The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda Packet - 2000-05-15 PM PLANNING DEPARTMENT FILE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA PACKET MAY 15 , 2000 (.52 04LAKEOs�ECO City of Lake Oswego • Development Review Commission Monday, May 15, 2000 7 p.m. OR EGOS City Hall Council Chambers 380 A Avenue Members: Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Julie Morales,Chair Nan Binklev,Vice Chair For Information: 635-0290 Doug Cushing Douglas Kiersev Sheila Ostly Bruce Miller Dave Powers Agenda This meeting is in a handicapped accessible location. For any special accommodations, please contact Janice Bader at 635-0297, 48 hours before the meeting. Agenda Book * I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL • III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER LU 00-0029, a request by Lisa and Mark MacKenzie. LU 00-0037, a request by Jane and Gregory Drew. LU 00-0001, a request by US West Communicaitons. V. PUBLIC HEARING • LU 00-0012, an appeal of the Planning Director's decision to deny the tree removal application by Phillip and Zona Ruhl to remove one 23.5 inch Douglas Fir tree from their side yard. The site is located at: 4351 Cobb Way, Tax Lot 11100 of Tax Map 21E 17BB. The staff coordinator is Sandy Ingalls, Planning Technician. LU 00-0007, an application by Gramor Oregon, Inc. to redevelop Block 136. The request consists of the following items: • A lot line adjustment affecting Tax lots 8400. 8500 & 8600 and a portion of the existing alley. • Approval of Development Review permits for a 41-lot townhouse residential planned development, and a 16,844 square foot, two-story retail/office commercial building. • Approval to remove approximately 50 trees. • The site is composed of Tax Lots 8400-9100 of Tax Map 21E 3DD. The staff coordinator is Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager. VI. GENERAL PLANNING & OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT STAFF REPORT • CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING DIVISIO1r APPLICANTS: FILE NO: Phillip & Zona Ruhl LU 99-0012 [AP 00-03] PROPERTY OWNERS: STAFF: Phillip & Zona Ruhl Sandy Ingalls LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE OF REPORT: Tax Lot 11100 of May 5, 2000 Tax Map 21E 17BB DATE OF HEARING: • LOCATION: May 15, 2000 4351 Cobb Way NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Bryant R-7.5 ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7.5 I. APPLICANT'S REOUEST The applicant has requested removal of one 23.5-inch (DBH) Douglas fir tree. The tree is proposed for removal due to the direct impact of the tree to the property and house, Exhibits 1, 2, 7, 8, 9 and 11. • LU 99-0012 Page 1 of 5 II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS City of Lake Osweeo Tree Code (Chanter LOC 55) LOC 55.02.041 Prohibition of Tree Removal of Trees Greater than 12 Inches, Exception LOC 55.02.065(1)(a) Review of Permit Applications LOC 55.02.085 Request for Public Hearing on a Type II Tree Cutting III. FINDINGS A. Backeround/Existine Conditions: 1. The applicants applied for removal of a 23.5" Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) tree that is neither dead nor hazardous, Exhibit 4. The tree removal permit was denied on January 24, 2000, Exhibit 5. The applicants filed an appeal of staffs on February 3, 2000, Exhibit 6. Following the filing of notice of appeal, the applicants submitted a hazard report prepared by a certified arborist, on March 16, 2000, Exhibits 10 and 11. 2. The affected Douglas fir tree is located near the front southeast corner of • the applicants' house at a distance of approximately three and a half feet, and about six feet from the neighbor's house to the east, see Exhibits 1, 2 and 7. 3. Eight other trees over 5-inch diameter currently populate the site. The predominant trees on the property are Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Exhibits 1, 2, and 3. 4. The subject property is rectangular in shape, and is developed with a single-family dwelling, Exhibits 1, 2 and 3. The lot is approximately 8,175 square feet in size, and zoned R-7.5. Access to the property is from Cobb Way. 5. Properties abutting the site are zoned R-7.5, all with single family dwellings upon them. 6. The site topography is generally flat (Exhibits 1, 2 and 3). • LU 99-0012 Page 2 of 5 B. Compliance with Criteria for Annroval: 4111 On September 28, 1999, the City Council adopted an amendment to the p Tree Ordinance (LOC Chapter 55) by adding section LOC 55.02.041 in order to address removal of trees that are larger than 12 inches in diameter. This amendment affects both Type I and Type II tree removal applications. The current application is being processed under the Emergency Tree Code that was in effect between September 29, 1999 and February 16, 2000. At the time of application submittal, the request was classified as a Type I permit. However. because the tree proposed for removal exceeded the 12-inch diameter threshold. measuring 23.5-inches in diameter, it was required to comply with the Emergency Tree Ordinance, which will be discussed below. LOC 55.02.41 Prohibition of Tree Removal of Trees Greater than 12 Inches, Exception states: "Notwithstanding LOC 55.02.035(1), 55.02.042(1) and LOC 55.02.080(3), no tree greater than 12 inch caliper at DBH shall be removed, except the City Manager may grant an exception to this prohibition when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. In making this determination, the City may • consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake Oswego Code. The City may impose such alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs as a condition of approval of the permit, in addition to any other conditions or provisions provided under LOC 55.02.042(1)and LOC 55.02.080(3)." The emergency ordinance was adopted as a stop gap measure to ensure that mature trees (those greater than 12" DBH) would not be unnecessarily removed. City Council acknowledged that in some cases the tree would pose an unacceptable risk to persons or property or that the tree would be situated in a manner that would prevent reasonable development of the property. In those cases, the Council authorized the City Manager to grant an exception to allow the tree to be removed. In the case of ha7nrd trees, the applicant must demonstrate that the tree poses an unacceptable risk. The applicants have indicated in their original application, (Exhibit 4) that the reason for the removal was "[to prevent] continuing damage to property and house". The question before this commission is; therefore, has the applicant demonstrated that this tree poses an unacceptable risk to property? • LU 99-0012 Page 3 of 5 There are several factors to consider in making a determination of the level of risk, such as tree species, size, age, health, structure, failure history and location. • Douglas firs are susceptible to wind throw, however, they are generally stronger wooded than other fast growing trees (alders, poplars and cottonwoods in contrast). The subject tree, measuring 23.5 inches DBH, is admittedly a large specimen, but is not large for Douglas firs which can reach 48 to 50 inches in diameter, or larger. Staff estimates, based on the tree's size that this tree is between 40 to 50 years old. In urban settings, this is considered midlife for a tree of this specie. In a forest. these trees can live upwards of 250 years. The tree's canopy shows good vigor and form, although there appears to be some amount of deadwood present. Exhibits 1. 2, 3, and 11. The applicants have provided contractors invoices to demonstrate the past tree failures and other work which has impacted the tree. An invoice, (Exhibit 8) from Platinum Roofing and letter, (Exhibit 9) from Jack Crossley Construction indicates that the roof was severely damaged in 1999 as a result of a large limb dropping on top of it, and apparently moisture problems resulting from lack of sun exposure to the roof. An invoice, (Exhibit 9) also shows that a large 8" diameter root had to be cut in 1993 due to its impact on the house foundation. The removal of the root has not apparently detrimentally affected the tree as any signs of stress or decline should be apparent 8 years later in the tree's crown. The applicants further substantiate their need to remove the tree based on • information from the Lake Oswego Fire Department, (Exhibit 12) which provides recommendations to owners living in or near the urban/ wildland interface. These recommendations include clearing flammable vegetation from ground 30' away from all sides of the house, cutting limbs 15' away from roof and chimney, and keeping wood 30-100 feet away from the house. While these recommendations are valuable, staff is of the opinion that these measures can be accomplished without removal of the tree. In fact, staff had already recommended that the deadwood (a flammable source) be removed from the canopy, and that the lower branches be pruned up away from the roof. This would substantially reduce the risk of limb drop, risk of fire spreading into the tree, and would also permit light to reach the rooftop. Staff finds, however, that under the present criteria applicable to Type II tree removals, the potential for impact to the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood are minimal by this one proposed removal. There are a number of other Douglas fir trees in the immediate area and the subject tree is not a direct part of a tree cluster. Removal of a singular tree from a cluster could detrimentally affect adjacent trees [LOC 55.02.080 (3)(b)]. In light of these findings, an assertion could be made that removal of this particular tree under current ordinance standards may be allowed. Under the criteria for the emergency ordinance; however, staff is unable to find that there is an unacceptable risk that can not be ameliorated through treatment or pruning. • LU 99-0012 Page 4 of 5 Staff nevertheless reminds the members of this Commission that this proposed . removal is not a unique circumstance. There are many locations within the City and even other locations along Cobb Way where large trees are growing very close (within 10 feet) to homes. There is a greater concern arising from the incremental impact that may result from establishing a precedent where the proximity of a tree to a home would permit its removal. If such a blanket authority were granted the character of this neighborhood and in fact many neighborhoods within the City would be substantially altered. It is on this basis that staff continues to recommend that the Commission uphold the staffs decision and deny the proposed removal. Staff received one letter from a neighbor in favor of the tree removal request, Exhibit 13. IV. CONCLUSION Based upon the materials submitted by the applicant and findings presented in this report, staff concludes that LU 99-0012 should be denied. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of LU 99-0012. • EXHIBITS 1. Tax Map and Tree Survey 2. Applicants Photographs 3. Site visit photographs 4. Type I Tree Permit Application, TC 00-0017 5. Denial Letter, dated January 24, 2000 6. Request for Public Hearing, received February 3, 2000 7. Applicants Additional Arguments,received March 16, 2000 8. Quote and invoice from Platinum 9. Letter dated March 10, 2000 and Invoice from J. M. Crossley Construction 10. Quote from Morton Tree and Landscape Maintenance Inc., dated February 1, 2000 11. Tree Hazard Report signed by John O'Shea, dated March 9, 2000 12. Letter from City of Lake Oswego Dept. of Fire, Rescue and Life Safety and Defense against Wildlife Chart 13. Letter from Dolly Cheney, dated May 1, 2000 • :Sandy_I/Cases/LU 99-0012/LU 99-0012Report LU 99-0012 Page 5 of 5 ' . • i-' .\,...\. \\ `` yam7 . i .1 1 H 1 3 Q.: , 0 00 -I Q`. u 4-. ,., , , .6-0 , ....it) i 6 0 ,. 0 . / C.(6.0 ' g '� l7 l7 CJ `b b C7 t7 I ?.S 0 0 0 0 E''� o 0 0 I 0 00 tIII062) IUIF pQ77 I 4400 7 fi � �, �, � '-� � e 437 35i 341 �. q' �' � ' � 4 2 �; 3 to le) , -. ® 0 ,i1 to \8 ..,:, 40444;\ ct, tys. , ______----_____-- . G., ,-,— % t 1 r ,,t) ,., A t>. .3"--o) . .c., '-i_. ..._ ., 36 7.. S W 1© r-:5 :r ,. 3 .x. - .._� AA33i N LOBJ .Y z :i:: 1: ,f s -. Ili -Fyn Ly"tRuiL:'Sl^" � _@ •... --.--- keLE-.1 1`-`-.-- - • SME iv- ii.:._ T---rff.-4 _ 1. Douglas Fir in front yard ` �+ :_ F _ `� __ ,, (southwest corner) i i - c___ „4/41=•--- 4 . _. - :�ri". nigiAi :ii. • a 2 and 3. Douglas Fir in front - yard (south middle) and Douglas ;; '. Fir between houses that is _ _ • ' proposed for removal - n� ,, -_in. , k... . - 7.- _� Q 1 13101411 1 1IIIIIIIIII '., gag.. - io ,_ _ _, _ _" Qom " �' • • ::T„.• 1,11444446g... ... r� vn t ., [• `I J [ J- �r F mac-. ^ Jo iL r Y .. {r'T^Y•:� . t 3 3. Douglas Fir between houses _ --.. that is proposed for removal _ :' 4...-... : ,. ,. . ..,:7,7,:,....-7,,,li,77--71.. -V \ '-r - I. �S't I 1 t tom• t rf • -.-:. • -, s • ..../. -i • ! � 4 'if,... ..,..-4-.' ,.:!.r!. tvi,:it-574:cy'--:. - 4 ..._p. •:' - '`''';'....:,:.1 k t _ __,,,,,:,..-,-, . 3 ....,,I. .,,,i. r.„......._.1... ....,.......;:_...5.,.......,„ , ,,„.;„...,t.,.. „, . ,...,,,,:l..,_-..,: r..;‘,;: .1k,:,__ :;-._...-,..i„:„„......., k .„.::_.....-;.:,: u...;-,".: :: .-''''''• -s.1:i2.--.,--t • 6-, iwA.A• --_; -:-. ! Iiii;;Iff,,,,m--.-- _- --.. - - A.--- .:.• - ,,61.0- '94114i; r ! . al -_ - -ram • — "!i `, rt/4 ,', _4 Ste T3'f ' :f 3. Douglas Fir between houses , - 'hat is proposed for removal , ,z, -` ,djacent to a wooden fence and _ _ _ --- neighbors wood pile 1` - ,t emsllitk-• :ys •• - .. i -7 %I',. ri.."._ :ZS k -I FT F: -J1;"•-•;'. ti ii 4. and 5. Spruce and Pine ems` '.7 il ' t f - _,-i • JU 4 • . : V.,..:,... : t ;.. , •' tv •.• .'r i_ • Fs}'a' r •., .-!, [is' - If ' . '.?t,i' kr. fl ,r 6 and 8. Three Douglas Firs ``°':" �it • ` fir. t If t0 \.rcr 1: r �j, 1 .t ,.. .I 2'.-.• SI:I 1.:/ .- !t:'...*•i.-.. '.:A , ' .8.-, - ...• ` k. i•. t • I 9. Flowering Japanese Maple .: y ; .. i • • 0 6 a 0 0 0 U - A _ r'K. J0 111..-.• i :Z 3. . f -f /y X ",.i t 4>.u , • -.:aY :-.ft 1. . _�� / s - •i4 t 2, c �u ,• ' A. Rocks at the base of the Douglas Fir Tree • j ! till toe. , , • 1 3:.•4°>U ice:.." l .,r 7•5•,..' + Yj6� ,L_' #.0. >�rjj9. ? _ ,—<._ ray't SDI. Itft iS T., q.'st - , ill.,,...,_... ''''iri-,- AMP-- 1a1— N. Apt.0 , sai - - ylo....,.." . B. Shows how far the bargeboard is from the peak of the roof to the edge of the cave. It EXHIBIT 2 dropped as a result of the wet LU 00-0012 ORoof and a limb that fell when we y 19Q ge s were having dead limbs cut out of the tree. '-I U . • 1,IT:7 ...4..,' •011, . , .7 i .t f-v,'-. -,,- • ., , ._ , -, •••:-_,-;.. ',..i. • ' 4.';'.-.. , .,•,,, , •#,•,... ; . li ; • • , 1#1•11A?$•••4.-.i i. r- - • •,:,'•••••0' -*• .4.'f..: - - i ' .:.' •: - -..,-:„- •: • *.i•, • .-5.,A -. • • •, ,. . - • • '1 -. 1p-0•• •-'7,..•:'*ir \ ---.'7.- .. • • .., 1 •... •',. . .yi,.,•4, .1.... C t • ' • - e 4 ..,..... . 1.., . .,:t • qt" 41.. ,t,-7. • ., • -1 --•:..:„ lk • _.........4.... . . f. .,,...V.. .•.•/." 1 1,..:k••!1; .14 1.. •''''-:•.:' •••-**'..f.'.4:-. , D ;i.%--11. .. ;. :•,-.:.1„ =, ill - '-'.•.'r:- . •-1 , Tr% ••!.••7, . 1.-A.-• •:, 4 ,- 7 rodo , ,.!- .....r.:, , ._. _.ii ;,,,,..: . . .•••eN•IL. .. Lr. , . ._.• ,--„.....„,. -.... ..„''.. ' • . •:- :? *. Ail .., _la ''''• '.,.i-44:•.::;',..:-.,,,";:'-ZXC:i -T:":::Zr-••77:-...--7.: •,...' t. •. ..,i. • ,-11,-,• •;-•:-17f',C.f,••4.itiV1t.',- .• .-:,'.,,i.,:-_•,i;',C•::;'!''''..7" ' -'''.-riT' ,, ..ili.ir ,''i -, • -,,P.)'• . I,,,,, V .1. ''.... .7'. -f. qci, '' ' . - '..it.'..- 1.111 .tC" ---'6- ''-'-;' • .-4-.• lite:----'44 ..„ . , ifi - • -'7•• '..` .1 .- -'':It,•••r. ' •'. • .,t.. , • • • ...-. . ; --`41, ;-1.--•:-,-; . .4 p ,.,, •-• 4, 7,/,,,g -. 1-......y.,1:i;..,1, •:„,'7. . ,,r ,, -?...-4- --- -• .k. . •A ,,, , - .., :•-, - • _- .......--..... : ..•.f,‘„.. •!...,,, , .;,: • r'-; lr,;i :-_-_ ..- . - • --.1.r/-, :1 41-.1 I' f ‘•-'il.f' ::,!..: ... t 4Le ,: :: .1".4: .V..1? 1 E-.-- A i il -,-,_,..,-• ...t...2.-..:::: .. .. MI'',.'• i"..% LI l', • , 10 / , (-1. ...i. II& -'!'r-. •,•'.•!"•.•7'..•" • - • 1 14, i _ .410 AO ...a.1••:/c4- :--; • t •-• • •••f.., a : • 1 ,r I • • .r.--. !JP' ‘'.1•117''':•-i i ------ 4.- N. . ,' ---- .r.I '''' . • 121., . . .-, --.,• ..!..-• *.i:.` 1 .,Ivi, • , ...-,,. -,. 1-,,-off. -•-,-- -,,,, ..., 1.i..-‘,4,,‘.. , - - . , 4,, k • 1 ,, - ,.,-4 1.:,.._ , • -,-.1 . 14-V01 /1 1 i w.• ' .. - ', : ---- - ,.:.f.iiitke.....:,.5„.,-1 , .-..:.:f,,.,1:, 1 . -...• r ,.1,..• • . ,,-"•-,. ••• • • 1 . . _4' .. . H. ...:!!.., • .. ? . . 0 . . - ... ,. . . ....-- 1 .. . _. ., ..f.... .:i -...-77. --'' -Zx,- p:1,7--:/,`"1.,.:,... 7 '4; ''' • ,-. • • 'et,•,•",.,..-?: '•: •-•-•-" '': 'r••,:.--- - • - . -,Jr• •:. •••• ,- . - -•-, =1)--4-46,-- --• 0--4.e. _ • . ...-.•.•''..'/''-e.7•--•,•-_----f•;.el. 44 ',J..- •• • Alirp .'"'I4 . .•.' • .:•....:,,•• i...-'-15/4.7'..44...-A - '..:A.,; t. ,10..1'. ,. VI ' ...s. ••-'4441::I.IPH: ..:.l'1%. 4" ' • • •--,,,14f•-••:,-,..i,,..,,-...-7r• --.Z 1 • ,.. . •.,, - •-, 4:•:" ---=• -•• "ff.'t. - '.'•i-tof.'-1.•••• ,,i • . 1 • ..•,-,- .., ,... „• .,,„V;;.,....W.e:,•4‘•-••.1,,• • V.% - . • 4. , :.•", ,... . •, ,„ -, -;...-.- ,....ri .-,,,, ,. ... .:: -_ , .1 .• -• ,I \y,•:::: -,i. 'I:I!..."....-•, • - - - ..•• A- :1",-11' -- '4., ... •--..- • - c .- ,- •,-.-• -./.1.- - - -•,; • •, '.,:f.-•- ',-.• .••,-''.,:7• --..-- . - , - k.. . 0... ,.,.'''''.,-:. 7 . 'S.' f ..,-.•, . •,.-0.•P•if " ''' t--':'''':13-4.--`.- • -• ' i' ..-.4,1.1C..-- --_:'-',-.4-.,,Z. •"".'it:`,•. y. •, ..: ' '-- t.-,...-... : ,.,;;,--1.• •' ...0-','::`.‘e- -'r; -, ' • • wryl. -4- '- 1 - , •- ,-,.....- ',71.7'''.. '•• ''''..11','7...-P-,,,.-,-_-.3...,--:- -. i.....,:.-4..A.„4 , .114;!'•- -4- .,..c... 4,--4, • - -- . ,,!-.I. .A . 'fie ,Avramitt...t..4.ii.r -•••• . 0.-• ' ..11, • .fit-r:l.'-IV--±A.izr V.' . 1. 7- ..- :'- .-b 1, • • • • .--1.'"----e°• '''4'.. ,•••t..--- `‘07. - • „,.. , .f'!---.3-;'''';P.,' .'''''lt',4•!::f/A'' , , .' ' t. • ...i.' . '. , - •, % 9 "'" •'' .. • 4 ' • '-- •• ..1%. h. , *- -''fs:• • • ••' , ••••-:' '41e!v. . , . • '• •-•i: -.. •.... oi'‘ ' -''• 4 . - •:. • Y.t '•••11 '4.a.! . '. • i ' •A r, ii •'• .4 .. ' :14.''i ..1• i. lk .r • %I • : . i .k........ .. S • . .'I. ';•.. tf. . . i.11iiits. •....!.t'. . • ..„. ei . ', .9!k.!•.11 ..‘ ,.•it.;424'- • ..,....,-;;; le . tire,T:L . 1'el.f.;':!..". '1 -T.'', . . -t-,41-' }'‘.':k.;. ....iik'.c:;1••-. ' ..,,Arif--.•et' ''..„,,,,•....., .. • .41,.,• el!. ..4. •...', 4 ,.•..A4,... •'''," :.. ''j • .."'?..8.. 4)*,";'''''' •:' .•1 -'41*. • '4..'id' ..•'‘. . , , ••••• / •, V'''-'.'i ri. -;*. -:., ---'.....- '...._•• _1',...:•-".%.. ari,;,, . ::11'..., _ . ______0„..5„...- ' •••.... --: , : • r -...2 A • ..: 2., . !I• ' • /, -,./..,••••.4 ,•,.,....,, .,:..'.,,•"-.T.,t1. .-. -. , :...'-.'12 H. ,r. •-,4 '.v . • , ,i ',.. ..;!,!"•.,'4}•:',',v..,- A4... .j.::••.`-':.;:Q.•.i...-.- 7.„Ifr; 'II ...... ....•.•.i.• .-. .,.. '.4i.. ,.,-,4: 2•;ZgiL.ij,..!...'-- -....".•.-..,,,, , . . •i,.. .... C. D. E. Shows how far the - '''./:- : - ,.,_. ,-,..,..., bargeboard is from the peak of / firr./! :"'usrlioi-ilit ''.•°:.-.?••••••••.?_-.('-'''' the roof to the edge of the cave. It --.,- 1.7- .;-• : 'Jr- • ,--gr - --.,.:, • dropped as a result of the wet . .- .• • -• -•:.,. ., - , A ., .,.,, .. . Roof and a limb that fell when we 1. _____ were having dead limbs cut out of __ the tree. .___ _-- - ____- :. _...,.. _ . •' " 1.-4-. - • . ,..„. .....,..4.Ns ...17.1 • -., • :. t • -. :„.....-, .,-• ..2,..,,,... ._.7' •-e. • "44:- • -4 - ,..70,111TiA .-6 i.., .L11.7' ''al" •a-A••••••• .,4 , ) . ‘..., ',.• . ! .- •••,: -.1.,•., ,'TiI . r •,,,.. • , :• . • V-- 1 14..• i.... 1 . , . .lerlirl-/r'..rF. ;;.:#•*1 0 .. - . .. . . , r F . • - •-, • , ••••;; ,,.. , .-._ sr_ • . ..• .. , 1 . ,.,, .. ..1--,:.„. •c.-6-..,%, S' 4 1 1,...'.0,44-•g . ...*: . -..e: ''91 .;4,.... t. ...• .. :. I ' ' •- •.. ; I. -lir-. ....' •• . ......- - ., --- - 41 ' -- -t-:144. ,-.4.-.- ..51. -. • ..... 7,-... `. • •••- ..'•ef.'-- ,71;r., • . .7 •• 4.1,- _44 .._, ---.. - 40jrir • : - If -- - • "- . - '' - • • . ' .•""lt• ,-.e,-_.,i• - • , • .„ ,.. . .,.. • . . . . ----- --. . .: -•::, :,.....___. - .. - -- • -- . •f...•;',7" _:•:.i . ,:• ' 'if .4.: . 41.71:4 7. r._.,....c..1-./ r --- , t. .V.. ,•,.I.30.t T -4,,.. . . t I OWN*..44,50. -=•. ; ••••11,0.. .t'-' . '• 47,..,.P4.'. ,..a._ •I.:1 • .,. . . 0 . I G 1 .„ '-'''s'"2"t'.-:-`..4•Vint't .- I , J ai-41, ..71:-,..111 _;: --- - 4, - 1 . I -.1% .--.--.• `.i:74.4. -.•;4;„•a_..,..i_._ - '-:..\:: ...-,.7._.7--r-.i.--•4. 0. . 4 ...,',.e.t1 • •I" i • . ' ''''' •• ' • itl"' ' . • i I•,i., 3 • .3. ' t • • . it . ! i: _._ •_.... . 1 . +4 - • "Air,77.... • .• i! :-'14'1 '. -•—•.- -. ...:. • - _ .,....: . --. ,.• . • • - . . . - - ; a . T---- •- ' . • ,,,_ ___ . ._ . • 1 r••••,,,,-._. ...t---,.--:- - _..„:, :_. " -....- ..7.-,4,-,..;....-..-- . F. G. Shows where the plywood had to be replaced throughout the eaves to the peak. 0 C.i u- q ‘.. 4,N9 ,., } f aj s r• a ?*, ` ,:+tit '` ..},rt .. S vj r -. H. Shows where the plywood had to be replaced throughout the • eaves to the peak 6 _: a • A-..,, •--,., ., P0000027 (1200x1792x161 jpeg) • , - - iv.. •edr 4 ...- 0- • . , t.41111, , . . . ..,_tik i....., , . .. .4: - .-- -: - - . . . _ . . . 7. s *.4., . ,. , 4611114 ..;gill' ' ,Af•••-1,- , , .• , "Illiiii., _ qp • - - , . . -49- 1 :--r- P4111. * ;71111141111tIk. . 1140 . tlf * ,* .. , n .-, * 1- • . ..,•• e , ti,,40-* ,e, -d- p.-•.a. 16. 'it so,' . ,' ." ' - .0.4.- 110 .. ... ,......',.•& .. ' • - P '111-,. le„ a. . • 4. ljlig 'If- ilk • ,.1.Illpi ........' jhe Y . -3 -- "-rfi, v .0. . A.,,.• ' . '.•'-rn ,.., • - t.:.•;, ,---r., 4, M. •- - -4 -.- .,-,.1ti,...4,:lr-- .v lzyk . .•lel • , : ,14•114 . ,i i,. - • , _ ,4 • , i. f-, , ...'-, :--.- ,-, a -_, — ..-.-- 1----.., — _• 4f,c'-At4 - - 21- _ cI:-4'4' ,1'..6.2t't,-, -4 •...,..