tilt-35 Till-35 �_� ° Tilt-35 4.5 4.4- 5.7 2.2 T I I D,4 :C �r-_-� to I L of im • y�� - °n 1.3 2.7 4.6 5.9 5.7 4.1 2.5 1.9 1.9 3.0 4.7 6.0 5.7 4.2 2.5 1.9 2.0 3.1 4.8 6.0 5.7 4.1 2.4 1.9 1.9 3.0 4.7 6.0 5.7 4.2 2.6 2.0 2.2 3.6 5.1 6.0 5.1 3 4` 3:977 4.4 2.0 1 g co a \�� z___ 1.5 2.8 4.8 5.9 5.7 4.3 2.7 1.9 2.1 3.2 5.0 6.1 5.8 4,4 2.7 2.0 2.1 3.3 5.1 6.1 5.7 4.3 2.7 1.9 2.1 3.2 5.0 6.1 5.8 4.4 2.8 2.1 2.4 3.7 5.4 5.9 5.2 3.5 3.1 2.3 2.6 1.4 O w LL - U) �°---9 • 2.2 4.0 6.0 7.3 7.2 5.6 3.9 2.9 3.2 4.6 6.3 7.5 7.3 5.7 4.0 2.9 3.3 4.7 6.4 7.5 7.3 5.6 3.9 2.8 3.2 4.5 6.3 7.6 7.3 5.8 4.1 3.0 3.6 5.2 6.9 7.4 6.8 4.7 3.4 2.2 2.0 LL o=m W aoy r �� 1.2 2.0 2.6 3.1 3.0 2.6 2.2 1.8 1.9 2.5 2.8 3.3 3.1 2.7 2.2 1.9 1.9 2.5 2.9 3.3 3.1 2 6 2.2 1.8 1.9 2.5 2.9 3,3 3.1 2.7 2.3 1.9 2 1 2.6 2.8 3.2 2.7 2.2 1.8 1.4 j (7 -.- % h T to i CNI O 7 ri. \ �% 0'.1031-0:290:31-0.32-0:31-0:30-d�2-0.33-0:33-0.31--0:39 0:34-0.32-0.31 .-33-0.34--0.33-0.32-0:33 0.24-0.-33-Q31-0:34- A34-0�4-633 0.33 0.33 0.30 9.28 0.27 p.33 /' ' li 0.14 I / \ i` \ /// 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0,09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.C9 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0 L9 .09 / L BRADDOCK 5-t.w9 J 0.08 �I ..gxaml: osn: I 0.06 A '' 0 0.05 I rev.:: l REV oar.: • 1"=10' A 6Cald. -- - - 0.04 I 1 1 0.04 I .1d.r Or ■ 0.03 09-27 44948 i' 0.03 I DRUMM 110. i 0.02 I i;' bin 0.02 c wi.4a...na..wd.a PHILIPS f' i I 1611 Clovis!tartar.d. San eereve, Tessa 76666 r / I \ \ .ho=e 512-392-5621 res 512-753-1135 4 I 3 I 2 I 1