• . . , ..,..0..,-,,. ..:7, 4- ,. ,,,-.10-#46,i, .--,..? ...,• ,- , ., - . • -;-:--:,--A-- , --Vi „-_.. . . it'.. 3....: . _ .. _ . ...._-,,. 7 • Douglas Fir proposed for EXHIBIT 3 removal. Approximately 3 feet LU 00-0012 and 5 feet from homes. 5— po ar: , '. . .' L 1 I P0000028 (1200x1792x16H jpeg) 41111 • fir. • ,' _ .a l' . '•4• •, `• pit ...,• �.:; I 1' -< iiii J ,.ti •yet • • '••••• • •11 . ,6 P.abw. lit • :A4, • •' •• r - ! "•—t+�' elµ P •IrfY r �Y 1 ' •1e. 'i � _ ,• . ., .. 7.... � ' per '••� f �, r' • 'a I�' tAt.. •' ''';'{ r .id .stwpt Mt-s 4� -.-. ' yi_.r ii,1 .i .. _,�� Y� , 1y� : S•.s. tom.•. •p cc 4.• ,�. . ! •,,. • • :..Or.:.h :• • eft•'', ''s P4 ,� ,r--- '''•`4-1-:.: • ;31 .• ' 4 -lit . 4 Al ' . 1: 1.:*.t.,.... t:...:„.,.../%.1#.:c . . .C1!"',;i 4- • ,,li, -ii " - .' � frw j , , 1� - V�r ray. • iii 'ILL.-'•A ~t -.• .o xx j�- ''• • I ,i, •.11.. F,- e2.r,'J } ' t-• S�j, r. ,—cam . 1, .„ " i1A , 4, . .• . mtellgrIMI a ..i.e. L • •lot • b�j r • 'Or' ti• - ._ • ,,:, ,; .., _ f Y; t,-- rw r� Mat• .' '• •..., • i S Mid-canopy of Douglas Fir proposed for removal a. i.. 1 • P0000030 (1792x1200x16M jpeg) 1 • A •2 r 5y 1 U3A p - MADE I® --- r r • •�: i d -,"�r-j }+' l F am„ r :,.•. Sr - • t „ 1, � Y r J •- ,r ice` �« . zc� • c • 23.5 inch Diameter-at-Breast height 41111 13 r 1111 P0000029 (1200x1792x16M jpeg) t •; j�. 17►t'a�- 4• u .fin 4...:-. - _,�S ': . , .. .!. r• ` '4,. `fL •`4F y • , T:u• r E • • • ',•-- ' . . ftp-..;.;lab.4.,. . ....L.. ' i• 1� y= � ,lit i t 'P`> -• r rl r ��,f' A J•- ? Ke-. �.• •1 •C.r, , Z,1• 5 3Je,fit -' i - ♦ �' J• ' • ;t. :q r r iv.: • 4111 • -�`a� ,. t• u. . _ _ -� • 1. i. 3•fi r.-- I si - .1y A'`. II Trunk showing deadwood and some running sap .J 1. 4 i 'L- 0 P0000031 (1200x1792x16M jpeg) , : • I ...ill. • « • i - i .i, ..•- . . , ..,. , 41 ,.-•- - • .,' ".t .".1 • .- . 1. . 4, f',,' , I"-r.-„,- ,_ ' ..,44,,, _ -.-A---•••• 1-• ' . ..'3 • ;,.. .. .4, ., , ,-,.- \ .... : ••.• ,s,_••„,, .. • it, ,..... 1 . , - -imb's *of t • . . • '"! iii Ak -.. 1, i , -..•:2... '..- ,,.. ..1,.... t.il I.,',1,. • ,- . :i .- ... .. ,... .... .... •. r. .„ . . . . ...: .4h, • - ,t•-- vie. -0- .... • .• - • t - . A •, ..-. • 'I•i‘ •:. f p....fii:.0.41k:i ow...4thi"4:,.. ::.tot.4u.,iii.Ist4.,.. •. "i•: .. .1 • ..— - • - • _ -• t• -1 144 ,X 4.1 • , :e '1 • . • : lb. - iodik .!•'••••1.---4-• Close-up of sap running down • .-: "/N 4 -,4*- trunk : . -, - ti-1:i. 1: - $ ..'. tii .---......1th,...g, 41 1.-17_ .... .. - .1\h, Ikk ......clr•• . J..4.7-.1, 1:-:.-.‘,-•.,I!..., . 7,,...• d4,4.4.'3, ' • -,,,,, . -41-itt, , ...71 .. • y....s. -1/4, -- ,AVA .1 ', • •iir4t - • .:4 -...3 . - • • -111 • • • 6., •if) 4k- ,f01,-,.... ...:4' • •"J'' Al*i 01/46,1„ • # ..* -- 01. '' .:* '' III .‘:- P: : • .. • ' •- - .• • •'a 1..• .::'•'m . ' 1 — 2. ' ' • -4.;- . N. .,..- •.-, .. . Ft, .••. :- . • ?.,-,,,.. .„.. .,•—s1 'I:: ' :,:':• 1- • -•. 1.1. .11.4114.•'''.. . . ,rt , •z• . ...,. .....,- t -:-. :.... •lf--.., _1. '•1— ,40. : •'• ",:! .'•t'. ''''''s.• .--,. , •• ,• '.3. - - • A . - . I • t..--, _ .....„--,...4. .fii ,•.• - ,-14. .:• •;,,.. .,• . .. ..:-.• ' ...-, .:.- r ' -w- ' v.t — ., -`,N; • . ' -4•- -3, ,. • • .. ......... ,•,...•4, .1:"%.--s-- -41-qz. - v .., , wik;•.:c.;. • ..i!...:--41.4-..,.. ,,r,v.....-_,,,_. ..,41, ..-_ . •.4.. k ,,,,.:14.-, ,-':.,„„ . tog-. :...,. 1 l'ILL-lift..-.4 ekil'ah -'1r4...";,,,Li-••e .b. ,4t..W.1" $ - . :Cr,'I'll.1ri•.. 4:•*:::::: q , .., _ .,--.P/-:. - :, , 0 - I,'._ .4., At,!;,• . i'..,•- - .--Zt n't:t.'.%).' . , . . 4 .. • S • 1 `�°:Va`°s�`C5 Tree Removal Permit No. Cy t✓'.�" C' 1100 . Fee: ( _ - Application Receipt No. 12-e( t IIIP Date: i-- ;�-- �a� QL{CAM Applicant: .Z- E:✓4- 1 .0 A L-, Phone: -IFcG: —C ` •: -! 7 r� f?Property Owner: ,, � � 7 ,�'S" .t l-.a �� ' .Phone: Address of Tree Removal: '�. 7.--/ (I_ •.r = i- LI` ' . Size. Number. and -h�.pe of Trees to be Removed: - - -= - -� _ Reason for Removal: %'. ;>: w•,-- / ---' .Anticipated Removal Date:--r:..., ", ,....w- 51 I agree to comply with Lace Osego Code,Chapter 55, regarding tree removal. I grant permission to the City of Lake Oswego for employees to enter the above property to inspect the trees requested for removal. _L, 3. . ice-' ZA.4--'tr t 14.0`11.%:,- °j r Signature of Property Owner (required) Signature of Applicant(if different) mie_ezty must sign for trees located on public property Please tie a ribbon around the tree(s) and restrain your dog on inspection day. Permit Type (Fill out with City Staff) ;— - , 7-- TYPE I Submit: (1)Removal plan ❑ TYPE I,2 DEAD Submit: (1)Removal plan - - : 'L (Oversized lots) To Do; (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon ';'i Y,OF LAKE QSWEG( 0 EMERGENCY Submit: (1) Removal plan, (2)Photograph of tree/or mark tr n aithl Alfes ritAitatiirner, O VERIFICATION Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)Mitigation plan, if required (Prior approval) To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon,(2) Stake building envelope& driveways ❑ TYPE II,DEAD Submit: (1)Removal plan, (2)Photograph of dead trees, (3)Mitigation plan To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon ❑ TYPE II,HAZARD Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)ISA Hazard Evaluation, (3)Mitigation plan To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon ❑ TYPE II,DYING Submit: (1)Removal plan, (2)Arborist report,(3) Mitigation plan, (4)Copy of notice letter I To Do; (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon,(2)Post sign,(31 Send notice letter. (41 Affiriavjt Wait: (1) 14 days until the comment period is complete TYPE II, OTHER Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)Questionnaire,(3) Mitigatic EXHIBIT 4 00-0012 U To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon, (2)Post sign, ( LUit Wait: (1) 14 days until the comment period is complete - City Staff to Fill Out: Intake Staff Zone ��=~'' Tax Map ti Tax Lot l aj Due Date 0 Planning File# ('\ifb Removal Approved ri4- 1/yip, t � , / Bu ilding Permit# WA- ,Mitigation Plan Approved/Denied v Revised Nov. 1999 I:lfotms`applcinsltree removal app-July 98.doc ; + rl :i 1 i I \ i > . 1 ...... - . L...0 , i , 3, -71 (4,:,) 36 '1 r•_ 34 , _... ...;...,<.-_ . . ,1 ..:,,,....-s-...— L............ 67._......._,...,,___. ._—... .......... . ... , - 1 .. m A N .1 (r. ) r• \ ...... •• ._ .......... _. , -1, ,x ,.,.• I 4^ .. -' ' I to' 0.... 71 ....,„ , ..._,.... A ,,a , , ik...) 1 III ci51 . 121 „....J 10400 10200 10100 990(2) 98(1.30 19600 4450 4100 43 „,-6() () 4 2 '', 0 1 4 2 6 0 ‘.......--,) 1 ) i 70 ' 30" i 4.-,0. Go ,3c./ ' r'')._ ,., 60 :,,,,,' I. .. . , ,..3‘1 1.1 .--....-....---„-__ -, .. r 7-S- . 1 ,XS" - 75—' 7.5—' 7.5-' I 0 8 00 ': I 0900 11000 I 11100 11200 11 :..6( )0 . 11400 , I 4 451 . 4401 , 4 3 7 7 4351 4 3 1 I 1 ,..). 'ti '1 i 4 2 6 i I . , . , . tfl q :s, stkt\ --z U%,4 ..... ___-- I (1‘. tt:ki .. - ,... ,...i ... '... _ . . t.) .\ '4----4.' • I ' ,-• : 3635 ' 34 33 '.r....:, C. 1 US (-____r''....1 - 43b \LijlOtAk ) . • , ‘. ‘• r''-'6 .. . . . . • , • . . .. •••• , ,. _3, I...1, .k ',. 1 •L.-t, t 1 ',. ' '. .‘• '. 1/. t.. ‘ 3 ,.'- .4... 1.'1, '..--\ 13... 2.1..-St t .\- .I. t 't. 't. 3_ t '. * . . % 1 W , -vii ': I I 1 ;: . '- ••• 4,... . .1k'kt.,67A1.. AILIELE.,.,.c: . 'W I , Ni . I i 11 E. 1 IA 1-' .f v 1--i • 1:44 "":-*- ' 41 ' '+k �.. _• `AID y i; V ,,.• n t rd l ,. s. my• : . .. /7.— ,- \ . ,, ii , .ij _r S ...s +f dsw • r1 d a, F,c M s# 1_ , A -,-..tEt344. -.!• ,-.5-,,.1"-r-,,- t 0 -- ,.,...:- '-.: ,:`..Ittei 1::::--:e':;::'..-;;;;;*'11-1- t,.4,11 ,. 1... r 6' .a a Fr.:� ;y t A, 1; SS d • . . F24,. 0 . r.44 _. .. '' .. s _ 0 • 0 • .. Lb • `st of LAKE 0.54,4.4.O COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT January 24, 2000 RE: Tree Cutting Application TO 00-0017 Tax Lot 11100 of Tax Map 21E 17BB 0. 4351 Cobb Way Ms. Zona Ruhl CAZ 4351 Cobb Way Lake Oswego OR 97035 Dear Ms. Ruhl, . On January 18, 2000, you applied for a tree removal permit. As a result of action taken by the City Council on September 28, 1999, all requests for removal of trees greater than 12-caliper inches shall address review criteria prescribed by the Council, as part of the Type I Tree Removal permit process. These criteria are as follows: LOC 55.02.041 : Prohibition of Tree Removal of Trees oreater_than 12 inches, Exception. Notwithstanding LOC 55.02.035(1), 55.02.042(1) and LOC 55.02.080(3), no tree greater than 12-inch caliper at DBH' shall be removed, except the City Manager may grant an exception to this prohibition when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternative landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake Oswego Code. The City may impose such alternative site plans or placement or structures or alternative landscaping designs as a condition of approval of the permit, in addition to any other conditions or provisions provided under LOC 55.02.042(1) and WC 55,02.080(3). ' UGH = Diameter at Breast Height, that is 4.5 feet above ground level, EXHIBIT 5LU 00-0012 380"A'Avenue • Post Office Box 369 • Lake Oswego,Oregon 97034 'f • 4 w. Planning Division:(503)635-0290 • Building Division: (503)635-0390 • Engineering Division: (503)635-0270 • FAX(503)635-0t69 - 2 - In your application, you stated that the reason for the tree removal was that • the tree continues to damage the property and house. Based upon a site inspection on January 20, 2000, staff finds the following: 1 . The 23.5" diameter Douglas Fir is located near the front corner of the house and neighboring house. 2. The Douglas Fir does not seem to be dead, diseased or hazardous. 3. There are a number of dead looking limbs in the canopy of the tree that should be pruned out for safety reasons. Based on the above findings, as confirmed through a field inspection, staff finds that it is not necessary to remove the existing Douglas Fir. It is on that basis that the staff denies your application for removal of the 23.5" Douglas Fir tree on this Type I Tree Removal Permit Application. Under LOC 55.02.085 (2) "An applicant for a tree removal permit may appeal denial of a permit or conditions imposed on approval by filing a written notice of intent to appeal, along with the applicable filing fee established by resolution of the City Council, within fourteen days of the date of decision on the permit. " If you have questions, please telephone me at 635-0290. • Sincerely, Sandy Ingalls Planning Technician Enclosures: • r . 1) Ltr— UC 'O HAND DELIVERED • February3 2000 DATE RECM -1- TIME.... 51/Pm Sandy Ingalls 4.0 v,,%-- Planning Technician City of Lake Oswego Latf. REC WER PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Fe: Denial: Tree Cutting - cclicatien TC CC-:01- Tax Lot 11100 of Tax Map 21 E 1766 - 4351 Cticb ,Vay. _aKe C swegc. CR Dear Ms. Ingalls: We are in receipt of your letter of January 24, 2000 in which you advised that your office had determined that our tree cutting application should be denied. We wish to protest this decision and are therefore notifying you of our intent to appeal this decision. Our reasons for this are as follows: 1. The tree is a huge fir tree and is growing within 14"of our house and within approximately 43"of the neighbor's house to the east of our residence. 2. Mr. Mark Henry, owner of the house to the east..._4341 Cobb Way, has expressed his concern about the safety of the tree and concurs with us that it should come down. 3. Approximately four(4)years ago, it became necessary to cut off one of the main roots of the tree due to damage to the foundation of our house and the breakage in the rain drain system from the house to the street. This root was approximately 9" in diameter. 4. The tree shows considerable movement in a severe windstorm and we are all concerned about the safety of our homes. 5. We have seven(7)other Douglas fir trees of similar size on our lot-two(2)in front and five(5) in the back so the loss of the subject tree would not be that great on our property. There are many, many other trees in our neighborhood- including fir and other varieties- so the area would not be adversely affected. We have read several articles and letters in The Lake Oswego Review and note that many of the citizens in our city are concerned, as we are,that the restrictions governing the Type I Tree Removal Permit Application are far too severe and do not take into consideration the facts and concerns as they are perceived by the citizens of Lake Oswego. Therefore, we wish to appeal your decision to deny our application and will await further contact from you as to how to proceed in this matter. RECEW ED • i EXHIBIT 6 LU 00-0012 CITY OF LAKE Dept. DeV of Planning 5 Devatonmenl Sandy Ingalls Planning Technician City of Lake Oswego February 3, 2000 • Page 2 In view of our concerns as noted above, we wish to put the City of Lake Oswego on notice that, should you continue in your denial of our application for a tree cutting permit and should the Douglas fir tree noted in our application fall and cause damage to either home or one of the homes across the stree from our property, we will look to the City for restitution for any damages that may occur. Sincerely, 1 1 1:442 Tr: , 1/./(yez,.(4 • Philip T. Ruhl, Owner .' Zona M. Ruhl, Owne `--)( Mark Henry, Owner .11 i • Additional Aaruments for Tree Cuttina Permit • 4351 COBB WAY - LAKE OSWEGO. OR Philip T & Zona M. Ruhl 1. First and foremost. Philip's health is not good and he is unable to do many of the maintenance jobs around our home. We now have to hire most of the work done. It is our premise that this • tree creates a potential hazard to cur hcrne and that of the ,ext ccor-eighcer!;whc aisc Rants the tree to come down i as weil as those homes across the street. We are retired ana are on a.invited ncome. We cannot afford to continually spend money on the upkeep of cur roof. 2. Due to the fact that the tree is close to our home(26" at the eaves) and that of our neighbor (54" at the eaves)the branches hang over both roofs and, except in the dry summer months, does not allow the roofs to dry out. This.then, makes for rapid deterioration of the roofs of both homes. 3. With the tree so close to the foundation of the houses, it is very likely that the roots were damaged at the time the houses were constructed. 4. As shown by the set of pictures submitted with this list of reasons for us getting a tree cutting permit, there are countless other trees in our neighborhood and, thus, the removal of this tree would not adversely affect the environment of our neighborhood. 5. We have eight other trees on our lot alone. 1 0 6. In the past several years, we have had occasion to get tree cutting permits for various reasons. i.e.: A. One tree was destroying our driveway - no problem getting a permit. B. One tree was destroying a section of our fence- no problem getting a permit. C. One tree was dying on one side due to the shade from the subject tree- no problem getting a permit. It just seems ironic that, now, we have a tree that is destroying two roofs and could easily come down in a windstorm due to the loss of one major root and we cannot aet a permit to cut that tree down. 7. TREE IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE 5'AREA TO THE EAST OF OUR HO ME.SUBJECT The firemen would certainly be hindered getting through this space if we had a fire at our home. We,therefore, wish to ask the Design Review Committee to reconsider the denial of our application for a tree cutting permit and let us remove this potential hazard. ','"1 77. t---, 7,7 1. I 7 n L ... •:..,„ .,....,, „...,, : :.: ....... ....., 03-13-00 4110 EXHIBIT 7 ..oT t'tc u L+'tve:J:.Tient LU 00-0012 U J LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Plat map showing the location of the house and nine trees on the lot. la Enlargement of lot and house showing actual measurements of the house and the distance between our house -the foundation and the eaves - and the tree as well as the distance of the neighbors house and the tree. II_ Set of 18 pictures showing all nine trees on the lots. Alf pictures show other trees in neighborinc cts. =ee pictures - thrcuah 9. II. Also, :he pictures .aceied A througn H show the damage to me houseiroof and subsequent repair work required. A. Simply the rocks at the base of the tree. B. Shows how far the barge board -from the peak of the roof to the edge of the eave - dropped as a result of the wet roof and a limb that fell when we were having dead limbs cut out of the tree. C. D& E. Same as B F. Shows where the plywood had to be replaced throughout the eaves...and all the way to the peak of the roof throughout the entire section of the roof. G& H. Same as F. IV Invoice covering repair work for rain drain and cutting of tree root. J Statement of charges and contract covering roof repair. VI. Confirmation letter from J. M. Crossiey Construction Co. verifying damage to roof. rain drain & the • cutting of the root. VII. Estimate/Recommentation from Morton Tree and Landscape Maintenance Inc. VIII. Tree Hazard Evaluation Form completed by John O'Shea of Morton Tree. IX. Brochure from LO Fire Dept. showing their recommendation for trees to be trimmed/removed in an area around a house due to the fire hazard. See' area on back page. X. Article from Farmers Insurance Co. magazine entitled`Fireproof Your Yard"regarding the creation of a safety zone around a house- including the removal of obstacles in the 5.wide area around the house. See circled area. Xl. Copies of"Letters to the Editor' from The Lake Oswego Review regarding the "...new tree protection ordinance..." along with letters covering problems other residents have incurred. 03-13-00 ,z •1.. .,�.. 'ZOOM r_ �4, .11 • - - - 9/ 74 ?# A° ._ , r , N•Z ;' .`Z I1 • 1 J. FiMMIN V= 1! , 21..7 4110 LAY,L: -:r“-elkit r L: _ _ 1 A6—Lake Oswego Review, Lake Oswego,OR,Thursday,January 27,2000 . IIII Letters/ from Page A5 411. vs. the needs, safety and protection \ , to the owner? How would the diam- City Notes eter of a tree trunk figure realisti- cally in such an analysis?I really �� doubt that it would, as there is no /L. correlation between tree size and Lake Oswego D R C was. So what •.ve really have delays decisions here isu a mer t o emotions, a tree hugger mentality that elimi- delays Lake Os.veQo nates all logic but will penalize Development Review Commission anyone who disagrees.You have by will consider requests having to do this ordinance made a potential with development of new housing lawbreaker out of any property at a meeting set for 7 p.m. Tree size isn't owner who is unfortunate to have a Monday, Feb. 23, at City Hall. large tree in his yard. Both hearings were continued only critical factor What to do with all this?Well, from a meeting this week. how much right does this City One request is to divide a lot at To the Editor: Council think it has to enforce such 1501 Country Club Road into The recent vote by the City punitive measures?At present we of three parcels for development. Council to approve a new treepro- Type Ia andordType treet . I speaks a Two of the lots would be flag lots Type l Type 2 trees. I applaud tection ordinance smacks of the the city staff in working their way with houses built behind the origi- misuse of legislative powers or at through all the legalese of this ordi- nal home. least a fuzzy-mindedness on the Hance. It wouldn't be so bad if the A second issue on the agenda part of some.Any good landscaper width of a tree trunk wasn't such• deals with an appeal filed by a will tell you that gardens come and neighbor who doesn't want to see arbitrary guide. In lieu thereof,I go and are changed over time as suggest for starters that the city trees cut on Mayors.Lane in the certain plantings grow and mature Palisades area to make room for a and no longer meet the intended might entertain the pos p ility of m new house. City staff approved the landscape design. I think that fodeveloping ranalyzing a multipointtreprogram tree cutting, but the neighbor includes trees as well as shrubs. So includer nlu large as age,It would objected and paid S111 for the my first question is, what does the strength suchf things as core of the trunk, value to the appeal. girth of a tree have to do with property owner,danger to the prop- retention or removal? erty owner, effect on a city tree There are many trash trees that inventory,trash tree vs. useful tree, over time are no longer beautiful or etc. That way we would be forging useful,and yet the City Council a partnership between the citizens would restrict the owner from and City Hall. Perhaps it might removing them because of trunk even be something that all of us dimensions. Not only must the could understand.At least it would owner pay for the privilege, but he be a more intelligent approach to must plant another in its place determining tree density in Lake although,the natural rhythm of Oswego. I find it tragic that the things may suggest a different City Council voted in a new tree planting scenario. ordinance after testimony of only Other questions I have for the nine persons. I believe you can do city staff are: Have you ever made better than that. Councilman an inventory of the city's trees, Chizum was right when he said, spotted their locations and deter- "tree protection laws go too far into mined their lifetime usefulness? the personal rights of individuals." Have you ever made any assess- Curt Wolter ment of the value of tree longevity .;_^ r-. - r �bake:Oswego Alk J.'S:i.Ci:"2iirlr: Dtvaiopra.;iit • ,' 3 - DRC has full of requests plate iioRThe Lake Oswego Development access via driveways off Country seeking permission to build a 1,980- eview Commission will meet at 7 Club.This hearing is continued from •square-foot garage on Lake Grove p.m. Monday to consider five scpa- a meeting Feb. 23. Avenue. They want to use the new rate development proposals. The Oregon Department of building to assemble cars from kits, First on the commissioners' Transportation is seeking DRC restore vehicles and do car repairs. agenda is a request for a hearing approval of plans to build a new And David Emami wants city from a man who doesn't want his bridge over the Oswego Canal at OK to tear down a building at 17040 neighbor to cut down 11 trees at Childs Road. If approved, the new Pilkington Road and put an addition 2306 Mayors Lane. City staff mem- span will be wider than the existing on an existing building there. bers approved a developer's request bridge and will have a sidewalk and All the hearings will be held in to cut :he trees to make room to bike lane. This hearing also is con- the Council Chambers at City Hall. autid a new house. ;;nder new „ity ::nce:i from Feo. 330 A Ave.. and ail are „pen :o :he tree protection rules, neighbors who Reynold and Earieen Keeler are public. object to the cutting can ask for a hearing. A request from a developer to divide a 1.28-acre lot at 1501 Country Club Road into three lots is second on Monday's full agenda. The site, at 1501 Country Club Road, has only one house now. The two new lots would be flag lots behind the existing house with • • „' a' Maiiing Address: .---• .. Portland (503) 220-1300 PO. Box 80664 Vancouver(360)574-24 14 Portland, OR 97280-1664 Salem (503) 589-1860 [1'1 C ' 1111111 Toll Free (877)255-1300 Physical Address: i f htt ‘1 it 1 9468 N. Macrum Ave. V,11` !‘ I . PLATINUM _„..,.‘, Portland OR 97203 IIV- L / .03 it I 19763 . ...5? )WA #PLATIC I 030NH . -- Ai .....? I 0.....,,, VISA . i / .... -•- - nnozosAL suemi-r,ED To 108 NAPIE I DATE .. /-7 / '.- 1 47 ' I' (Z. . /i 7) /I , )_,,,, ,,,, t / 57REEr / ,08 LOCATION / 1/ c/ . i/ '. el /71•-"-. _ :--rw.sTarE aro ZP.:cps •..."-t -.>"" .• :•.• -- • , ..z: ,..,..,-, AA ..Lr ,..6.4-• ; a r- .: 5 7 4c:-. -- I ''.:. .' • - . . */ :. '.. We hereby submit specifications and estimates for Roofing: - House Garage _Car Por:-. _Patio Cover Other / PITCHED ROOF SPECIFICATIONS—Pitch(s) Skylight reffash new !&WS .z -'repare grounds for re-roofing, Gable rap/comp edge H&R Lr/Tear off I, _2. /3.all layers of roofing and Vent pipe(lashings Lead clean up arid haul away debris Valleys: Pre-painted metal _Triple lined I&WS Install 1/2"CDX plywood _7/J 6 osa 3/8 CDX Attic ventilation: _Replace _New Sweep off debris,prepare roof for recover Ridge Vent _RV038 _AF-50 Apply over existing shingles jwood deck ' Ridge Caps L....-Custom Cut High Proflie • CAUTION: New roof will conform to unevenness of tr Clean gutters Tear off existing deck and/or shingles , New continuous gutters 5"-K/Fascia 4i3rown White / Felt paper •'-'. I 5 lb. 3C lb. shake liner PVC(rubber)on low slope area,built in gutter.or dead valleys 41VIce and Water Shield(I&WS)Low slope application ./Clean Jp debris&haul away • - Drip edge ana gable(lashings(paintea) _white _brown Inspection:daily and on completion Roof to wall flashings(painted) reseal . Paint all exposed penetrations to match Chimney flashing and/or counter flashing_I&WS MATERIAL TYPE I COLOR INVESTMENT 1Finan6ng Payment 1Month "7, ,;) 4. e. -7 ;:31/..-i' --r. / .. •, i z...., • . 2. Id?..1.I --7:?.-7/ 7-r,',:7 ',' $ I I 3. I s I I ' 4. I 7.-- SPECIALJNSTRUCTIONS/OPTIONS ./41'171-'-re _. " ,-,e i' ‘-') ./.:-/- .S-.. yr--r-, ..-L,-7z- "A.,....-6,,f..../7". :-..---, i-7/7-'' ,-•..-1 ./,-.. ...• • 1. 1 , ,-, . • a 2!ev •.. c.).-7 7/-0..t.'...2"4,3, .e.,.if '7 '. '4::.7.V yr)tr..; c.e.Jo ri zr.i." .,A..-..1 ,'". / . f.1 t:)ji.:c;cr-7: ‘,..,1/(1"/ 1-.), •....7,.'2.7 . ,I...; *1-." ..1.74- _/-.-7,, 7- •.•Ie.s A,-' e-/.:',.: STRUCTURAL DAMAGE:Some additional work maybe needed.for example:dry rot.delarrinateci plyy,o0,fascia boards aid rafter tails,but not limited to these items.This work "4.'7 is biiiea to customer at$45.00 per man hour plus materais. /t/e.:377—`7':v -5% il.--",(")' -:".(":.— (-6-.;:ri;ea 49(2-7:,--/. rn... 7 .4 r c.-o2".57,4.-.4.-',;.-0 • PAYMENT TO BE MADE AS FOLLOWS: 30%aue upon acceptance.naance due upon cdmpieuon—.A late charge of I'/,%per month or rraximum allowed by law will be apple,:to delinc Lentaccamts. We Propose nereay to!urns-material and or:complete in accond - q----..TO-- seen-fa:ions.fcr the sum of: --- . .. ..--------------- ---7.; ..-, t•-•:.ticaars• - . T7,7; .__ In the event of breach of this contract owner agrees to pay PLIPPUrn reasonable collection costs nIcluding attorney's fees even though no suit or action is filed.If a suit Or aCif6n lahydinz j arbitration is filed,Platinum shall be entitled to recover its attorney's fees.costs and disbursements Incurred therein including on appeal. .11 work to be completed in a workmanlike mann( Respectfully submitted by . • an be used and srAll not impact payment upon col . . ii-s .'.7-;..;:s .., -7:'--7.."7_,-/.AI ieof ons nvolvng extra costs wits become an e . Contact# ?(''"; -t://0 .• gr conengent upon stnkes.acodents or c EXHIBIT 8 •oeier necessary insurance.Our work LU 00-0012 NOTE:This pr000sal rrey be withdrawn by us if not accepRedwithin ,•1 .."'.. .'..days.. .., ompensabon insurance.Owner agrees to pay re . . ...,......il, .... .;.. ...1...,.,1,..:• 113e11 pe-c.r•,- ____. .-- Customer-4-1,f r.,i) ,cceptance of Proposal The abceue pr Signature k:.i. ) . ke.?...‘ _ -...- are . Date ____._.' hereon accepted ted You are authonzeo to do ow wu, m a>ape,..cw.raTcitt wow.is 1..0...c cp i / ...:,/,eC. By signing this notice ycu are.ndicaung that yOJ have received Information No to Ainers About Construceon Liens'. have read and understood rt L'7 .c't , SEE REVERSE FOR STATE REQUIRED NOTICE "--. ,- r•O I 1 :JU., ',.1 '--, . 7- --•,,) 4'7° .. ' _"5'_'_ „II- “-, •...,(. • Platinum Roofing Statement PO Box 80664 Portland, OR 97280-1664 DATE Office (503) 220-1300 12/1/1999 li Fax (503) 220-1313 TO: PHILIP RUHL 4351 SW COBB WAY LAKE OSWEGO.OR 97035 - ' AMOUNT DUE TERMS i ! $950.00 ' Upon Completion 1 I i I 1 DATE TRANSACTION 1 AMOUNT BALANCE 11/01/1999 1 'Balance forward . -300.00 I 11/19/1999 INV 43281 1,250 950.00 . 00 I , , 1 1 .• ! , 11 1 , ! i 1 ! 1 . ks, ---, N.,_) . • 1 ; , 1 ) (-, 1 I \ •') 7 1 , I - 0 • • 1 r- 1 (\.:, ‘Cj • . 1 I 1 1 . . I I I 1 I . : 1 . CURRENT 1-30 DAYS PAST 131-60 DAYS PASTThDAUYES PAST I OVPEARS T9 0D DUAEY S MQUrauE— ' . 1 I 0.00 950.00 0.00 0.00 000 $. 950.00 • 1 1 1 2 I. •'. M. Crossley Construction Co. Mike Crossley PresidentMuf 10, 2000 Sandy Ingalls =!ar.r.ingThchr:ician City cf Lake Oswegc PO Box 369 Lake Oswego. OR 97034 Re: Tree Cutting Permit - Philip&Zona Ruhl 4351 Cobb Way., Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Dear Ms. Ingalls: I am writing this letter to you in support of the Tree Cutting Permit application submitted by Philip and Zona Ruhl. They are trying to obtain permission to cut down a large Douglas Fir tree on their property. I personally inspected the damage done to their house the winter of 1998-1999 and can verify that considerable structural damage was done to the roof and and sub-roof on the front section of the east end of their home. The barge board from the peak of the roof to the edge of the eaves dropped about 4" breaking the support for the board. This, in turn, put such stress on the sub-roof that the plywood cracked and had to be replaced. This necessitated removing the asphalt roofing (which. I am told, was only 5 or 6 years old), tearing up five(5) sheets of plywood and replacing them, repairing and rehanging the barge board and re-roofing that section of the roof with new roofing material. It was obvious the damage to the roof was the result of that section of roof being shaded by the fir tree so that it stayed moist nearly all the time and the subsequent damage done by a limb falling out of the tree. The tree is very close to the end of the house so it was inevitable that this should happen. I also know that several years prior to this damage, one of the major roots of the same tree grew into the rain drain crushing and destroying the pipe and was also growing into the foundation of the house. The end result of this was that the root-approximately 8" in diameter- had to be cut off right at the edge of the tree. I would be apprehensive about having this tree so close to my house and I know The Ruhl's feel the same way. In my opinion, it certainly is a hazardous tree and should be removed. Sincerely, J. M. CROSSLEY CONSTRUCTION CO. ack M. Crossley • '�` "`� " 3 =". President EXHIBIT 9 T' `� ~ .2 `�- LU 00-0012 r 18305 Lothlorien Way • Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 • Phone(503) 635-9295 or 638-1635 ( 161M ) J. M. Crossley Construction Co. • Mike Crossley President/Owner INVOICE Philip Ruhl Januar' 71 , '`093 4.51 Cobb Way Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Statement of charges for work at your home: Dig up rain drain at the base of Douglas fir tree, cut out crushed pipe and repair rain drain through the installation of new pipe. Cut off 8" root of tree that is growing into the house foundation. Total charges for labor and material : $157.50 1111 • l jr-% „ID °�? 18305 Lolhlorien Way • Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 • Phone(503) 011120Eglftar 638-1635 J4 L Vl antttt:n.......:___,..ra tj , ' * - .. . 1 /J j£NOt11ft reraee NATIONAL e-mail. 'not Ion®ititeyrityonitne.com or w ARBORIST 4erusk TREE AND WWYY.tt-dearityvnline.tlonr/itiurtJlitte. ASSOCIATION BOp{GV thanks WORK SCHEDULED: L DSCAPE MAINTENANCE INC. THOMAS BROTHERS PAGErc C-.t.1 ( 636-7902• Fax(503) 598-4548 M DAY OF PROPOSAL: Moll 2/21iU) .BOX 596•Lake Oswego,OR 97034 TIME OF APPOINTMENT: 3:00PM Licensed-Bonded-Insured CCB#67428 i a4.I I 2 i//2UUU Y❑ F C s D ITE, P * PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO PROPOSAL GIVEN BY HOME PHONE Phil Ruhl UUI I C1 STREET ADDRESS BILLING `!!` ��,/`NG ADDRESS OFFICE P'HO,E"i�5 4351 COBB WAY 4351 C.0613 WAY CITY.STATE AND ZIP CODS Oswego OR 97035 Lake Oswego OR 97035 DIRECTIONS TO STREET ADDRESS 1 fSr BRYANT N r ' p .PIE,EREBY SUBMIT RECC;vI ENDATIONS.AND ESTIMATESFOR: N. Want To Remove Tree That She Thinks is Hazardous- Wants You Tu Evaluate l I 1 —t— -1_,I . •-1;:r. —71/v.-- • I Ai Cf.ft cr.. -4 -i-1:-�,..v1-_ - - ,c4 y_. - : .�� -'- --7Yi(�1 I-F2^>. 'p•.N:'r (IL, TZ-ho ` 4t Nr�t..f ( . 1-} _' --r- _ ra- n Q••A — C l... - , I-A. _ t'A..- •T- e,..s/5.__ --E• ,. v— ( q-L..<-1 ----- L743 Li i t Alp ---- ��'L ,I) is�r.s A.nI L� 1�-�„ 14rc t... ) 41 t...l l..-Y'ti/ L.... •'.-'-- !.A.) /I_.-F I-%-•!--^-[V. 14 l . 0 064/084ree Permit Required C Duckbill ❑Dosco ❑Rayco ' D Murton Obtains E7 i;l+a Eb, f I!S- "` ❑Small Truck l(ustomer Obtains ..... - . ' s -_ C Hedge Trimmer C Utility Locators n ❑Cabling Gear ❑Power Pruner n - - ❑Notify Power Co.of 220 Drop ❑Crane n ❑Notify Power Co.to Clear Lines C Fertilizer VIY OF Lr' y. - M C Hobbs Lowering Device ❑Auger Bit r r CHANGE ORDER/SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS TOTAL Morton provides its services in reliance on Customers representations that the trees and vegetation on which Merton's services will he rovided are located on C1stornet b real property and/or Customer's own property CUSTOMER AnREFS TO HOLD HARMLESS AND IPIDEMPaFY 1ORTON FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING IN ANY WAY FROM THE INACCURACY OF CUSTOMERS REPP-ESENTAIION OF OWNERSHIP. • The wood chips generated from grinding stump(s)Is not included in the removal of debris or job clean tp urdess specifically noted n Ilia PROA•r work `CHANGE APPROVED BY: DATE: REVISED TOTAL: EXHIBIT 10 r TO SE PAID UPON COMPLETION UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY ESTIMATOR.A late charge of 2 4 oar month will be charged on past due accounts. T T T oo-�O ^ THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES ATTACHED CONDITIONS AND CONSTITUTES A BINDING CONTRACT UPON ACCEPTANCE. L U L OUR WORKERS ARE FULLY COVERED BY WORKMENS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 1/44 NOTE THIS PROPOSAL MAY BE WITHDRAWN BY BY US IA NOT ACCEPTED WITHIN DAYS Acceptance of ' sal THE ABOVE PRICESAND CONDITIONS ARE SATISFACTORY AND ARE / — — HEREBY ACCEPTED YOU APE AUTHORIZED TO DO THE WORK AS kk SPECIFIED.ALL CHANGES HAVE BEEN NOTED AND DISCUSSED SIGNATURE DATE f riNi ` S I l/ rj� / eo ""'s4, A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas � ' TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FDRM o„,tJ� 2nd Edition •Address: `T 5I ()V13 w‘c' HAZARD RATING: Map/Location: LA0660 + + = Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner:public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: — 1-O() Inspector. tMEZr5lec‘. 15q 4- S$71 -ktJUSA Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: 2--17-2-ce0 Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS -;ee 4: Species: ,— ---'c•.cS —. JBH: •=- - / 4 of trunks: I Height: _•/ Spread: Form: erally symmetric _minor asymmetry major asymmetry E stump sprout G stag-headed Crown class: dominant ❑co-dominant 0 intermediate 0 suppressed Live crown ratio: CIO % Age class: ❑young ❑semi-mature mature G over-mature/senescent Pruning history: crown cleaned ❑excessively thinned E topped ❑crown raised ❑pollarded ❑crown reduced ❑flush cuts ❑cabled/braced p none multiple pruning events Approx.dates: 3`/fS rP''```5 .2) hx tat a. o • Special Value: ❑specimen ❑heritage/historic ❑wildlife O unusual ❑street tree E screen ricade ❑indigenous Ilsprotected by gov.agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. Er-normal ❑chlorotic 0 necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: normal Esparse Leaf size: 'rural C small 0 stakes 0 wire/ties 0 signs 0 cables al shoot growth: C excellent Eraverage 0 poor Twig Dieback? Y V 0 curb/pavement ❑guards r ` I' ndwood development: 0 excellent F rage 0 poor ❑none 0 other Ef (b !c 11ace_o f a is Vl�_ Vigor class: 0 excellent al-verage C fair 0 poor 11^w bees' cot CM.-WI° slc)eti-Et Si{S Z Major pests/diseases: l� SAC—N rt' 3r a"'t c'2-, 12' yowl aangstINIC SITE CONDITIONS Site Character: .'`residence 0 commercial 0 industrial 0 park 0 open space 0 natural 0 woodlandlforest Landscape type: 0 parkwayay 0 raised bed 0 container E mound Ga1 n 0 shrub border O wind break Irrigation: CI none 2 a quate 0 inadequate E excessive C trunk wettled ctear_claqa,t4 pi Recent site disturbance?0 N IJ construcfion ❑soil disturbance 0 grade change 0 line clearing ❑site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25°/° 25-50% 40-75°/ 75.100% Pavement lifted? Y Nf ° dripline W/till soil: 0°/, 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 41, 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ❑drainage 0 shallow 0 compacted 0 droughty C saline 0 alkaline 0 acidic ❑small volume 0 disease center 0 history of fail 0 clay E expansive 0 slope ° aspect: -Flat' ) Pt- Obstructions: ❑lights G signage C line-of-sight 0 view ❑overhead lines C underground utilities O traffic 0 adjacent veg. 0 Exposure to wind: "single tree ,below canopy C above canopy =recently exposed 'Zwindward,canopyno edge Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms 0 never ❑seldom l regulariy EXHIBIT 11 T. LU 00-0012 TARGET �� pay; p Under Tree: wilding arking ID traffic destrian la ecreation ndscape �hardscape 0 small features C utility lines arget be moved? Y CO Can use be restricted? Y 0 "' - . .. . , Occupancy: 0 occasional use E intermittent use C frequent use constant use ` r,,:' The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS • ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y- f� Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N� ID: ------------- • Exposed roots: ❑severe 'moderate ❑low Undermined: ❑severe ❑moderate ❑low Root pruned: S distance from trunk Root area affected: 2-0 c/oButtress wounded: Y CND When: 5 �( rs nAlliti m Restricted root area: ❑severe oderate ❑low Potential for root failure: l s vere ❑moderate 0 low I LEAN: Igo deg.from vertical ❑natural ❑unnatural ❑self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y0 Roots broken Y 0 Soil cracking: Y Compounding factors: alai' 66\ is cg-- Cest ,a rC'- . Lean severity: r severe Berate ❑low CROWN DEFECTS: 'ndicate presence ncivioual defects and rate:heir severity is=severe..= ncce:ate.!= ow, • , DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK _ _ ___SCAFFFFOLDS_ _ BRANCHES 1 Poor taper -- i i Bow.sweep I 1 Codominants/fors 1 Multiple attachments I Included bark 1 Excessive end weight I Cracks/splits - Hangers I Girdling Wounds/seam 1 Decay � II Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleeding/sap flow j Loose/cracked bark I I 1 io Nesting hole/bee hive I I 1 Deadwood/stubs I 1 Borers/termites/ants Cankers/galls/burls I - — Previous failure 15"art VJ 3SGV 1 HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: WIA/A° - " e.� Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium; high;4-severe Inspection period: 3 yJ 6S annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6" 15 cm);2-6-18" 15-45 cm); 3` 18-30" 45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3 + 3 + _ (Q -----3-frequent useeconstant use - HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: removed mart ❑reduce end weight ❑crown clean 0 thin ❑raise canopy ❑crown reduce ❑ restructure ❑shape - Cable/Brace: , Inspect further: ❑root crown ❑decay ❑aerial ❑monitor Remove Iree:C9 N Replace? j N Move target: Yalp Other: - Effect on adjacent trees: Ja none 0 evaluate Nolilicalian: owner ❑manager !a governing agency Date: 3�J� COMMENTS f `�,�� r �� ( ,;� I �� 1 liU., 4 U`A.k teal( \VZDA-- ca "\S 1 C�v�- -L k avt 'CxnLL, .vejcav .e'.. a vvtlf— �('-�jca/l OS-mac.. ( t abl l4 IM?S l CUSita-S-e— S 'Vlk 0V1(1.e►1 - • • f r-�% .4 ,tom q ;S sc 7a$J t ,�� • -_ t'�-' I j w om ''' ' �r - If tier--ti,i� .�`~ .-}. � 4 • jT { F 4 a fps c i�J --, ;'' `-�. 1 -I-1 yi • I i • ,•'mo". h trio wrC ;>/ - DEI'ARTNIENT OF FIRE,RESCUE&LIFE.SAFETY "Serving Our Citizens with 1)etiicariun anti Pride Since 1910" I • Dear I lonteowner: If you find yourself readine this brochure,you and your home have most likely been recognized as being at risk from wildiand lire. If your home is surrowtded by flammable vegetation in or at the edges of forest land,you live in a fire-prone area ( firelighters call the urbanwildland interface. Lake Oswego Fire.Rescue&Life Safety.the City of Lake Oswego,and Clackamas Cuunty's rural lire districts have joined etTurts to help interface residents like yourself prevent property damage.injury or loss of life front lire. On the back of this brochure are problem areas which make many forest homes unsafe-along with steps that can be taken to improve a home's defenses against tire. In essence.these measures can give a home and its surrounding property the ability to repel wildlarnl fire. By following the suggested steps,you create a"defensible space"around your house.which makes it less susceptible to damage by wildland fire. But you also make firelighters'jobs easier and safer. If they don't have to worry about protecting high-risk hones,crews curt focus on putting fires out and Ott place themselves in more serious danger by trying to defend vulnerable structures. Population growth in the City of Lake Oswego and Clackamas County means an influx of people building homes in the urban/wildland interface. People find the rural forested areas of the city and county to be beautiful.serene places to live. And they are. But lire has always been a natural pan of this ecosystem-people must leant to live with its EXHIBIT 12 ever-present threat. Please:cad on and follow the steps on the back of this brochure. Contact Lake LU 00-0012 Oswego Fire.Rescue&Life Safety at 635-U275 fur further imitnnation or assistance. • . a"ors .4.0it . .J eve. ;u: • 300'tr Avenue•Post Office Box 369•Lake Oswego.Oregon 97034•(SUM 6..35.O275•FAX IRA)6354576 r f"'. ...5 "— ?rr-. Jail,r.,l rF,11 i111,-J tiD i'N!,:t:i,:A1,1 1 r it trr� /] 1 � '� � � � ��j�1 �� rf" r -��I �"�" � f � � rJ 1r��: J �f.,rI-- �j_ �ihi WUJ:...1Jrn�TI.C1 i� Area of Common Effective • Concern Problems Solutions Building • Flammable wood siding on house and • Replace volatile building materials with wood shakes or asphalt shingles on roof. non-bumina metal,tile or composition. Materials and ' • Stilt foundations or decks not enclosed. • Enclose with solid sheeting or 1/2"mesh. • No fire protection for wincow openings or • Have pre-cut plywood sheets ready to Ivialntenance • attic and crcur,d vents, place over openings in case of fire. • mail trees.weeps,grass arc sntucs root • Remove ail rlammaole veoetaticn from Flammabie -,nr.eo and maintained around„ouse. ground for 30'around house on ail sides. • I A Vegetation ree branches overhang roof&chimney. • Cut limbs 15'away from roof&chimney. • Leaves&needles cover roofs&gutters. • Clear roofs&gutters of ail debris. and (Materials • Stacks of firewood,etc.next to house. • Keep wood 30-100'away&uphill of house. Slope of • Inadequate clearance on downhill slopes. • On downhill side,extend fuel break to 100'. • Yard trees are too close together and their • Trim trees so crowns are 15'apart and Land and limbs too low to the ground. lower limbs are 15'above the ground. • Neglected grass becomes dead and dry. • Mow,rake and frequently water grass. Landscaping • Flammable shrubs planted close to home. • Plant and maintain fire-resistant shrubs. Water Su •l • Lack of a sufficient outside water • Maintain an outdoorwatersourcesuch as p p Y to assist in fire suppression. • a small pond,well,cistem,pool or hydrant • Shortage of tools around the house to aid • Have a shovel,rake,axe,saw,bucket and Fire Tools in controlling an approaching fire. operational garden hose ready for use. • No way to wet down and protect roof. • Get a ladder&hose that reach to the roof. Power Lines • Overhead power lines within 30'of home. •• Run power lines underground near home. II • Tree limbs on or near power lines. • Ask power company to trim branches. • Driveway and home address unmarked • Install reflective,fire-resistant name and Driveways and • and difficult for fire crews to locate. address signs at house&driveway's end. Road too narrow or steep for-fire engine; • Make 15'-wide circular drive with 13.5' • Addresses • obswctedby low branches:ordead-ends. high clearance; 2 outlets; and no obstructions. Vehicles • Cars,trucks,campers,boats on trailers, • Park vehicles inside garage or shop or at etc.are parked outside and close to house. I least 30'from buildings if stored outside. • Lack of an organized escape plan. • Practice escape route with two ways out Evacuation • Inadequate steps taken around home to • Shut off gas and propane tanks;consult reduce hazards to firefighters. your department for further precautions.- Preparations • Not sure what items to take when being • Organize a portable supply kit with only forced to evacuate. essentials—food,water,tools,documents. • Not knowing where to go. • Do as instructed by fire officials or police. For more information,please call your local fire department or fire district. as o �_-- ,?fir, ,i JF2t 4-e t -•-•( ni i i 1 - :::- - ..-.,,:•_:• 11 7 7 . ..14:7:..::.;-'. ,!,:v.1,:___12-,i.; --1. --. \ _ _-_, ' ,---, if,,,,--' . i !I e-- _f. lj . . . ,4 .,1 a --___....i.:!:','..... 7 try 1 i �' I t( . ._. r`7� !_ ' U. si -._-- ..-s.--___-_-.�..,...,..1-_._. ._-,�_,.A.--_:,...rot... •.i= '' r,.._a _ ._._._.__ ... 1 � y —. i ,z r - , ,� i Y ,' {iy 4' r1IF�r �re V t�.' ''"c; •' r ,r }f, 1ti • 11 rS� a t�E, rn iNh` -,L .•t :- h 3%: ,,,,, ,, ., „21.4'. ,ay._111yt st'�PY. iy l nVfl rr. ter a '.` 5 1'.T',t .y�"d •� " _ .,r,1•e J <o .s yt-•'p( I� ,b ] r.� ® © an�r "-'-�� 3.-•�'r. �� 1! }t�rt'�' 1 !'• J ,'•'•1 1' r. , .., „__.„ VA a � �� t „ :� Trim trees around your residence - IC '-°:1.,YI,''' .t`^hY lisp yi } to a height of eight to 10 feet to 1 t�� eliminate "fuel ladders" which ' �' z• ��.� , � J ,gig �:r� w ;1t,rd fm f,s sy : tit r p n- ..;. enable flames to climb onto the �' ' ,` >ai M • tr}• •t wood and moss on trees. Ogiiiit .q,}"y ,`• , t e " �' i` Of>J �' ``;,$4`tIr ' - ,: • Rye grasses have a ' •! . ', , s . s: 1 :. � lower fuel content than other grass _ , i i}., ,, r 'r . .-I 1 , -, - _ ,: varieties. Mow grass in spring, t , • . _�� _3g ? us a eul_ 1 e e31i uu 1nr to eu •; i, E {�.�,' ;� � i before thatching, to minimize fire ; , • •�- �••� ><p rI i e it •s!'11,�. i ;i 11^t ei-�i1 ""' r err�rr - � �'�$ :,' l<_ ht .rn1 ea� risk. Remove all clippings. � :t�: irk'et. 11F . 1,:� e � � 4 ,. �1 :e �;• �., i.. �:. ,�- :. A f 44 .. . _ y _ -� •---=c�..•r_.ry ,„te r '•i• r.�,,,ff 1xtRR /•: T.y , . SY2 3� - •T r S F , t T 11 i44 f: h• 1111 ' ' .. fY q[ • '•�l -.. . ,�. Y__._... 1 . '1f f r.'" .. 4'L• �, & ej�1F7 Lif' a 11 i it i iiit tt . �r r�j1 ? kg 'r,.�Yi 1 Timid +,, .L" c ,. { ,,a -! ► 'tom,' ,/� it 7 ys -. ''1. • � fro: r t' •�' sS ,r�� 1i .,. 11'. el .i r Yellk I. ; �;. •� ^' f s eee��,,, }0 u •: . 1 pond,spa, pool, or water storage ` flit Si ,�?b�l, `t4 + j F :r et .., tit w41:11te 1 p ' 9 ^. ', r- • i .,ySte 1,i, 1'r2• .i�•r , ;. r- . I- x. tank with a gasoli, powered Y$�L�/ sti . f • to a MI e;l: z 1.. •, �/ - - )L... `� , , t ' ;1 - -- �. : / ^ -aF1 a . �#�s ao e 1 pump or generator, hoses and �!�' • s; ��. e e ,4 e t a1 1 t l a. it 11 a �'. 1te n (4fltfln9smaYheiPsaveYourhomew• 12,,, 4,,,,,,. ., -._ff. , ' " "'� " ` : s i y y� . y -..f fRt:,.xiri, l•',_ k V45'.1'i}• R 1 s'1.*""3 �'?"w.{4 L _. 7 •,• t� 1 ,111 it ,yf5a' t r� i �i CI; ,e.1 i r•.r t a ad• �, �lrL r .e, '. '? #�, ,3.�F .(7 +q}* ra C •3Ht.�c..1!"...a fp.-xL. .� r s iott JJ � �= ResourcesF • • -. _:. . .-- MoreGravel paths, stone or con- ;_ r ° — _ crete patios, and non-wooden ^`0 , y I or more information on fire-resistant land decks act as fuel breaks. -' g ;� §.' r_j scaping,: contact your local fire department. -.� r. •�s-,„••�,—_�.� o ' i Nurseries and landscapers can advise you on native fire-resistant plant species- _ s ' _ - ;" '_ - *To obtain more information on :1 •• 1� rc .�v__i d • •• i ,• � ��!.Lt- itl,.ti •"ua.t,to •=;1 _,-visit_the Firewise Web site a • ; { at http://www.firewise.org. - ~ •�' ,.: - "'For a detailed '�t_ =_ !:_ lz' r consult CaliforniaWildfire Landscaping by Maureen - I ..: " 'I a'xMost species of ice plant and ��+ j _ :_. Gilmer(Taylor Publishing Co., $10.95). :, s , T j cactus are good choices. Others •• t *The Federal Emergency Management Agency - include thyme, rosemary, yar- •: i 'yt,• publishes a , t = .. ` _. _ -ice.__ _ _ __ I row,ivy geraniums,verbena and including how you can create a safety zone, at trailing gazanlas 1-' -'4v„._ www.fema.gov/mit/wfmit.htm... -- 't ��:.-,.«>:._.- =x-, .. - kT:TIC:' r• y f 5aft • Q 7a • - • - -ti '°`"T! �S�7 t 2- .t,1.lr} i c s�4}• ¢•y� 4'ak,� a pC .yli i 1 v a -� »r oTiyl-1 "'[+ate_ y 'ht..'• S� - x � 5 ¢ 1 spring 2f20D FRIENgLY EXCHANGE r • ;q, 1sti � 4!l 4i'u^',R;j:a i tg .i. ,. 'fir.'{ ii.. `. m.. P 9 (� I ,I y '} 4 ' K;.�, ,.... rr;is,or r t1 A -• - r. 3 t� '-.e1 d ? I.•:... r r.t.of p 2-J.. • 1/40 CA V 1:-. Li, 0 CITY OF LAKE OSVitr0 ' 11/Ay Dhipt.of Planning eiDevelopt-r4rt / 6 t „4..3.. — , Af fylAq ..D•epi-Hitweikt ) -,• -, -• 4,,-;7‘., '. ;T:. v ,14,',1„/,' 1 , . • 7 /4 •!'".. _ - -r, '';'.P iri I.:''. - .,-i...: . ;:!,--::•: ._, ., ,/.4 -• i ,- .- .-- ,--- •.• . '! - . ''•'; . 41;;*L _ .... — ... . ' - ._.7 -1 " '- .• "' — ' /; ' . .611',4i/ ..4 ! ,r) 4 i ,`,i /4/9fr. .,4- i ,- ; Pr_Z.'_.'" / f ' 4 4.:r • •, , • ..- - . .'1 i•;.,.. . • / ./' Z •,., c. . . t , f JA,4/1,1„:".!. ,r.4.• 2.........5,-.....,, TA eif A e e d A . -14-4 12P115e 11.01 / .i- r p e •-• 5 (..2/4,W_5 f.' A/40,e /-/A Al/.4.1.1,‹ hi' i bi,w 5 e - //1 e'''' ,3 /AO) e i/0 PO e•(AA e;414 home i, , piet,9 ,..b.eiNi 0, rh e Ity*?e5' , . . • - lie, ,€. pe-A-2,./.e.,,,I. ,--ler, e iita pyiAA emf.Sider. I'll" /19'42"f'14" 0 II • , , 4/ M iiiiii' '') , 7., ."-el," /1404A . 4 :.*. 0 EXHIBIT 13 LU 00-00P .,, L. 43 ____ i STAFF REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING DIVISION LU 00-0007 • APPLICANT: GRAMOR OREGON, INC. PROPERTY OWNER: EUGENE WIZER LOCATION: South of "A" Avenue, north of Evergreen Road, between 2nd & 3rd Streets LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax lots 8400-9100 of Tax Map 21E 3DD. 9 STAFF REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING DIVISION APPLICANTS: FILE NO.: Gramor Oregon, Inc. LU 00-0007 PROPERTY OWNERS: STAFF: Eugene J. Wizer Hamid Pishvaie LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE OF REPORT: Tax Lots 8400-9100 of Tax Map 21 E 3DD, May 5, 2000 and the southern portion of the existing public alley DATE OF HEARING: O LOCATION: May 15,2000 South of A Avenue, north of Evergreen Road, between 2nd and 3rd Streets ZONING DESIGNATION COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: EC(East End Business Commercial) GC (General Commercial) NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: Evergreen I. APPLICANTS' REOUEST The applicant is seeking approval of the following requests(a detailed description of the requests is provided in the applicant's narrative,Exhibit 44): 1. A lot line adjustment affecting Tax Lots 8400, 8500, 8600 and a portion of the existing alley(to be vacated) in order to accommodate the proposed commercial development, Exhibit 5. The commercial site is 16,581 square feet in size. The site plan is designed to provide vehicular and pedestrian access to the lower portion of the existing commercial building to the west(Key Bank). 111 LU 00-0007 Page 1 of 29 2. A 41-lot townhouse residential planned development, Exhibit 6. The site area for this project is 75,200 square feet, including the public alley south of the Key Bank structure that will be vacated as a part of this application. The proposed lots will range from 956 square feet to 1,834 square feet in size,and townhouses will range from 1,798 square feet(17'-wide units)to 2,392 square feet(20'- wide units) in size, Exhibit 9. The townhouses will be two-story tall,with brick veneer on the ground floor, and lap siding and cedar shingle on the upper story, Exhibit 8. 3. An approval of Development Review permits for 41 townhouses, and a 16,844 square foot,two- story retail/office commercial building. The commercial structure will be a fully brick clad structure,consisting of 8,232 square feet of retail space(first floor)and 8,612 square feet of office space(second floor),with a 19-space underground parking garage,Exhibits 25-27. The commercial structure will be located at the northeast corner of the site(at intersection of A Avenue and 2nd Street), and townhouses will front on Evergreen Road,2nd and 3rd Streets. The proposed Development Review permits would require approval of several exceptions to Development Standards(without the necessity of any variances), as authorized by LODS 23.605. A detailed description of the proposed exceptions is provided in the applicant's narrative(Exhibit 44), and will be discussed later in this report. • Roofing material for the residential development. The applicant is proposing composition roofing for townhouses,whereas LODS 23.I05(3)(c)requires materials other than composition asphalt be used in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District. • Frontage and lot width requirements for townhouses on a public street. LODS 18.020(1) requires that every lot maintain a minimum of 25' frontage on a public street. As Exhibit 6 4111 illustrates,the proposed exception to this standard has two components, as follows: - Lots 12-20 are platted in the center of the site along a private street,without the required frontage on a public street,LODS 18.020(1). - All lots, except Lots 1, 11, 12,20, 21,29,30 and 41,are narrower than the minimum 25' lot width requirement of the above standard. These lots range between 17' to 20' in width, with Lots 34 and 35 measuring 23.42'. • Setback requirements for townhouses. LOC 48.10.310(1)requires a minimum of 25' setback for structures in the EC zone when adjacent to zoned R-7.5. As Exhibit 7(A) illustrates, Building 4 is located adjacent to the R-7.5 zone at the southwest corner. The applicant is proposing an exception to this standard in order to reduce the 25' setback to 13'. • Storefront appearance for the commercial building. LODS 23.110(2)requires that new buildings fronting on streets or alleys be designed for pedestrian use by creating storefront appearance on the ground floor. This may be achieved by designing 80% of the ground floor abutting pedestrian ways as storefront with display windows and entryways, and by special placement of windows along sidewalks. Due to the existing topography on 2nd Street, it is not possible to design a continuous storefront along the eastern elevation on 2nd. i LU 00-0007 Page 2 of 29 • Building material for the upper story of the commercial building. The applicant is proposing the upper story of the commercial building to be all masonry instead of wood and glass,as required by LODS 23.110(3)(b). • Landscaping for commercial component of the project. LODS 9.020(1)requires a minimum 15% landscaping of the net buildable land in commercial projects. The applicant is proposing an 8.87% landscaping. 4. An approval to remove approximately 47 trees in order to accommodate the proposed development. II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: Goal 1: Citizen Involvement Goal 2: Land Use Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources Section 2: Vegetation Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Section 3: Landslides, Erosion and Unstable Soils Goal 8: Parks and Recreation Goal 9: Economic Development Goal 10: Housing • Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services Section 2: Storm Water Management Section 3: Water Treatment and Delivery Section 4: Wastewater Collection and Treatment Goal 12: Transportation 1984 Comprehensive Plan, Commercial Land Use Policies, Specific Commercial District Policies: East End Community Business District Policies B. City of Lake Oswego Zoning Code(LOC Chanter 48): LOC 48.02.015 Definitions LOC 48.02.025—48.02.085 Interpretation, Regulations and Procedures, Delegation LOC 48.02.105 Revocation of Approval LOC 48.10.300-48.10.315 EC(East End General Commercial District)Zone Description LOC 48.18.470-48.18.490 Planned Development Overlay LOC 48.20.530(2) Vision Clearance C. City of Lake Oswego Development Code(LOC Chanter 49): LOC 49.16.015 Definitions LOC 49.16.020 Application of Code LOC 49.16.025 Authority of Planning Director LU 00-0007 Page 3 of 29 LOC 49.16.035 Development Permit Required LOC 49.20.105 Ministerial Development • LOC 49.20.110 Minor Development LOC 49.20.115 Major Development LOC 49.22.200 Burden of Proof LOC 49.22.205 Development Standards LOC 49.22.210 Review Criteria for Ministerial Developments LOC 49.22.215 Review Criteria for Minor Developments LOC 49.22.220 Review Criteria for Major Developments LOC 49.22.225 Condition of Approval LOC 49.30.500-49.30.510 Application Requirements LOC 49.36.700- 49.36.720 Application Procedures LOC 49.40.900 - 49.44.920 Review by Hearing Body/Notice of Public Hearing LOC 49.46.1000-49.46.1035 Hearings before a Hearing Body LOC 49.56.1300-49.56.1310 Effects of Approval/Denial of Development Permit LOC 49.58.1400-49.58.1430 Compliance with Approved Permit D. City of Lake Oswego Development Standards: 5.005-5.040 Street Lights 6.005-6.040 Transit System 7.005-7.040 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access 8.005-8.040 Park and Open Space 9.005-9.040 Landscaping, Screening and Buffering 11.005-11.040 Drainage for Major Development 13.005-13.040 Weak Foundation Soils • 14.005-14.040 Utilities 16.005-16.040 Hillside Protection 18.005-18.040 Access 19.005-19.040 On-Site Circulation—Driveways and Fire Access Roads 20.005-20.040 On-Site Circulation—Bikeways, Walkways and Accessways 23.005-23.605 Downtown Redevelopment District Design Standards E. City of Lake Oswego Systems Development Charges(LOC Chapter 391: LOC 39.06 Collection F. City of Lake Oswego Subdivision Ordinance(LOC Chanter 421: LOC 42.03.050 Local Residential Streets—General Standards LOC 42.03.055 Local Residential Streets—Specific Standards LOC 42.03.060 Grades LOC 42.08.400 Sidewalks G. City of Lake Oswego Sian Ordinance(LOC Chapter 471: LOC 47.08 Regulation of Temporary Signs i LU 00-0007 Page 4 of 29 H. City of Lake Oswego Tree Cutting Ordinance(LOC Chanter 55): • LOC 55.02.020 Definitions LOC 55.02.035 Tree Removal in Conjunction with Major or Minor Development Permit LOC 55.02.041 Prohibition of Tree Removal of Trees Greater than 12 Inches,Exception LOC 55.02.080 Criteria for Issuance of Permits III. FINDINGS A. Existing Conditions/Background: 1. The site is approximately 2.11 acres(91,781 square feet)in size,and is commonly known as Block 136 of the First Addition Nat,excluding the Key Bank property to the west, Exhibit 1. As a part of this application,the public alley south of the Key Bank building will be partially vacated in order to accommodate the proposed development, and is included in the overall site area calculation. 2. The site is surrounded by A Avenue(a major arterial)to the north,2nd and 3rd Streets(major collectors)to east and west,respectively,and Evergreen Road(neighborhood street)to the south. 3. The site is roughly rectangular,with a variety of commercial buildings on it; however, all have • been demolished to facilitate the present application. 4. The site is gently sloping from north to south,dropping in elevation from 124' to approximately 104' at the southeast corner,Exhibit 4. There are approximately 50 trees on the site,whereas the site analysis plan(Exhibit 4)only discusses 23 trees. Of 23 trees identified,all measure 10"or greater in diameter at breast height(DBH). Of this number, the proposed site plan will retain two trees, including the 16"Washington Hawthorne on 2nd Street and the 36" Siberian Elm on 3rd Street,Exhibit 7. 5. The surrounding land uses and zones are as follows: North: A Avenue and a mix of retail and office commercial uses(EC) South: Evergreen Road and a mix of single and multifamily residential(R-0) Southwest: Single family residential(R-7.5) East: 2nd Street and general retail/grocery store(EC) West: 3rd Street and office commercial(EC) 6. All public utilities and services,including water,sanitary and storm sewer and streets are available to serve the proposed development. These issues would be discussed in more detail later in this report. 410 LU 00-0007 Page 5 of 29 B. Compliance with Criteria for Approval: • The proposed requests are classified as follows, lot line adjustment as ministerial,Development Review permits as minor development, and the 41-lot planned development as major development. As per LOC 49.22.200, the applicant for a development permit shall bear the burden of proof that the proposal complies with all applicable review criteria or can be made to comply with applicable criteria by imposition of condition of approval. The applicants has provided substantial information, as required by LOC 49.22.210, LOC 49.22.215, LOC 49.22.220,49.30.500-49.30.510 and LOC 49.36.700-49.36.710 to enable staff to perform a thorough evaluation to determine compliance with applicable criteria, listed on pages 3-5 of this report. Per LOC 49.22.220, the Development Review Commission must consider the following criteria when evaluating a major development: 1. A major development shall comply with: a. Any applicable regulatory policies of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan; The applicable policy groups are listed on pages 3-5 of this report. Staff finds that the applicant's narrative(Exhibit 44)has thoroughly and adequately addressed all relevant Plan policies. Therefore, no further analysis of these policies is necessary at this time. b. The requirements of the zone in which it is located; 1. East End General Commercial District 4111 LOC 48.10.300-48.10.315- EC Zone Description The applicant has thoroughly addressed the requirements of the EC zone in the narrative, Exhibit 44. General commercial uses(retail, restaurants and offices), and residential uses at R-0 density with a maximum 3.0 FAR(floor area ratio)are all outright permitted uses in the zone. LOC 48.310.310(2) also prescribes a maximum FAR of 3.0 for commercial uses. As Exhibits 7 and 45 demonstrate,the residential component has a FAR of approximately 1.58 (to be averaged over the entire townhouse site), and the total development will maintain a FAR of approximately 1.07, well within the limits of the Code. The actual FAR on individual townhouse lots range from a low 1.53 FAR for the 20'- wide end units to a high of 2.25 FAR for the 17'-wide units. There is no maximum lot coverage in the EC zone. As Exhibits 10, 13, 16, 19, 22 and 25 illustrate, all commercial and residential buildings comply with the maximum 45'-60' height limit of the EC zone,LOC 48.10.310(5). The commercial building ranges in height from approximately 35' to 43' (all measured to the ridgeline),while the townhouses range from approximately 34' to 38' in height. In addition, LOC 48.10.310(5) prescribes a height limit of 35 feet in the EC zone when a structure is within 120 feet of a lot zoned R-7.5. Building 4 and the southerly unit in Building 5 are subject to the maximum 35' height limitation. As Exhibits 7(A), 19 and 22 illustrate, these buildings comply with the 35' maximum height. • LU 00-0007 Page 6 of 29 Whereas, in general,there are no setback requirements in the EC zone, LOC 48.10.310(1)prescribes 111111 special setbacks for structures when a property is adjacent to a residential zone. The property to the southwest corner of the site is zone R-7.5;therefore, a 25' setback is required at the southwest corner of Lot 30, Exhibit 6. The applicant is requesting approval of an exception to this standard, as authorized by LODS 23.605, in order to reduce the 25 setback to a minimum of 13'. A detailed analysis of related issues in support of this request is provided in the applicant's narrative, Exhibit 44. Staff supports the proposed exception for the following reasons: • The intent of the 25-foot setback requirement is to provide a buffer between a single family residential use and a more intensive use,typically a commercial, institutional or industrial use. Since LOC 49.16.015 defines townhouses as attached single family dwellings;the proposed residential project is similar in character to the existing dwelling on the adjacent site to the southwest. • As Exhibit 32 illustrates,the proposed setback area will be heavily landscaped in order to create a visually engaging streetscape at the intersection of Evergreen Road and 3rd Street. • Locating Building 4 at 13' from the southwest corner of the site is not unreasonable,and to require the 25-foot setback at that location would potentially limit the development potential of this property and reduce project density. To further enhance the streetscape on Evergreen Road, the applicant is proposing a public court yard at the entry to open space Tract"C". As Exhibit 32 illustrates,this area will be heavily landscaped, including seating walls and benches in the • Tract and within public right of way. LOC 48.10.315(5) prescribes that specific conditions for each commercial area identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map and text of Volume I of the Comprehensive Plan are made a part of Chapter 48 and are conditions and limitations of the zone. These policies are adequately addressed in the applicant's narrative(Exhibit 44); therefore, no further analysis is necessary. 2. Planned Development Overlay LOC 48.18.470-Purpose,Applicability LOC 48.18.470(2) requires that all major residential development proposals of 20 or more units on four or more acres be processed as a planned development. Since the proposed townhouse project has a density of 41 lots, it is required to be processed as a planned development. It is important to note that the planned development overlay by itself does not change the character of the development, nor does it establish any special requirement in the project. The only significant contribution of the overlay is that it requires the applicant to create a homeowners association or similar organization to maintain the proposed open space network in the project. LOC 48.18.475-Procedures LOC 48.18.475(1)requires the establishment of zone requirements(special site development standards)which would be applicable to the proposed planned development. These requirements may be adopted either by referring to existing standards of the underlying zones or by creating special zoning standard for this project. LU 00-0007 Page 7 of 29 The EC zone does not prescribe any setbacks,except adjacent to the R-7.5 zone, lot dimension, lot • area or density standards. Therefore, the zone requirements for the proposed planned development will only include the following requirements: • FAR: 3.0 • Height: 35' for Lots 11 and 30-34 45' for others • Setbacks: 13' (at southwest corner of Lot 30) 0' for others LOC 48.18.480-Special Requirements As Exhibits 6 and 7 illustrates,the applicant is proposing a private open space system consisting of two open space Tracts in the project, including Tract B(7,325 square foot) and Tract C (578). The open space will include significant landscaping and a meandering pedestrian pathway through the site from A Avenue to Evergreen Road. The creation of private open space system requires a homeowners' association or similar organization to be established for the maintenance of these areas. The applicant will be required to establish such an organization and submit the covenants,conditions and restrictions(CC&Rs)and bylaws of that organization for review and approval of staff, prior to approval of the final plat. This document should address the ownership, use and maintenance issues associated with open space Tracts"B" and"C". It should also provide the City an enforcement • authority to assure reasonable maintenance of the open space area, at the owners' expense, should the homeowners association fail to provide the necessary maintenance. 3. Supplementary Provisions LOC 48.20.530- Vision Clearance This standard prohibits the installation of any object, including landscaping, that will be higher than 30' above the level of the centerline of the adjacent streets. This standard applies to all access points on public streets and existing intersections. As Exhibits 7 and 32 illustrate,the proposed site and landscape plans are designed to comply with the requirement of this standard. The landscaping at all intersections should be continuously maintained in order to assure long term compliance with this standard. c. The Development Standards applicable to major developments; Since the site does not contain any floodplains,the Floodplain Standard is not applicable. The applicant has provided substantial information to evaluate the application's compliance with the applicable Development Standards. This report will address those standards that require additional discussion or where modifications to the applicants'proposal are recommended. • LU 00-0007 Page 8 of 29 1 Building Design- (2.005-2.040) This standard is supplemented by the Downtown Redevelopment District Design Standards (LODS 23)which will be discussed in detail later in this report. Street Lights-(5.005-5.040) The street and site lighting requirements on the site are regulated by the Downtown Redevelopment District Design Standards(LODS 23). LODS 23.305(1)will be satisfied by the installation of ornamental street lights(acorn)on all streets surrounding the site, Exhibits 7 and 40. Any new signal poles on A Avenue will match the street light poles. Staff recommends that manufacturer of street lights provide optional "top side" and "house side" internal shields in order to reduce the adverse effects of light trespass and glare on the proposed townhouses. The glare protection should be required as a condition of approval for the light fixtures on 2nd and 3rd Streets and Evergreen Road. Along the internal private streets,the applicant is proposing Sternberg Park Ridge/Scottsdale style fixtures with downward lighting that would minimize glare onto the nearby townhouses, Exhibit 40. Staff notes some inconsistencies on the preliminary photometric plan (Exhibit 37) in regard to information in the legends box and details on the plan. The applicant will need to submit a final photometric plan to reconcile these inconsistencies to the satisfaction of staff prior to issuance of any building permits. Transit System- (6.005-6.040) 1110 A Avenue is a major transit route. There are existing sidewalks along the site frontage on all abutting streets. As Exhibit 7 illustrates, the applicant is proposing to replace all existing sidewalks in compliance with the requirements of LODS 23.305(3). Brick paving and 2' square scoring pattern will be incorporated into sidewalk design at all major intersections,with the remainder of sidewalks designed to match the existing A Avenue Demonstration Street Project theme in conformance with LODS 23.510(2). In addition,the proposed public pedestrian accessway through the site will provide adequate access from A Avenue to Evergreen Road and the new Millennium Park to the southeast. Off-Street Parking,Loading and Bicycle Access-(7.005-7.040) The applicant has provided a detailed analysis of the parking requirement in Exhibit 44(page 36-38) demonstrating compliance with the requirements of this standard. Townhouses: Since townhouses are defined as attached single family dwellings,only one parking space per unit is required (including the space in the garage). Therefore,the proposed 41-unit townhouse project requires a total of 41 spaces. As Exhibits 7 and 44 demonstrate,the townhouses are designed with a mixture of one and two-car garages meeting the requirements of this standard. In addition, the applicant is proposing a 4-space guest parking lot at the north end of the westerly private street,between Buildings 2 and 5. Staff notes that no on-street parking spaces need to be set- aside for residential parking purposes. Office/Retail/Restaurant uses: The total parking requirement for the 16,844 square foot mixed-use • commercial development is 84 spaces. However,this total can be reduced to a minimum of 55 LU 00-0007 Page 9 of 29 spaces by using several modifiers as listed in LOSD 7.020(1)(e)and LODS 23.405, including transit availability, pedestrian access and location in the downtown area. As Exhibits 7 and 27 illustrate, • the proposed site plan provides a total of 61 parking spaces to meet the requirements of this standard, including 38 spaces on site(with 19 spaces in the underground garage)and 23 spaces on the abutting streets along the site frontage. The use of on-street parking is allowed by LODS 23.405(1)(e). Park and Open Space- (8.005-8.040) All major residential development are required to provide open space in an aggregate amount equal to at least 20%of their gross land area, LODS 8.020(1). As Exhibits 7, 44 and 46 demonstrate, the townhouse project provides 22% open space, including Tracts"B"and"C". These Tracts would be fully landscaped and would contain a paved pathway providing a pedestrian accessway from A Avenue to Evergreen Road. The balance of the open space land would consist of landscape areas around the proposed townhouses. The future homeowners association would maintain the open space areas. The commercial project requires a minimum of 15% open space, LODS 8.020(1). However,the standard allows the 15% percent landscaping requirement to meet the open space requirements when no Distinctive Natural Area(DNA), Protection Open Space or Public Open Space or public parkland is located on the site. As there are no natural resources on the site,this standard will be met by the landscaping requirements, as discussed below. Landscaping,Screening and Buffering- (9.005-9.040) Development projects in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District must comply with the requirements of this standard and LODS 23.305. LODS 9.020(1)requires a minimum of 15% landscaping of the net buildable land in commercial projects. As explained in the applicant's narrative Exhibit 44,the applicant is requesting approval of an exception as authorized by LODS 23.605 in order to reduce the landscaping requirement from 15%to a minimum of 8.87%. Staff concurs with the applicant and supports the request for the following reasons: • The site area and the existing topography do not readily lend themselves to comply with the 15% landscaping on site. The proposed building is designed to take full advantage of the site conditions by incorporating an underground parking structure. • The project will fully improve and landscape the partially paved abutting public alley to the west. As Exhibits 7 and 32 illustrate,the proposed improvements include a pedestrian pathway, lighting, extensive landscaping, benches, art display area and basalt veneered retaining walls. • The improved alley area measures approximately 2,146 square feet, which if it were added to the commercial site would provide a combined landscaping of approximately 19% in the project. • The alley improvement combined with open space Tracts"B"and"C"will provide an attractive setting for the proposed pedestrian pathway connection from A Avenue to Evergreen Road and ultimately to the Millennium Park to the southeast. • LU 00-0007 Page 10 of 29 Staff finds the proposed landscape plan(Exhibit 32)provides a rich texture both in terms of variety • and size of plant material. Staffs primary with the plan relates to the proposed density of sequoia trees. While the trees may adapt well to the limited space available in terms of growth habit; however, in few years they may start uprooting curbs,pavement,retaining walls or abutting parking lots. The applicant needs to address this issue to the satisfaction of the Commission. In the townhouse project,all end units will be screened with 8'-10' tall Leyland cypress trees,and the terminus of the two north-southerly private streets and the south end of the large Key Bank building will be screened with 8'-I4' tall Giant sequoia trees and Columnar hornbeam trees. Staff finds that open space Tracts"B" and"C"will be heavily landscaped in order to create a special sense of place, including a textured paved pedestrian pathway and benches. In addition,Tract"C" will incorporate a pergola between Buildings 3 and 4 and basalt veneered seating walls in order to create a gateway along Evergreen Road to invite pedestrian into the project. As Exhibit 32 illustrates,the alley to the west of commercial building will be fully landscaped with plants, benches and art display area in order to create a public court yard on A Avenue. For street tree purposes, the applicant will continue the existing A Avenue theme along all abutting streets,Exhibit 32. In accordance with the requirements of LODS 8.030, all landscape materials should be guaranteed for a period of one twelve month growing season from the date of installation. The applicant should also provide a security in the amount of 5% of the total landscaping cost in order to ensure necessary replacement. In addition,the applicant should submit a schedule for continuing maintenance of all • plantings for review and approval of staff. Drainage Standard for Major Development-(11.005-11.040) This standard requires storm water quality and detention facilities in all new development. The requirements of this standard have been thoroughly addressed by the applicant in Exhibits 33 and 53. The Engineering staff has reviewed this information and concurs that the proposed drainage plan complies with all aspects of this standard. Detention facilities will not be required because the applicant has documented and analyzed recent improvements to the capacity of the downstream system. The improvements can adequately handle the design storm for the built-out drainage basin. [Note: the application's narrative(Exhibit 44)makes reference to an underground detention storage pipe. This improvement is not necessary]. The primary storm drain serving the site is a 12" main line located in Evergreen Road. The historic drainage pattern will remain unaltered by this development. After passing through a storm water quality facility, runoff from the residential development will be conveyed to a new manhole built over the 12" line in Evergreen Road near the intersection of 3rd Street. Runoff from the commercial development will be conveyed through a private line located in an easement along the 2nd Street frontage of the residential development, and connected to an existing catchbasin in 2nd Street, Exhibit 35. This catchbasin appears to be connected to a storm drain in 2nd Street that eventually connects to the 12"main in Evergreen Road. The applicant's engineer has been informed that the pipe in 2nd Street is of unknown size and condition,and might have to be repaired or replaced. The minimum standard for a public storm drain is 10"diameter. • LU 00-0007 Page 11 of 29 • The storm water quality aspect of this standard will be satisfied by collecting all surface runoff, including roof areas,and directing the flow to two underground treatment vaults manufactured by Storm Water Management,Exhibit 35. The drainage report(Exhibit 53)includes all necessary worksheets and a letter from Storm Water Management indicating that they have reviewed the plans and concur with the overall design concept. The smaller, commercial development drains to its own filter vault near 2nd Street, and the larger, residential development will direct its runoff to a vault in the southwest corner of the site. The systems are separate to preclude any difficulties that could arise if the commercial building is spun off from the residential development. Periodic maintenance and replacement of the filter media will be performed through a private agreement between the applicant and Storm Water Management for the commercial development. The CC&R's for the residential development should also incorporate appropriate provisions that identify the needs and responsibilities for maintaining the proposed storm water quality facility(filter vault)as part of the homeowners'commonly shared maintenance activities. Weak Foundation Soils- (13.005-13.040) The entire site has been identified as having weak foundation and unstable soils condition on the City of Lake Oswego soil classification map. The applicant has provide a geotechnical report (Exhibit 54)which states that the site is suitable for the proposed mixed-use project. Staff recommends that the applicant incorporate all design recommendations listed in the report into the final site,building and utility plans for review and approval of staff. Utilities - (14.005-14.040) The applicant's narrative(Exhibit 44)and the preliminary utility plans(Exhibits 32-36) indicate that 40 adequate streets,water and sanitary sewer facilities are available and can be extended to service the development. The development of this project will involve significant utility construction, upgrades, and relocations of the existing facilities. [Note: A significant portion of the anticipated improvements would be provided by the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency(LORA), such as the re-routing of a sanitary sewer line and the A Avenue street improvements along the site frontage, including the traffic signal at the intersection of 2nd Street, pursuant to the 1988 agreement between LORA and Gene Wizer. LORA has agreed to the assignment of this agreement to the applicant]. The preliminary utility plans have evolved from several meetings with the Engineering staff. The highlights are as follows: Sanitary Sewer: Exhibit 34 illustrates the abandonment of two existing public sewer lines. One runs through the site along the existing alley and the other cuts across the southeast corner of the block. Existing offsite flows from the north will be re-routed through the new commercial parking lot and channeled to the existing 8" line in 2nd Street. The existing alignment of the 8" line located between A Avenue and the new commercial parking lot will remain the same,but the pipe has deteriorated and will be replaced. The residential portion of the development will require the construction of standard 6" and 8" public sewers lines on the site. Each townhouse lot will have its separate service line. The new collection system will replace the existing line that cuts across the southeast corner of the site, and connect to the existing manhole at 2nd Street and Evergreen Road. • LU 00-0007 Page 12 of 29 When a development requires the diversion of sewage from one pipe to another,the second pipe's 41) capacity must be analyzed. If there is a net loss in system capacity, the applicant must upgrade the downstream system to the extent necessary to recapture the lost capacity. The City reserves the right to require a capacity analysis of the downstream system that will be affected by the proposed re- routing. If the City Engineer deems capacity improvements necessary, then the final construction plans will be required to incorporate upgrades of the pipe sizes to retain system capacity at the applicant's expense. Staffs review of the preliminary plan is not to be construed as an approval of pipe sizes, slopes,or other specific design elements. Water System and Hydrants: Water system improvements are illustrated on Exhibit 33. The site is surrounded by 6" and 8"water mains,and the development of the site will involve the construction of a straightforward extension of the public system into the site. New hydrants are located at strategic locations,and are subject to the Fire Marshal's final review and approval when the final construction plans are submitted. The internal system will be fed from two directions in order to minimize the probability of interrupted emergency supply. Each residential unit will have its own water meter. In addition,the applicant proposes a residential sprinkler system in each townhouse unit. Frontage Streets: The existing streets surrounding the site are curbed and,with the exception of 3rd Street,have sidewalks. The project involves major reconstruction of the existing sidewalks and curbs in order to conform to the 1994 Concept Plan for A Avenue Demonstration Street Project, as required by LODS 23.510(32). [Note: The A Avenue improvements will proceed under a separate City contract, and is not strictly speaking a part of this land use application. The City Council authorized the Redevelopment Director to prepare design and construction contracts at its April 25 • meting,with a possible start date as early as August,2000]. The scope of the proposed street improvements is illustrated on Exhibits 7 and 32-36. There are currently only 9 marked parallel parking stalls on 2nd Street,primarily because most of the existing curbline is interrupted by driveway cuts. An angled-parking plan was originally explored on this street, but it was found to be unacceptable because the bumper overhangs would have encroached onto the new sidewalks. [Note: Angled parking remains a viable option on the east side of 2nd Street when Block 137(Wizer Shopping Center) is redeveloped. However, such a plan may potentially require the relocation of the shopping center's west wall at the street level]. No intersection improvements have been recommended in the traffic study(Exhibits 49 and 50)as a part of the present application. No additional right of way will be required for street improvements; however,public access and utility easements will be required for the public sitting areas at Evergreen Road in open space Tract"C"and at various locations where the sidewalk or other utilities may meander into the site. Exhibits 5-7 illustrate the location of proposed easements. Staff notes that a public access easement would also be required where the proposed pedestrian pathway crosses the northwest corner of Lot 12. The final placement and dimensions of all necessary easements will be decided at the time of approval of final construction plans and the final plat for townhouse planned development to the satisfaction of staff. Internal Streets: All internal streets are designed to be private; however,they will be constructed to public street standards. The site is currently bisected by a paved public alley. The alley serves as the access to a basement storage area on the abutting Key Bank site to the west(outside the proposed • development area). The development on the site is contingent upon partial vacation of the alley,and replacing it with a new pedestrian pathway in a slightly different location, Exhibit 7. The LU 00-0007 Page 13 of 29 Commission's approval of this project will prompt staff to initiate appropriate vacation proceedings by the City Council. Staff finds that the pedestrian connection will be open to the public, and the historic access to the above referenced basement will be preserved through the parking lot of the commercial phase of the project. Other aspects of the internal street system will be discussed under LODS 19 later in this report. Other Utilities: All new utilities are required to be placed underground, and the vacation of the alley will involve abandoning or re-routing the overhead utilities in order to accommodate the proposed development. The applicant,LORA,and the utility companies are currently investigating strategies for undergrounding and relocating existing utilities. The proposed private street system (Tract A)will become a public utility easement, Exhibit 6. If a particular section of overhead wires cannot be placed underground with this development for some unforeseen reason,the developer should be required to sign an agreement to cooperate and participate in the cost of underground conversion at a later time. The agreement should be binding on the current owner and it should run with the land. Utility Construction Phasing: Staff understands that the applicant intends to construct the development in two phases. Efficient and prudent construction practice normally dictates that all present conflicting infrastructure be re-routed first,followed by the installation of successive layers of the public and private utilities. Underground utility work is typically completed before any building permits are issued. However,this project is atypical in several respects. The commercial structure on A Avenue, for example,does not rely on the infrastructure that will be necessary to build the townhouses, so its building permit could be issued independently. Likewise,a particular townhouse cluster on one street could be built and become available for occupancy(assuming all its supporting infrastructure, sidewalks, and landscaping are installed), before another cluster on 1110 different street is finished. Therefore, staff recommends that the applicant be required to submit a construction phasing schedule, subject to review and approval by staff,prior to approval of the final construction plans or issuance of any building permits. The schedule shall detail what tasks will be completed before occupancy of a particular structure is permitted. As an example,the occupancy of the central cluster of townhouses (Building 2)should be contingent on paving its vehicular access, installing its front and rear landscaping, and finishing the curb and sidewalk improvements to 2nd Street. Hillside Protection-(16.005-16.040) The site is a gently sloping property,as illustrated on Exhibit 4. Even though the entire site has been identified as having weak foundation and unstable soils condition on the City of Lake Oswego soil classification map,the geotechnical report(Exhibit 54)submitted as a part of this application states that the site is fully suitable for the proposed mixed-use project. Staff recommends that the applicant incorporate all design recommendations listed in the report into the final site, building and utility plans for review and approval of staff. Access- (18.005-18.040) LODS 18.020(1)requires that every lot maintain a minimum of 25' frontage on a public street. As Exhibit 6 illustrates,the townhouse project is designed to gain access through several private streets and the majority of the lots do not have the minimum 25' frontage on public streets. As authorized by LODS 23.605,the application is requesting approval of two exceptions to the requirement of this standards, as follows: LU 00-0007 Page 14 of 29 • • The central cluster of townhouses, Lots 12-20,is platted without the required frontage on a public street,LODS 18.020(1). • All lots,except Lots I, 11, 12,20,21,29, 30 and 41, are narrower than the required minimum 25' lot width of LODS 18.020(1). These lots range from 17' to 20' in width,with Lots 34 and 35 measuring 23.42'. The applicant has thoroughly addressed the requirements of LODS 23.605(1)for the above exceptions in Exhibit 44. Staff supports the applicant's request for the following reasons: • The site is located at the heart of downtown Lake Oswego, a unique urban environment adjacent to the Millennium Park. The site layout and dimensions do not readily lend themselves to the standard subdivision design,as the primary design objective is to provide a dense and lively urban setting in close proximity to the park and commercial activities. • The proposed lots maintain a minimum of 17' width, as required by LODS 18.020(1). The Commission should note that this standard was amended in 1998 in order to establish less restrictive lot frontage requirement for townhouse projects by reducing the standard from 25' to 17'. However, it seems that the EC zone was inadvertently omitted from the list of zones where the new standards apply. The affected zones include DD,R-0, R-2, R-3 and R-5. Staff finds that since the EC zone allows residential developments at R-0 density(minimum 4 units), it is reasonable to treat the EC zone similar to the R-0 zone, where the 17' width is allowed. • • All private streets will be constructed to the same structural standards as a public street and will be functionally equivalent. The major residential accesses will be located on 2nd and 3rd Streets near Evergreen Road, and the commercial access will be on 2nd Street approximately 110' south of A Avenue. The traffic study(Exhibit 49)does not identify any problems with the chosen access points. LODS 18.020(2)-(4)prescribe standards for access design and traffic impact issues. The applicant has provided a comprehensive traffic impact analysis prepared by DKS Associates, dated March 31, 2000(Exhibit 49),and a memorandum dated April 20,2000(Exhibit 50). The Engineering staff has reviewed this information and concurs with its findings and conclusions. Staff had originally directed the applicant to take a long term,comprehensive look at the A Avenue corridor;therefore, in addition to the project impacts,the reports also include scenarios for redevelopment of Blocks 137 and 138 to the east. The studies are a culmination of a continuing effort to address a number of issues raised by staff, Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT), and the neighborhood. As a whole,the level of detail found in these documents is commensurate with their value as a long term planning tool. The reports analyze the project's impact on ten major and minor intersections in the area. The level of service(LOS) is described in various tables. [Note: LOS is defined by average delay in signalized intersections and by the most delayed turning movement in unsignalized intersections]. The tables include the present day baseline performance,and run the range through eight progressive scenarios culminating with full build-out in 2017(of all three blocks). The proposed mitigation • improvements within the A Avenue corridor includes exclusive lane designations,signal interconnection,a new signal at 2nd Street and A Avenue,and signal cycle adjustments. It is also LU 00-0007 Page 15 of 29 expected that parking will eventually be prohibited on the north side of A Avenue between State Street and 1st Street. Page 32 of Exhibit 49 provides a succinct summary of the report's conclusions and recommendations. All intersections currently operate within the City's minimum operating standard,which is LOS E. It is important to note that no street or intersection capacity improvements are required to compensate for the traffic generated by the site. In the short term,when the site and Block 138 are developed, two intersections will undergo measurable capacity degradation: • State Street/A Avenue will degrade from LOS D to E. • 1st/A Avenue will degrade from LOS B to F. At its April 25 meeting,the City Council authorized a design contract for the A Avenue improvements between State and 3rd Streets. The scope of work includes the recommended capacity improvements noted above,and the work is expected to be substantially complete prior to the commencement of the development. With these improvements,the above noted intersections are expected to operate at LOS C when all three blocks are redeveloped(Table on page 23 of Exhibit 49). As explained in the applicant's narrative(Exhibit 44),the proposed mixed-use project consists of 41 townhouses and approximately 16,850 square feet of office and retail space. The retail space could include a small area(approximately 2,744 square feet)devoted to a food service, such as a bagel shop. To represent a worse case scenario, the trip generation estimates in the traffic reports were derived by employing a"fast food" rate found in the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)trip generation manual. Proposed uses will likely generate less traffic than a typical fast food establishment. Therefore,the overall estimate for the site will likely be less than what is reported in • Exhibit 50, and the conclusions are indeed a worse case scenario. With the inclusion of approximately 2,744 square foot fast food use,the site could contribute 110 PM peak hour trips to the overall street system in the neighborhood,compared to an estimated 267 PM peak hour trips for the subsequent development of Block 138. In addition,only 56% of the site- generated trips will be passing through the two intersections noted above,according to the trip distribution analysis. It is; therefore,not possible to attribute the above LOS degradation at 1st Street/A Avenue intersection to the traffic generated by the site. The site is nevertheless a significant player and bears some responsibility for capacity improvements. Based on the multiple use categories represented in the applicant's narrative(Exhibit 44)and traffic analysis,the street systems development charges(SDCs)for the site is an estimated $383,712. [Note: This figure is subject to a credit for pre-existing uses and the possible elimination of the fast-food restaurant component, which is singularly responsible for an SDC of$120,223]. Irrespective of the final calculation,this development will be contributing its fair share towards the construction of street capacity improvements. Regarding traffic mitigation for the Evergreen neighborhood to the south,the traffic report(Exhibit 49)contains a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan(NTM), including information on hourly traffic and speed counts for several consecutive days. These baseline data will play a valuable role in the future,because the City intends to monitor changes in the local traffic pattern as the three block area(Blocks 136-138) are re-developed. As an initial step, the NTM recommends the installation of a semi-diverter on the west leg of Evergreen Road at 4th Street "before occupancy of • the site". Staff's experience; however, is that the associated construction related traffic often has a LU 00-0007 Page 16 of 29 greater impact on local street livability than what will be attributable to the future residents of the 1111) site. Therefore,staff recommends that the semi-diverter be installed before any building permits are issued in order to deter the influx of construction traffic from using the neighborhood streets to the west. In addition,a traffic management plan should be required to sort out where construction workers will park, where material will be stockpiled,and whether any streets will need to be closed. It should be noted that the development of already approved projects in the downtown area,coupled with the proposed project on the site, will use up a great deal of the available intersection capacities along the A Avenue corridor. Even with the planned implementation of the short term mitigation measures listed in the preceding paragraphs,the intersections of State Street/A Avenue and A Avenue/Ist Street will degrade to LOS F by 2017. These failure designations are based on the "average delay" method. While other intersections along the corridor receive passing grades using the average delay method,the steady progression of experienced delay for individual turning movements is best illustrated in the Turn Movement Level of Service Summary tables at the conclusion of the April 20 memorandum (Exhibit 50). In this table, staff finds a number of LOS F's on the 1st Street through 4th Street approaches to A Avenue. The averaging method underreports the delays experienced on the minor approaches because they are diluted by the higher traffic volume on the major street. In real life,this means that drivers attempting to make a F-rated movement will have to wait through several signal cycles at the affected intersections. As pointed out in Exhibit 50,the recommended long-term mitigation measures for State Street/A Avenue are probably financially and politically unachievable. These improvements include adding a separate right turn lane at the southbound approach to State Street and A Avenue(necessitating the purchase of the properties at the northwest quadrant of the intersection), and constructing double left • and double through lanes at the northbound approach (necessitating the purchase of additional property,probably on the east side of State Street, to move the whole roadway further to the east). With these improvements,the intersection of State Street and A Avenue would return to LOS E. Staff notes that as long as the City retains a Comprehensive Plan policy requiring that its arterials do not degrade below LOS E,staff cannot assure that future applications on the remaining blocks can be successfully reconciled with applicable policies. On-Site Circulation—Driveways and Fire Access Roads-(19.005-19.040) This standard establishes specific design requirements for driveways serving single family dwellings, including the maximum driveway grade(20%), maximum cross-slope of a driveway (5%),and the maximum width of a driveway approach on the right of way(24'). In addition, it prescribes special design standards for driveways serving as private streets. The proposed private streets in Tract"A"(Exhibits 6 and)comply with all turning radius, slope,and pavement width design standards. As Exhibit 48 demonstrates,the Fire Marshal has not required turnarounds on the internal streets, because the site can be accessed from multiple directions and the townhouses will be individually sprinkled. This standard is satisfied. On-Site Circulation—Bikeways,Walkways and Accessways-(20.005-20.040) The proposed pedestrian Accessways through the site from A Avenue to Evergreen Road meet the requirements of this standard. The applicant will provide a public pedestrian easement over Tracts 11111 "A","B"and"C"to assure continued public access through the site;therefore,this standard is met. LU 00-0007 Page 17 of 29 Downtown Redevelopment District Design Standards—(23.005-23.605) This standard is applicable to the construction of new buildings within the Downtown • Redevelopment District. This standard supercedes LODS 2 [Building Design Standard], and LOC Chapter 47 [Sign Code]. In addition, landscaping,parking and street standards specified in this chapter are applicable [LODS 23.305,23.405, and 23.510, respectively]. Landscaping and parking issues have been previously discussed in this report. LODS 23.105 requires that building siting and massing create a village character by designing buildings containing elements of the Lake Oswego Style, [LODS 23, Appendix C]. LODS 23.110 prescribes that new buildings shall be at least two stories tall,shall use masonry as the predominant building material for walls on the ground floor,with upper stories constructed of wood and glass as the predominant building materials. Gabled or hipped roof forms are required with materials designed to appear to be slate,tile, shake or wood shingles. Buildings and entrances shall be oriented to pedestrian ways. Outdoor seating and display areas are encouraged to provide a sense of community and social interaction. Corner buildings are to compliment and be compatible with other corner buildings at the same intersection. Moldings, window casings and other trim elements shall be designed in a dimension and character which either exaggerate or illustrate a creative design concept or to match the scale of the new building, [LODS 23.110(5)]. This standard also requires curb extensions at intersections, where feasible,ornamental street lights, pedestrian friendly alleys, and other amenities consistent with the East End Redevelopment Standards. It also requires brick accents in sidewalks. The proposed unified site plan(Exhibit 7) • illustrates compliance with the requirements of these standards. The applicant has provided substantial information to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this standard. This information includes the narrative(Exhibit 44),and detailed graphic materials consisting of building elevations (Exhibits 8, 10, 13, 16, 19,22,25 and 26), site cross-sections (Exhibit 29), site and roof plans(Exhibits 7, 12, 15, 18,21,24 and 27),color boards(Exhibits 38- 43), and perspective(Exhibits 30 and 31)for the Commission's review and consideration. The design concept for residential phase borrow elements from the Lake Oswego styles combined to create a distinctive and eclectic building elevation that is well detailed and visually engaging. Individual units are offset from one another, and feature projecting elements such as bay windows, porches, iron-railed balconies and deck in order to create shadows and variety to the elevation. The buildings have asymmetrical composition,utilizing steeply pitched roofs,and have windows that are multi-paned above single paned sashes. They are segmented, with round and arched openings for accent purposes. All buildings take advantage of the sloping site topography to break the ridgeline between the gables into segments in order to breakdown the overall mass and length of the building. They also utilize a variety of siding materials, including horizontal lap siding, shingles and masonry. The use of masonry base with siding on the upper levels is commonly used in the Tudor style and provides a strong tie to the ground visually. Other elements of the Tudor and Art and Crafts styles used in the project, include small entries recessed into an arched opening, and bracketed porch roofs above the entries. The brick clad commercial building contains elements of the Oregon Rustic style in that it provides gabled dormers,asymmetrical bay sizes, and articulated cornices. The masonry is detailed with LU 00-0007 Page 18 of 29 different colors and textures on the storefront and upper levels,with solder courses separating and accenting the two levels. The building contains a series of sloped roofs that are visible from every direction. These roof elements are designed to create a visual connection to the roof pattern of the adjacent townhouses to the south. The commercial building is designed to provide an appealing storefront on A Avenue, 2nd Street and along the alley to the west. Staff finds that the commercial building design satisfies the requirements of LODS 23 relative to building materials,massing and scale. The use of natural materials in an Arts and Crafts style provides a rich texture and visually engaging facade,characteristic of the desired "Lake Oswego style." Mechanical equipment for townhouses is proposed to be located in the garage, and for the commercial building on the rooftop behind parapet walls. As explained earlier in this report,the applicant is requesting approval of several exceptions to the requirements of this standard, as authorized by LODS 23.605, as follows: • Roofing material for the residential development. The applicant is proposing composition roofing for townhouses,whereas LODS 23.105(3)(c)requires materials other than composition asphalt be used in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District, Exhibits 42 and 43. The proposed composition material consists of GAF Grand Canyon Shingles designed to provide a "rugged wood shake appearance", as illustrated on Exhibits 43 and 44. • Storefront appearance for the commercial building. LODS 23.110(2)requires new buildings fronting on streets or alleys be designed for pedestrian use by creating storefront appearance on the ground floor. This may be achieved by designing 80% of the ground floor abutting • pedestrian ways as storefront with display windows and entryways, and by special placement of windows along sidewalks. Due to the existing topography on 2nd Street, it is not possible to design a continuous storefront along this elevation. • Building material for the upper story of the commercial building. The applicant is proposing the upper story of the commercial building to be all masonry instead of wood and glass,as required by LODS 23.110(3)(b). Staff finds that the applicant has thoroughly addressed the requirements of LODS 23.605 in support of the above exceptions in Exhibit 44. Staff supports the applicant's requests because the development provides an exceptional design and quality project in downtown Lake Oswego. The townhouses are designed with high quality materials used on all elevations, rather than just on the front and end elevations that are customary for projects of this type. The proposed landscape plan (Exhibit 32) is very effective in creating a rich environment through the choice of plant material and variety in plant size. The planned improvements in the alley west of the commercial building and the landscaping in open space Tract"C"on Evergreen Road will create a well designed and visually interesting public courtyard and pathway through the site, connecting the active commercial uses on A Avenue to the Millennium Park to the southeast. • LU 00-0007 Page 19 of 29 d. Any additional statutory or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be 41111 applicable to the specific Major development application; 1. City of Lake Oswego System Development Charges (LOC Chapter 39): The applicant will be responsible for paying the routine system development charges(SDCs) according to the City's master fee schedule. Certain credits are allowed for pre-existing uses. The improvement component of the street SDC could be adjusted if the developer participates in the construction of qualifying street capacity(not cosmetic) improvements that have been identified on the City's Capital Improvement Plan. A Avenue improvements are listed in the 1999-2004 plan. The applicant's narrative(Exhibit 44) provides an inaccurate definition of a qualifying improvement. This standard and the Oregon statute from which it was derived contain a more stringent definition of qualifying improvements. As of the date of this report, the City has not determined the extent of legitimate credits and reductions if the applicant participates in the construction of capacity improvements. The City Engineer will perform final assessments prior to the issuance of any building permits. 2. City of Lake Oswego Subdivision Ordinance(Chapter 42): This standard establishes design requirements for improvements to public streets, including slope and other geometric design criteria for streets and intersections. This standard also establishes the minimum pavement width for a public street at 20 feet,with three-foot gravel shoulders, and additional width and features as required by the City Engineer, LOC 44.08.382. This Chapter has greater applicability to the construction of new streets than to the redevelopment • and upgrade of existing streets. The abutting streets already conform to the requirements of this chapter, except where sidewalk sections are missing. All gaps in the perimeter sidewalk system will be filled in by the proposed development; therefore,this standard is satisfied. 3. City of Lake Oswego Sign Code(LOC Chanter 47): This standard is superseded by the sign regulations of the Downtown Redevelopment District Design Standards of LODS 23.205. In response to staff suggestions regarding a comprehensive sign program for the project,the applicant has provided Exhibit 45. This information provides detailed and comprehensive sign criteria designed to assist future tenants of the commercial building with their signage needs. Based upon a review of the information in Exhibit 45, staff presents the following findings and recommendations in order to assure full compliance with the requirements of LODS 23.205: • All cornice signs should be limited to stainless steel, aluminum, brass, bronze or black iron materials. No plastic or Plexiglas cabinets or letters, or neon sings should be allowed. • The exterior signs should be placed within the designated areas shown on Elevation Sheets 1.1 and 1.2 of Exhibit 45. • The sign colors should be complementary to the overall color scheme of the commercial building, and should be limited to black,dark brown,dark green,white or gold leaf. 411 LU 00-0007 Page 20 of 29 0 • No signage should be allowed on the west elevation of the commercial building. This elevation has limited visibility due to the presence of the abutting commercial development to the west, and street trees along A Avenue. Staff finds that the proposed cornice sign on the north elevation provides adequate signage for future tenants. 4. City of Lake Oswego Develonment Code(Chanter 491: The application is composed of a ministerial (lot line adjustment), a minor development (development review permits for commercial and townhouses)and a major development(41-lot planned development) land use applications. The Development Code allows for the concurrent review of permits, LOC 49.44.905(4). Therefore,the Development Review Commission will review all applications concurrently. The applicant has substantial information and a complete application as illustrated in the exhibit section of this report. The applicant has also complied with all neighborhood notification and meeting requirements, Exhibits 56 and 57. The City has provided adequate public notice and an opportunity to comment on this application as required by LOC 49.44.920. No comments have been received as of the writing of this report. The final plan for the proposed lot line adjustment and the final plat for the townhouse planned development should be submitted to staff for review and approval within one year of the date of the Order reflecting the Commission's decision, LOC 49.58.1405. Upon written application, prior to expiration of the one-year period, the City Manager could grant a one-year time extension. • Additional extensions may be requested in writing and must be submitted to the Development Review Commission for review of the project for compliance with current law, development standards and compatibility with development that may have occurred in the surrounding area. The extension may be granted or denied and if granted, may be conditioned to require modification to bring the project into compliance with then current law and compatibility with surrounding development. If the applicant seeks to record the final plat for the planned development prior to completion of infrastructure, a financial security for 120% of the value of the public improvements will be required to be posted with the City before the City signs the plat [LOC 49.58.1415]. Furthermore, it is a long standing City policy not to allow the issuance of any building permits until all public improvements are completed and accepted, and"as-built"construction drawings have been submitted. The reason for delaying building permits until the infrastructure is completed is based upon public safety issues (adequate emergency access, fire protection). This policy is routinely incorporated into the conditions of approval. The Commission should note that the development of this project is contingent upon the City Council approving the proposed vacation of the public alley west of the site, from approximately the southeast corner of the Key Bank site to Evergreen Road. The applicant should seek no further permit activity until the City Council approves the vacation application. • LU 00-0007 Page 21 of 29 5. City of Lake Oswego Tree Cutting Ordinance(Chapter 55): LOC 55.02.041 -Prohibition of Tree Removal of Trees Greater than 12 Inches,Exception • LOC 55.02.080-Criteria of Issuance of Permits This ordinance is intended to preserve trees. Since the application was received under the Emergency Tree Ordinance,the requirements of LOC 55.02.041,which are designed to protect trees 12" or greater in diameter,also apply to the application. Only those trees that must be removed in order to site proposed improvements, including public and private utilities and services and structures will be granted tree cutting permits. As Exhibit 4 illustrates, there are approximately 50 trees on the site, the majority of which are elm and cherry trees. Of this total, 21 trees are 10"or greater in size, and of those two trees will be retained as part of the proposed development. Trees to be retained include the 16" Washington hawthorn on 2nd Street and the 36" Siberian elm on 3rd Street. Staff finds that the applicant has provided a thorough analysis of the applicable standards in Exhibit 44 and the arborist' report(Exhibit 55). As the preliminary landscape plan(Exhibit 32) illustrates, the applicant is planning to mitigate the proposed tree removal by planting approximately over 200 trees in the project, ranging in size from two to three inches in diameter for deciduous trees and six to 14' feet for evergreen trees. Even by discounting vine maples,which appear to have been included in the mitigation tree count, the proposed mitigation is approximately at 4:1 ratio which far exceeds the current requirements practiced by the City(1:1 ratio). This standard is satisfied. The applicant will be required to provide a revised tree removal plan identifying all trees that are to be removed during utilities installation and housing construction, per staff analysis above. Removal IP of any trees over 5" in diameter, measured 4.5' above ground, will be subject to a tree cutting permit application. In order to provide maximum protection to the trees be remain,the applicant will be required to install tree protection fencing, a 6' high chain link fence with metal posts, at the dripline of these trees. Any excavation within the root zone of these trees should occur under the supervision of the consulting arborist and staff. The tree protection fence should remain in place during the entire course of street and housing construction, and it should not be moved unless specifically authorized by the consulting arborist and staff. IV. CONCLUSION Based upon the information submitted by the applicants and findings presented in this report, staff concludes that LU 00-0007 can meet all applicable criteria for approval by the application of conditions of approval listed below. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of LU 00-0007, subject to the following conditions: A. Prior to receiving any further permit approvals on the site(including compliance with conditions B-G,below),the applicant/owner shall obtain City Council approval of the vacation of the public alley located in the center of the site,as illustrated on Exhibit 7. • LU 00-0007 Page 22 of 29 1 • B. Prior to Approval of Final Plan (Lot Line Adjustment).the Annlicant/Owner Shall: 1. Submit a final plan and legal descriptions (metes and bounds), to be specified on legal instruments for title transfer for recording with Clackamas County Clerk's Office) to City staff for review and signature of approval within one year of the date of this decision. Both documents shall be prepared as depicted in Exhibit 5 and shall reference this land use application -- City of Lake Oswego Community Development Department, File No. LU 00-0007. Upon written application, prior to expiration of the one-year period, the City Manager shall, in writing, grant a one-year extension. Additional extensions may be requested in writing and must be submitted to the City Manager for review of the project for conformance with current law, development standards and compatibility with development that may have occurred in the surrounding area. The extension may be granted or denied and if granted, may be conditioned to require modification to bring the project into compliance with then current law and compatibility with surrounding development. 2. Shall register the final plan and legal descriptions with the Clackamas County Surveyor's office within 30 days of receiving its signature of authorization by the City. 3. Record the lot line adjustment deed or agreement with the County Clerk's office within 30 days of registering the final plan and legal descriptions as required in Condition B(2), above, and submit as evidence of compliance with this condition, a copy of recorded lot line adjustment deed or agreement to the City. Failure to comply with the requirements • of this condition will render this approval void. 4. Identify the adjusted lots on the final plan and legal description as"Tracts 1, 2 and 3". C. Prior to Approval of Final Plat(Planned Development), the Annlicant/Owner Shall: 1. Demonstrate compliance with conditions B(1)-(4), above. 2. Illustrate the following information on the final plat: a. All necessary public and private easements, including public utility and access easements over Tracts "A",`B"and"C". The public easements shall be conveyed to the City in the plat's declaration. b. Site development limitations, as follows: i. Setbacks: 13' (at southwest corner of Lot 30) 0' for others ii. Building Height: 35' (Lots 11 and 30-34) 45' (all others) iii. FAR: 3.0 3. Complete the construction of all public and private improvements, or provide a financial 411 guarantee for their completion pursuant to LOC 49.58.1415. LU 00-0007 Page 23 of 29 4. Declare all private streets in Tract"A"as fire lane on the final plat, and designate the driveway as such to the satisfaction of Fire Marshal. • 5. Label open space Tracts"B"and"C"as"Private Open Space Tracts"B"and"C on the final plat. Provide the following notes on the plat: "Private Open Space Tract"B"and"C"are to be retained as a fully landscaped open space area to provide a scenic, aesthetic appearance; protect natural processes; provide passive recreational uses, or maintain the vegetation of the open space. The City may approve activities and improvements(including public and private pedestrian pathways)that enhance the natural qualities of the open space and meet the above purpose of the open space. Trees and other vegetation may be removed only after they have been shown to be dead or hazardous to life or property by a certified arborist,and after all necessary approvals (including a tree removal permit)have been obtained from the City. Improvements in this area,which are in keeping with the above purpose, including public and private utilities must be approved by the City of Lake Oswego. This note shall not restrict the maintenance activities required for the drainage easement portions of Tract"B"." 6. Provide plat restriction against removal of street trees(if they are planted outside of pubic right- of-way). 7. Submit the CC&Rs and bylaws of the homeowners association which address the ownership, use,and maintenance of the open space Tracts"B and"C", including an acknowledgement of the homeowners' responsibility to periodically maintain and recharge the storm water quality facility in Tract"B"according to the manufacturer's recommendations [as required by Condition • D(4)(q), below],for review and approval of staff. These documents shall also provide the City an enforcement authority to assure reasonable maintenance of these Tracts at the property owners' expense should the association fail to meet its maintenance responsibilities. D. Prior to Issuance of anv Building Permits.the Anulicant/Owner Shall: 1. Complete construction of all public and private underground utilities, as required by Condition C(3),above. 2. Submit final site plan and building elevations/details which illustrate design, materials and colors which are the same or substantially similar to those illustrated in Exhibits 7, 8, 10, 13, 16, 19,22,25-28 and 38-43 for review and approval staff. All mechanical equipment for townhouses shall be located inside the garages. 3. Submit a final site plan showing the location and methods of screening of all trash enclosures and mechanical equipment to the satisfaction of staff. All enclosures shall be designed in accordance with Exhibits 27 and 44. 4. Submit the following plans(including all supporting documentation and/or calculations)for review and approval of the City Engineer(prepared in accordance to the City's design standards and specifications): a. An underground utility conversion plan for all overhead cables in the alley and around the • perimeter of the site. If it is found that it is impractical to fully convert the overhead LU 00-0007 Page 24 of 29 utilities on the perimeter of the site to underground systems due to factors beyond the • applicant's/owner's or the City's control,then the applicant/owner shall sign an acknowledgement of the obligation to complete the conversions, and shall post a financial guarantee for its completion. The agreement shall be binding on the applicant and successors in interest. b. A detailed construction phasing schedule for the entire project. c. Sanitary sewer flow calculations to demonstrate that the proposed lines in 2nd Street are of adequate size to accept the diverted flows. d. Specifications for the proposed sanitary sewer pipe re-lining in the alley west of the proposed commercial structure. e. An internal street pavement design that can support the weight of loaded fire-fighting equipment. All private streets shall be designed for a 20-year pavement design life for based upon the prevailing soil conditions. f. Fire hydrants at locations specified by the Fire Marshal. g. Details for sidewalk patterns and brick accents in compliance with the 1994 Concept Plan for A Avenue Demonstration Street Project, as required by LODS 23 and illustrated on Exhibit 7. • h. Details, specifications,manufacturer's cut sheets and other information,as necessary, to adequately review proposed benches and other public amenities in the public right of way and alley, and/or in open space Tracts "B"and"C". i. A note on the final construction plans stating that the applicant will replace the existing storm drain line in 2nd Street if it is found substandard. j. A final construction traffic management plan for the project. The plan shall specifically address the issues of parking for construction workers, offsite staging areas, and road closures and detours. k. Final design for the semi-diverter on the west leg of the intersection of Evergreen Road and 4th Street. This obligation shall not be satisfied by providing a performance bond. L Submit a domestic fire sprinkler plan for the townhouse project. m. A final grading plan, in accordance with Exhibit 33. n. A final street(both public and private)and pathway lighting plan and photometric data in conformance with the requirements of LODS 23.305. All fixtures shall be designed with adequate cutoff shield to minimize potential glare onto the adjoining residential uses, including"house-side"and "top-side" internal shields in Acorn-style lights on Evergreen Road, and 2nd and 3rd Streets. So. Undergrounding of all utility vaults. LU 00-0007 Page 25 of 29 p. A maintenance schedule and plan for all storm water quality facilities. For the residential development, the project CC&Rs shall incorporate all maintenance requirements. 5. Provide a note on the final construction plans that the public pathway improvements in the alley and open space Tracts"B" and"C"shall be constructed as a part of infrastructure improvements for the townhouse development. 6. A final geotechnical report. Incorporate all recommendations of that report into the final site, building and construction plans. If construction will occur in the wet season, obtain and provide more specific recommendations from the geotechnical consultant and incorporate those recommendations into the final plans. 7. Submit a final landscape plan prepared in substantial compliance with Exhibit 32 for review and approval of staff. 8. All public utilities shall be sized to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 9. Submit a final tree removal plan showing all trees to be removed during utility installation and housing construction period. Removal of any trees 5"or greater in diameter, at 4.5' above ground, shall be subject to a tree cutting permit application. 10. Incorporate all tree protection measures as outlined in the arborist's report(55) into final construction plans, including the requirements for tree protection fencing. 11. Provide a note on the final construction plans to clearly inform the site contractors about the 410 necessity of preventing damage to the Washington hawthorn and Siberian elm trees, including bark and root zone. The contractors shall be subject to fines, penalties and mitigation for trees that are damaged or destroyed during construction. 12. Finalize a SDC agreement with the City and pay the agreed upon charges. E. Prior to any On-site Grading or Other Construction Activity,the Applicant/Owner Shall: 1. Install the semi-diverter on the west leg of Evergreen Road at 4th Street, as required by Condition D(4)(k), above. 2. Obtain a tree cuttingpermit for all trees 5"or greater in diameter. 3. Install tree protection measures as required by condition D(10), above. These measures shall remain in place throughout construction period. The tree protection fencing(a 6' high chain link fence with metal posts)shall be installed around the 16" Washington hawthorn on 2nd Street and the 36" Siberian elm on 3rd Street. Any excavation within the root zone of these trees shall occur under the supervision of the consulting arborist and staff. The tree protection fence shall remain in place during the entire course of street and housing construction, and it shall not be moved unless specifically authorized by the consulting arborist and staff. • LU 00-0007 Page 26 of 29 1 • F. Prior to Issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy.the Annlicant/Owner Shall: 1. Complete the construction of the balance of public and private improvements(including sidewalks,alley improvements and all street and pathway lights), as required by Condition C(3), above, provide the City with all certified"as-built"drawings conforming to the City's design standards,and receive a certification of completeness from the City. 2. Install all landscaping(including planting along the public pathway in the alley and open space Tracts"B"and"C", seating walls,trash receptacles, and benches)as illustrated on Exhibits 32 and 40, as modified by condition D(7), above, to the satisfaction of staff. The applicant/owner shall also submit an irrigation plan. 3. Provide a 1-year guarantee for all landscape materials(one twelve month growing season from the date of installation). Appropriate security in the amount of 5%of the total landscaping cost shall be provided by the applicant/owner. In addition, the applicant/owner shall submit a schedule for continuing maintenance of planting materials for review and approval of staff. 4. Submit a stamped survey(with final site contour elevations)to demonstrate compliance with the final grading plan for the commercial development, approved under Condition D(4)(m),above, to the satisfaction of the staff. 5. Provide legal descriptions and convey public easements over all water, storm and sanitary sewer services(including the relocated sewer line), if those easements have not already been conveyed • by the final plat. G. Prior to Installation of any Signs.the Applicant/Owner: 1. Obtain all necessary sign permits. The applicant/owner shall submit final sign elevations/details in accordance with Exhibit 45, and as modified below, for review and approval of staff: i. All cornice signs shall be limited to stainless steel, aluminum, brass, bronze or black iron materials. ii. The exterior signs shall be placed within the designated areas shown on Elevation Sheets 1.1 and 1.2 of Exhibit 45. iii. The sign colors shall be complementary to the overall color scheme of the commercial building, and shall be limited to black, dark brown, dark green, white or gold leaf. v. No signage shall be allowed on the west elevation of the commercial building. H. Miscellaneous provisions: 1. The approval of this project shall not imply approval of a particular design, product,material, size, method of work, or layout of public infrastructure except where a condition of approval has been devised to control a particular design element. i LU 00-0007 Page 27 of 29 EXHIBITS 1. Tax Map • 2. Vicinity Map 3. Title Sheet 4. Site Analysis 5. Lot Line Adjustment Site Plan 6. Preliminary Planned Development Plat for Townhouses 7. Unified Site plan for Commercial and Residential Phases 7(A) Unified Site Plan Showing the Boundary of the 35' Maximum Building Height Zone 8. Front and Rear Elevation Details for Townhouses 9. Typical Floor Plans for 17' and 20' Townhouses 10. Building 1 Elevations 11. Building 1 Lower Floor Plan 12. Building 1 Roof Plan 13. Building 2 Elevations 14. Building 2 Lower Floor Plan 15. Building 2 Roof Plan 16. Building 3 Elevations 17. Building 3 Lower Floor Plan 18. Building 3 Roof Plan 19. Building 4 Elevations 20. Building 4 Lower Floor Plan 21. Building 4 Roof Plan • 22. Building 5 Elevations 23. Building 5 Lower Floor Plan 24. Building 5 Roof Plan 25. Commercial Building Elevations 26. Commercial Building Enlarged Elevations& Section 27. Commercial Building Floor and Roof Plans 28. Details for Pergola, Sitting Walls and Monument Elevations and Sections, and Mailbox Elevation 29. Site Cross-sections(east-west and north-south) 30. Perspective from A Avenue and 2nd Street 31. Perspective from Evergreen Road and 3rd Street 32. Preliminary Landscape Plan 33. Preliminary Grading Plan 34. Preliminary Water System Plan 35. Prelimianary Sanitary Sewer Plan 36. Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan 37. Preliminary Composite Utility Plan 38. Preliminary Electrical Photometric Plan 39. Color/Material Board for Townhouses * 40. Color/Material Board for Commercial Building * 41. Color Board for Street Furniture/Cutsheet Board for Commercial Building * 42. Light Fixture Board for Townhouses * 43. GAF Materials Corporation Catalog for Grand Canyon Roofing Shingles for Townhouse * • LU 00-0007 Page 28 of 29 44. GAF Materials Corporation Large Sample of the Roofing Shingles for Townhouses * 45. Applicant's Narrative, dated April 19,2000 46. Project Comprehensive Sign Criteria 47. Project Land Area/Landscape/Building Calculations 48. Project Parking Calculations 49. Memorandum by City Fire Marshal, Phil Sample, dated March 20, 2000 50. Traffic Report by DKS Associates,dated March 31,2000 51. Addendum Traffic Report by DKS Associates, dated April 20, 2000 52. Letter by ODOT, dated February 4, 2000 53. Letter by ODOT, dated May 2, 2000 54. Preliminary Drainage Report by KPFF Consulting Engineers, dated March 24, 2000 55. Geotechnical Exploration Report by Kleinfelder, Inc., dated November 23, 1999 56. Tree Assessment/Arborist Report by Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants,Inc., dated November 30, 1999 57. Minutes of November 18, 1999,Neighborhood Meeting 58. Minutes of January 4, 2000,Neighborhood Meeting * Too Large to Reproduce Date of Application Submittal: January 21. 2000 Date Application Determined to be Complete: April 21. 2000 State Mandated 120-day Rule: August 21.2000 I:\hamidjlreports\LU00-0007R 11111 LU 00-0007 Page 29 of 29 I,) -- _., C: I L-----------------------"- -=7° /-4.- • i .t 5 ,/ 3/ , w / q .... 46o k,, OUTH 7 • 41 & ZtE 7 .______ ______ cv , IL ...,._ 1'12 N OR.T-H" .1' : - . il AI 0 :. • 30 0 6-4P'"P". 0 Lt 'n 4 3 0 •••" '•"-- N I .---- -- -..- ---------___§_/ LI 433 -': i i q . 34 op 5 q "Zif• ‘: 4 2 0 1 2 • . I-7 ---'-:------.'" . _. c u 0 4 2 4 .• . :e 1.0 I 1 0 I • , ,i; ------4 o 2 -,..)0 A/200 '44-- 7 1 •.? •00 .:.-..:.-_, - ... . -3:--------s-____-_-__ • • .. ' I ir ----------:----------_'. 13- .. 4,......,..,c44,.• , -----_______ !-.-•'51-.:,,,, iy--_,L,,. :•,...,5,,,..;,,, :',/4/ ;---''.---:1Y 9200 / \\ , . •\ .\ , , -------76-7 •._s,.. /i , .,. .%C.„ ) 757 ( 'fs 2,58-7--- - it7 ).. .,,:--0°.-- - 4) *--...... _____ t; - ---1-__ ,,,,, ,, " .....• `,/8400 . -5-451,• .k- /.7.- ,t 2r,, • f.r 204 .- -- • •,-. - -- I --i 414 , il 2. "2i 9 100 " -------::•LL 43 -`11 .”. . ' Of/.17 ..•141., 33 6 ----1--,- 1,,lo 337 I i, ..d. Li •-,, i, • /0 2 236,9 ----- ,.......___-e. -..• / • 00 '.2. . 'sj r..---‘..338 i.2 0 ; 360 ----'4:--- 12 I• 34 23 5 I', 9 rs.i N 2/ e-7---1-4Z-C: ------t-1:.„. ii 8 /r.2-„ ---'2:-. 0 r • 9000 7 4 ------, 10 ,---1-= .... -0 ---f---.--1-__ 25 i• --t.-1--. 1.- 2.2, --":2:--__ ;z., , f:-----Z_..i...,. -----H---L-_ 26 ..-...._ i 5' ,- r OC . .........—;7f, . l'-';' --------.-4--- --- ,_ -------_, • 5: .27 ------'4'.. -- Ij 11::... 13—4: ---:- , 4-37 ',8 8 ------- f.• : 26 ------4-'. - -z; !-- __ __,,,,_.:_._ - . -----'-:_z.- f_. ---/---_,„___ .. '.29. •• .. . • . : 4.27 '-7' in -......'...?_ ,;:, ( ,_ •..• 5 • P: ---------4-4:--- 30 , „411.00 _..... .._____ _....,. • r, 28 . 1 ../-4., i 2 -----------.. le `t 8 9 1.z..• 3 Zi l - 9 r --4- 4-- . i____' 00 Li._ ------_,A,• tt:.....Z _I 45-6••:..,A7 C q 3rN A tc ------ ----' -`. ' 2 „ , i ' -i-lt--;-•,x15_,Gt , 2 --------•••.0, (1 S. 1 f".i ! "----i... .... • .;", .0.• • 'r''''' .. L ---- ''.::. 4••• V C FP ir: .'..... ..... %/ 1-' .). I . ' r ‘ , b 3, --------4tb• — ---.--tL., 4-i•;;, 00 r /Be ---4 ••..,,, ., , ,..--4. • , • :7-... I _ -----_____ 0 • :•. EXHIBIT 1 LU 00-0007 N , , ! , -.+ u , 1 - ef! eaE - I:I C 1 l F/ / / t'•tr .x.' ,Tj I ` I !]e !aT fn fft f a m A,rt' S1�Crerr i` ti ILA.1 •! 'r 3: I !TE '7 :' "-.5' ' -i.-�F " _ $ rOREST HILLS ev ev era �� `�illt �» R/ Y b--''�y --' ' `� u' < - 'era c, ELEMENTARY °O as ' ° E!f att� � B I S I.m .o :/,;,ifa" of SCHOOL a Ifa ea ®� u. / r S cI f' .��> u e.! °" „/... ® °ij e! f.f / ,� Y �' 'a"r -,'as,. .5•m H �! G ,y ,ro> r.3i .G.t l .le ® sze e.r u �Zs^r'^ R,y' a' . al a I . > sT� .!.'`G.`''s -1.i I ,E. Jsf ft ,� v nall ., ® . • S. / --.v.- `•-71">• A / �_ I ^h r. % - >ET i ® • its ,'v,.WJ, ,I� 2,MI p�^ y1/A/ `•.0`W 4 / . - 1fTli ,•= l 1' 1 ' - '.s '!l ,Ejr Tf! .. GYp f,. b'.. 4 •'1 , f.;. i .,4, x • 3 y et "3 �}x �] _ s f: `'•fie,• DQT w. r+ -:". 1 411RAL ♦f . S..R� _C Jy l � ��''''+++�f� !e1 ill . '1s x ..f NZ Iff )lelm fl ` p ~ f R� .A 1123i1. I .fn f\T! I E ' SC• '3 - I �� 'LinI,yT4:7 u 'ft my* 1�M h ! fx `1\ _ .•`.7� { \.---'� /` • I saT I,�-`:, ../ .,� �•� 1�„ �I !"��iVVll .��y�� 1`� +tl -.s I^; _ , ...+[ + � � �-- _ -- `(-� Et e n--.-- �'•� /.�JyTi• _.JB 0:� .-cfw a+.f0 I - �_ 1 a r .r —.r-af � - 1s� x G'Nt . .. �. su I --' .T. I~ !ne• 1 _ (` ~ —` .'EL` a' ''u�a��JJ '~, ,.�' l - sE a`7 'z_ -5ns I G _ � G _ �' �.. \. - • - I �'. ��'J a'z �' a �e: s. ~ + `�.Y! :a 6i T•_ Nlaz �J" /,.'", / . IL- MIR�� f Ei fTT / BUT..-i r l .a m� ``"�-�; r ' 1 s '' !r! xa xr w lam—1`I _ rat�•'� �-•.% .fG "zJ _IG 1 , lh: _ s)Gsia MAY �I ^�J 2310 0,4.44 ,_, I $ /✓ as •��..• s 1 ,% @ a ate. .' >.1 :!! a� s ":'1; to 'i'•T S- •.g5 EE 4VfMf n ., i I Li, !� f2,, !!. __1..''C' ®© ®sE%�u �` :2 _lu�� " = I"fJ t>o arkf+! J • IMF ass � 1. ,.Lzri— `i' n •e .M .ae'� ..CM r •ft!-d:r.. ® I yrl�7..N r :1 W ,.f F. _ l tl nk'ry fix: " ' !f£ E'ie I 1 �'1 1.£ -s it 1 k c� •. .111:1111114' Ma AP 4�, Si ��a` "� ru` \ ,. R \ /t` a r ii / c ?, , , \ i -. aLi 4 „ 1 - r�l > • � »\ `�, li , 1a I��q0 r.!,n i X I 1 o 1/7c''f 171 a Calm n, ,Se,� - as.+*Fp. :i -' W > - 0 1 a. `', .y'\�, , Q�'w I� 1 21,J LylI'f P.l x.. I �f�;i a,wi� + gI - J i _ ../ !s £r I i• rT,P`Pc� ?acn e, of =L �� 10 '� z I 1ue y «rt "I i4�lq +f,� zn G�� A.....41)r •f_ i2 17 Qp ' 'to _ _ C t r.x »x- �6 • 5 1- 8 ` , i A,'Y§ at.... Imo`' In ,h aro fa� .0. r. '+ m•G'fynf n - I I m' 5 .a t! 'a te fif___ +ao + ua F am v •..-'' .. S74-f - '� E. -seu^ .y 4� rr 1; I r--`I= J lC'- �C =3.t $ =lCt��i!) Yfi y..y.! d -ham .� i°lY 'IJ J l7 �� l % '' ff, HOW I� _ i . max. Jam- .,�r. r'.1 I I I �- /,4 ^ . !y LLL'�� •v .0: 4 4 F y ` g 5 ,1 I' s I '�t. �1i '� e''4 - I i I_I`I --- ` `° 9 -o ''.I�.i - s I v - 1�' �C� (1� 'r`'�'• ifa tcoTix .a.R:Y� 1 l;� hw MINT, \ � `? , 'y!.\i' 1` YN, :o'1'...I SE'. A ' f! 'S £ ell:i'S1 3 s 1 ±/ ^` tc 1 ——~ 0 'C. .f • • II • .. .. _. - 4`.~•. 'a-t•i. 'A '.' .e»/»/� a .n '»:,-.;1V4 fs WI 1- 1 .•,-,. E'er~- �� • Ew � � . T 4. I`i S:i I ,i a 2 !,`%\ - / � r4trI a Ya , fMr:•rE /-itiat: ". 4i.,:;-,:--,...,,.,., .y # e- W n+o-fs -Ii.1EORoO`GEBnos'_'r ._jar \ P _ 1_ \ t . n. EXHIBIT 2 III LU 00-0007 0Ou2 0 i • LAKE OSWEGO 0 z w BLOCK 136 wCO2 REDEVELOPMENT Yci- DESIGN REVIEW SUBMITTAL p 0 J CONTACT LIST: W ' w O OWNER Y w GENE WIZER 330 1ST STREET 503.636.1414 t? o LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 w DEVELOPER _ __ IC GRAMOR OREGON INC. 9895 SE SUNNYSIDE RD, SUITE P 503.245.1976 .LOCI,�OR CONTACT MATT GR GILL GOODS,ADY CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 °SOW C III 9607 SE SO/NNW R610 SR 5 CtACkANTS.PNOR Grl 97015 IONNT 9ry.elrw eE601 CML ENGINEER -_ _ KPFF CONSULTING ENGINEERS U.S. BANCORP TOWER, 111 SW 5TH AVENUE, SUITE 2500 503.227.3251 CONTACT MATT KEENAN PORTLAND, OR 97204 tt RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECT ARGO ARCHITECT SUITE 321, ROOSEVELT BLDG, 9370 SW GREENBUHG RD 503.293.1644 sienna CONTACT TED ARGO PORTLAND, OR 97223 /��F�j��— I1 It-!.—�Cv.1.6MF looms) COMMERCIAL ARCHITECT Fr.T21(uAL FhF$H1611 A L.6LL}AAOnEACT SIENNA ARCHITECTURE COMPANY 411 SW 6TH AVENUE 503.227.5616 CONTACT.WARREN TYLER PORTLAND, OR 97204 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUMMY cEeICIN FIE9EW CHRISTOPHER FRESHLEY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 1020 SW TAYLOR, SUITE 355 503.222.9881 N p..,e.... CONTACT:CHRISTOPHER FRESHLEY PORTLAND, OR 97205 N44 ='. o _-- u..A er Ow..er DRAWING LIST: Ilh WAT^ MORO yR.I 1P. CRIL RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIALL t I ‘ ItIICAL '�ESI•I-- --- SILO PRELOJ,IIAR'r Roo Fop PLAIINCO OE'tLOPLIE111 /.3nial OPAy0UCjS L'tOR G° mill lxlP:S ACI UIl(ED-IISE/�:CNNERCIAL RUTAPIG R q000 I ANS ,.,.MICAP(1010NETRICS PLAII -� S20 LOl LOW AD.II514tENT NAP .tW, OE/AIL FROIN CLEVA11011 ARP ELEVATIONS 4R46 ELTRA110065 AC2 NI.lD-USE/COARAGROA,MAIM ELE''A11.NIS ----—.--- -- .^^ ^.^ •. AP:‘ DETAIL REAR LLCVA*00 4i10 LOWER BOOR BIN LINN0 PLAN 71719 LONER FLOOR RNILDRw PLAN AC) N1tED-uSE/NNNCRF,IN EUILM1IM ELV AIILRIS t'EHbI'tt:TIVE DRAWINGS APJ :0'PL.91, TIP 4101000 MOT ARI1 POE.'PLAN AIM P00h PLAN ACA W11E0-LISE/C0NA1lPC1A1.eLRLDRIG ENL.P.,,EO -�'---- APA '-NY PLMI IIF EMI VM, W OVI AP21 SOL MANS SECTION RIO 115011 -- -- - - - - ARS 1. PLAIT,ilPRAI UM AR12 ELEVADON5 AP22 TIPIF.AL 511E SE,=NON'. P I ,4(4)R,.,'A ART. A11U SCCL.R1 CT —.�.._ .RIJ LOWED.FtV'P eLRL0elL,PLII{ P r INN I h'111 DROP SI Am)F:TIILR[Lll RD EX�NIIiBIT' 3 fro ARS IB ARIA P a1 LANDSCAPE ! LU 111J-0()07 AR: LONER n(:OR eIPL[WIIi PL,N AR 16 L[vATRR1f 11.) LANDSCAPE WAN I 511..1 IA. 4R6 NOW(hall M06 LOWER FLOOR DIALOIAN PLAII •RT7 MCI PLAN L_S LINKS!.PE DETAL$ 00 i ' I I I l• .........•L--- 1---- -\ -I- — — / ..... '', ,..qr,v1.::-. - , .-Aita. _ '.":.t' -...-...`.1.1_,,-1*-,, • 1.-- I - " -- -- •,, ; , -- • • -•-•,„, 1-- z SECOND ' ''\ .. I . !• . 0 • ' .i , I •1 0 co .......... $ . .•- t:ZIV.I.:.' ..--:, ....21 .?-,,-- 44 •»--1 r . -11" -"`"'"" ,„ - -!Tr . s, li, / '.l t 4, .t i-A , -1 ' •••.. .-0- it >. 11-a':-`14'Ili'-' '..; .1 ,. i 1.: . I .----It , 1 Mmx---,_....‘"---T. i,'. -- ; ; . . -1-T-0'••---- I . I. ' - 0 0 —is: - 4! '. i • , ... • •, •.. , , ., • 1 ):1:ii_1 i • ,•.•,.., 1 •'s Id I i:. .::::::::::-• • •- ti i ., --......,-.....- - ' ; I • 1, i. -N,-- -,-_ Ii , - t. ' 1'1 I I ztli • ; 'I , . - 0 It LU > tB \ ''., .."..•- " - --).. '[ I 1• t.. ., 4 ( • , - f•-•.., ,, -1 1 •-, • -1 - ' . -- 4 1, ',. • at•-r...- 11 ' -' A . , <co 0 i,:.1 • 1 V ;15•:,' - ,.4 * i - C•30\4- 1,j . ,.... 1 i - tll 1 -n•-r4'.- ., \‘... . ..i" -I LU nu 1 1 ... .', r - _._. -- 0 4',, I 25 SC; ir I ± t.• ,. .. .g: . WI §11 1:1i; • • '1 3..- i 1 f-— - .• / -.. a i ..' . . -• nil - —------ t t 1\ , i I ,/ • .i, HOCK IA iA,Ct OSWEGO.(W. .. I\.,. — --,......--- I a 10 t.-I. i . I 7TIF. ,WOK / . ° GROWL*OREDOW WC 11805 SE 9......5.0E 410.0.ITE . • Cl/0~S.OM Dial!, -- - • pr•ww:IvoilliOn ,, , 4 tl ". k,...1.----1,--•-•-5, - -L•,-. i --'''. 7...• I 4C I. ..'1 ._ -.• — ---...' !I, - ''''` .•-•.'. S.077,11.w,WWI' ... •• 41 ma.."..11 • 2 •_4,..31. -- --- 7-- -- i I •••• ; ------- ' " z .. w . t. :.. : . V 4 ..• • .•I :,- . . • •.• . . . • , , ) , 1 tt 1 --. _ ,,,, , I t \ - 1• '.•-• ' . 4...•,..1 .L.--i. FT.-.4 '. .• •1 • i r I, :It il• \ ... , .. ... . , j), .. . ••., i r---:::. Jsiennal . . .. • r kpf f — - - —._ _ - -- \ I ii A •, .. ......,,,,,,,..,... . . ••., . ..•:-. . V : ; ‘ , , . V.1:!`,".`•'FrIn.1". .•1..!..:71t74 - lit•-t• cie' • , :, \ 1 A I : _ , ,.. .._,, \ \ ,—44. ;4•',d, i,. - — ,.. , f . ;,.. N. •„......, , k,.. • .... • •,..,1 0.../i. 1 I I C . t I ,.I : . , -.4. 1 .I. .104 t •... .'n. ,., ,I: t.,.... i .,..,...., • ....--I, ', ...,J., I 1 I — _____I",Nilit Cff !i •••••• , fly War,..Tels'f',.10SCIS . .' ''''.... 11.11, -"r- I' ) ... — . I . I WI N-----_.:' _-.- / ..--r—....--, ,.' www. ',. 0.ri .,.. ,,,,,'',. • . . ..• ,... .,.... ..._.. 1,i,____ ""'•'-',N 1,?,'''-"""'":-1/2,7,•.,....-;,,,,2._:, ......-- .:. 1 . I . ffi .,..., _. — . . _ . —,- ! IC•001531.001 E1Ali . — - iti ! THIRD S1REET — — 41 1 . - --_-....._ , • . , . ..._. 1.1_.. _ • - ._ • 4 11 ( .' 4•...... DnoW W, 0.00.0111* Nis I ! 1 I .iii ... ,,..' 1 E MY -11111.--JMN--—401-14 atm wo. — •-'.. rti. ' lEaramc9tdomor1e rrl EXISTING TREES TREE CQUNT SUMMARY LEGEND x z /DLL I MAIL U.:1 WI 111a 1 wnall 111 IVW Mt a DADL WI.WI I. www ,w.ww two 1 1 r r" 03 101 kW....r tel. HU 14.11,1411 OIL., .11. 1. 101,11.04/1.10 11) swwwo nw III 01110 1.4110 P*0 . la TM ow.,,a. o wt....0 PIM 111,A 14416,•11, • ----• .---. 8 --1 10, eV..t..,.....IT . 1.4.1.4.0 111001 le I. wawa.ow Of 111 NIMPAO1 nog I,1. .1, Wwwww nw yr ,in mi.*.Elli ..• WIMP Rid 120 WINO/Ole 1.. IS' II nwrn :::own tr vo en magma, IT—wan"„ I A ....tnt•vo"Le.,o no.1%11411.. ........ ----.4.---4;i2 11.0 0111110 VV 0 il. . ..8.0i 10041 Tr 111 .1111.11.11.1 11• .21 WOW.M.CEA/1.14.111 le _ ',act C.' ....,1 101 1•1111....1 t. ' .4 Mt It.fltil fr ilp ..01111.1•flu 11. ." WOW.0.11. le . • GRAPHIC SCM./6 . . . Shawl No ••• MON..61 It. .1• 1 11. II COO (.„.., • • limlh-. NM . .4.. AVENUE .:00-00 LYI S 119IHX3 i 0 , s ; 7 a mr.-e MAI 1 f ,!• E• i i ra 1 1LI, 1 i : •1 id ... . ' 'R i 0— . - 1- 1 - 4: Kr)c \ ; •,. 1 1 -\ 1 " '';" ...t" -,--I .: I_,-, ' --i. 1 - 1: : -.._ ,..-I,. ! iI = - -- - - - -- .- - 1 g i II i 4 g fr ;I fir 2 4 I ,-y.-_ • . g . I • RiE E0la 2 d y! 1 i :1 5 f g: P A!:i V t 5 ;: i 1 1: IN I 1 i q i o i a g,P • • ,t. 4. .F i. !: 1-i ,! 3 5 ,•,, p W* I ___ ____ ___ ____ ___ ___ ___; , • , - , ; ti A. ,--7,..i:i ; 01 , zt = 0 rn • 12 = - 7 2 e. i cr.„:c 1 R I i I 8 • v . -. - ;.• R A -f; • w r ...1 z .- i 4 7 i '•' 9 ii akir; [-— — -- — — — —. 1.-.— — _ _.'4.__ .___. _____ —___i 0 . i • ,A L-;• t .-, k :,,,, n pe,ii I 1- - — — — — — — —1 I-- = rn , 1, it ' ig 7*R‘• .:1'. i oplq .— 9 i'_., v`a ,. . , $ Fi Ai i c‘ zhq, I ViCR .t148i mW ! late r7. ` i •4 fli —_— — _ _ _ ____I L__ _ ___ _ 1 _tA . - EVERGREEN ROAD I1- E E 1 i Vii= 4- g.'• $ ?a 0 cg rI-11 I 'ilk I q. 1W i N ' i'l i 4' 1 ..- ; • k:i A LAKE OSWEGO 0 " jr!! BLOCK 136 l E REDEVELOPMENT ! ! 1 • =' ,1:.i. ' = lighl ; •,,• I v , ige5_ 411174URIOR . a a t IL_EU ,r>tln;. L000 0o Ill •A• AVE : • 41;• Iiiiiiii • • `; PPPyPP 1 _ I — _ I — — — - aA �``eDcili 1 111 IE t.1. j z' 6Pab5� P- - ii a !a r_ - ... T _ —r _I _ A.. —_ —4— '_J 3�? 6 } F 19 � L I ,Iej I 94 Irk cP'it:- $ 13 . a rnao• una±o• I : I I _e L°T, It I2 Ian...a - :'i 2 n ryt LOT 21EO:OP-b6t • Ili EA' n Ip.. LOT a i N :ar pie 4 - • t 8 1 :K 1 < { 4 Q ° Jyn.. • ar R a 'it. LOT a ¢i 1 .px� �`, t.E13 N2 t 1.xd6 NK ` jf y 11OT 3 0 N _ n'n'v-i L11�LO r., g LOT s P LOT13 a. P a g `V:,yn 8 :.:ta wn A f s N • Lai:,, a s It‘• +i ua 4n ) _ LOT t qv KA 1261 • x• e5 !�', �.r D C LOT■ 4- e!e WIN • LOT YI X O A 1•zwN.11 21 "1°ra'" Lxw wn g .aa' Liu• it - .:w 11111 rn 0 sLOT, e c^ :. K a p x wT m x Q :.xq.GK i a I,xw POI. 8 nra..• I ,an.•• A SS ;s . t ' a.- g i i "•I v q Ii Sil ill -, . ryK ; e ,ir.. € +.atDe.wK C. aH g LOT 9 Y.mx NK s [j'_@�$ 4 n+mg- 5 g eoxa.aa e 9 H _l ?1 > 0 gp4 a •Rr�•• 04it ..w ''W.• rr7 A LOT:O t b LOT,It x [ LOT xx a a -4 C ,�»yK R R I.+x mn. S E. 1.24.1... A w ,i' ' .sue • rr. o a:varr•• O UM L. IO LOT r: S O y ta,.xfft rt. - t LOT 211031 x ; ,.LOT W x• T _ i grqJ— •warat. v.uY1mr �� .a .i.> ...am -I 4•1 �� !@ s • e 11 141, I . ° • �• e, , • .. ° nrQ u ° <z a 00 ° „d r ate. 20]s e { %« c: _. sso Ci1sri$_s 's _a is j•Fe :=go:n §:sa6 {g �s p lli j .� ;:a- e2�5Ai2rl: 2x :;, ' 2$ a;a% d:2' ..a$Rs xR:2a . x_ eta ��i - s ! p (8, a ors T •u -nc .bs. 7".__.• . [ F { ,,C-a. • rir 3 - - ii II EVERGREEN ROAD 11111111111111111111 `iklifirla r~rnrini 1 eon : :.:. :-:: - 1 . :.::+:wit.. rr � r�rx,tir,� ='xl1“1 Ili li 1 I. A A. LAKE OSWEGO !� BLOCK 136 p I= � � � REDEVELOPMENT • • s 1 j 1- i I I _ _ — - - - - - - - — — z — — ._ --,. -- — — U-- r I 0 .mJ�I•.N,G 11 I W il11 SECOND STREET r.aua aMa r•sa.fil[•siwl.. COz• .:u.:(r010P1 �w r.m.e P'aJVW }17 �rz� MO PAWS OW 1 -. .Ilurx I w C'7 2 IwMif.,.k \// - 'IMM. ; I f a I 1 --^I'I K1i1J104LL?: I,Ij}I„ I cf) Y O I*2; InI 1l 0.• �i T „ ® O ,11 .r im TV"""4 .1 1D1 I ' 4 I I 1\ I w - t' s.al ar ow�( iiv ) I 1 I 1 1 I 1 , I _ ,I - } I O [Qrl.ilC , zi S. I I I I S 9IUNIT RCJMMI pMES Iuo •� I I Y --, L (IIm) 1 I 1 W Ili1 1 I I m T- = . 1._ � brntarto- _ J f Q p • 1: MIXED-USE/ I Y"" 7 UN11 I, 1I ' I- COMMERCIAL BLDG. . I ',... I� f I ;'...IOK11 l0AlE5 1 - w I . 1 - ?- - e i•n�r wr M _. _._ r� unmet 1 •!� I Ili CC flit I , Ii 1;..: _. 11\ .. .-_, . .-.r I .:f...z,2f .�.L.,.:•1.....,� r MUM..aavn.w: N,R,Cv._ OR f 1 9.95 Sr SUMFSKK M.C.SII P • \ I `Su,1�••�' I 1 I I 1 1 I CVC»N.5 Ilk iM15 - ' BUILD NC 2 _ s¢ ,u-a ..4...I4 WO. - AV_ I I I 19 UNIfF TONI4IOMES I I! ' --- -- '� II'L.., o •r��S/.1 1 +I 1 a l' 1■fMiPrW� i j,�I 1 IAL,arid I I I I I p' � ■ i i `.. Lr Illli�i�r r.�r�l x. Iu•`•I- J,�. ,a h. 1 -F,-.. . ,TI , �. q.P I _ • ,�, i tt •,. _ — �---did.�uls,.;I.,E� -�. • . ,iiii , ,Iem,JiuJ `r t ; I. f I'I f I t. r ;• w..t � n , d91•!RY* 172� -.r I ,. — L.. , , >mE I.. �.� 11 11 S 1 Q ii ■� _..—'---- B r....1.. .�_�.I �......° rw, -. _., •1 I r It _ l II•• l1 iViNmilinamILI-f I 1. i S U I rc - arc friiS___ 1 µµ.,,HarsTr7rn' reeSNte. BUIlU1NC 4 —" I g+•Pr1 IrI +.Ga11 !,1 Id..' I 'I - I I 1 1. • - m o -- TOWNHOMES I O = I P.r. S r :9_T 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1'".n I. _ II , jut 1O CO I I I I I I 311 IUNItTLIOYiJHOME � . 1 - - - - /:�I .I -- ! I I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 .., 1r1_ I 1 1 1, I I I I V1 �J — - .. — Y► ilr IR t 5-_ I I. I - �. _ I 9. I I I eeueoran DATE 1 'if!; ,1; - 1 ,ry h _.I ,.,. ..ln \ \ 1 I w_1rr THIRD STREET -I "TIY" I • ! I w 1^-�«•. so IPOURNORLION le y1 u L A.-71-z1' I �••• ED w RAN __ _ Mt _ ! UNF _ 5'is•lt 1.E - - - - - - - ---'1:*. romewrt 1. .PbU I0." I ■ aNn u..Irt111r.r I I• .Gd.MlI 9..t PDC. —' GRAPHIC SCALE Sheet No ay 1WrK C.Cu..Pr r.11a.1 • • • • 1.01.1..r1I.cuss... -- 1 -� CIO I.mar I I I 1 1 I..i j_ _ • 2- PAflEaw m l r.xxwC iO'WRAit SECOND STREET rrA ) I l' `. _i. STOPaw [ CO SPACI _.---__. ...- .... ._YMBILCNANI _.... Il)+'A6'.. �_- '_- _ /0041.4G _ ....- _..__ Lill hll S!R1 _ - oli3Oc e. P/NEG V..� C") �v_� -R*Th 11 H.AS' _ `__- _ _ _ . _ dI T 4 I " r — 1 � I cnY .w..;WNM.OtMAN,o I -I I Lam:: I I I V AJ -I '" , I __ I O w I TACT NA STOW(,n•I .'. I I I I I I I I + -+ i t I� iPC. A114. - nb,prop„,.. By1ILDIN t 1trransurrt: .- 1 -- _ W I�1 1 rvAllOi IN .„.. � i I I I I n 9I UNIT TOWN1-jOMES IAa } 5 ' I _1 II„U,UG. 1 1 ry Y m W f I •1 1 I 1 1 I 1 t c.0,1 - x, _ -� 1 1 1 I •I I I. 1 $,Id aaua. rIP.1 6UIl DING 1 Q0 1' i urn I f. — . MIXED-USE y ( t 11 :, IUWIl1111MESI I i.. 1 • COMMERCIAL BLDG. ! wt... 1!! '1' —r I - .-F+ • a- -*IWO I I i I :_>. >_'.• t__•="•--"' I_I_i• ,o `er y t I _— t_ I zr - w• t;taal MI *a n sate I I �i i� .a+.. x ' �1 A • ` '� II 1.IF I 1.,- a a'. w,} f .-1 L I .—_. ___-iMn.ua' .INIu�:wAu ..I 1 -_� �' j . . - N .1 )µ--.I I 1-,,,. I 1 w/osM1W�xN�rn I �. 1._ GaMwR oat" 1 IdL9CA� I N wu.lue lN„„,,'}'' ••.,.1 . 1.. . I 1 I I !. �` 5 .- -.. 1 WO',St cla/Itt:lc ROA, % I w BUILD NC, 2 �r t.14! I �4 - Cta:KAAu,l 1 f ,' SEC 51 .NI-3I �A�aBI I I I 19 UNIIf IOW410ME5 i ci 1 _ _1 Q W : 1Ax T, Itir... - - Q ip.. Ix2hI : L 1 I 1 1 I �.I .w • 1 ♦.1• 99' I.. •� _` _ # 8 J I.1 - �C _J - I . L" 4 . V T :`�PIANY Q MAMMAL/ - • `J. n It ;. + xAM - I — s>tsa if #[ R�IfIYq�Y .-1,. l t"..SJ.-.. •.. , S L . a I I .i A.0' So'"' f11tISI�,,r.1t Ea rl: 1 1 r , .._: ..1 I I I � Ii1I11 111P1, 4 '-•. 1 ! �+.- r I ...� I • • CT .lNE1A Y ‘.1 5IINIT 1 1 I t ..1, I I I r F lik,o / 1 .' TOWNIIOMES w'..:.. 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1s^i11 �''' I i I N.EA�J I- u1I't" v'I CI W UILUI G 5 `fti'O I ( I ( �1 IIN�T TOVI�JHUME _ CD y I r I ] I I I 1 1 1 I I I'('—�I I I. •I + �t • 1 If NO map For . l 1- I_ ._.�, r \i .I 1 BaILnMIM.G it n -a_,E•s . THIRD STREET i q I r . 1 . , Dm.Br Mw.«,By _ _... , �� _ __ - - e vrIL ire) — S�RIs -_ _. . .. _..----- -'----elNn.r 1m•U --- : . (,Egdlp- rMx a CURB OW) •• F INV AR-21 t" so, in..,,Ion e4� BITE PL/ IFGi[WR gut Ram - - - - - - - - - a� _.-_ __ IIINI Iw...._ I Iu.,i. -_ -- T _ I.r,MI.IYI AV ION* to l5'MAAN 13 W eCxo,..a.rawxo ].B•Of Ali R1.3 MKS AA x- ldh 1 CBNC t E Or I- I ZON C _: •�.5 I°kacoAN BASE OOC eEw10l18' ZONE Oil IAO.:.N. C) rS1N OK4 t T 7nw,&aN f._ I MMA08RECAff BASS BOCA. !RAMC(JI(CINAad1 PAI,Y'Po. CRAPIIIC SCALE Shall Nu r • . wA..Acc[13w.r • 4 CLO AO MR 1 1 raw-w 44 • • • 0 Z 0Cw T co 0 OUw w W0> in J W Qm in _I W • .1. • • /� �\ I �\ I T LOCNwEco�\';'\ ---� •r,n,mD.S_ , snm sE SUO sr�.r.rswra. Ofl 4• _ 1 ��., 15 I+ .+erruro . 0.. , ..iYi; 'Ri, 1!!!14 ! i7 I, 1 W ui.c4 _... 0 — — gat -�, I— ��. (l I h r.r.�. _,' 111�Cs::Incol� ,1,1_■ II:t.` __w�.L sienna arrr_.�_, err.,,. I -.�.� f Mar -. �.� .ram. -. ■ Ws.j - �roq' II ItIY7L1P11EM1 fRESHL6Y _ �'''erC",. wrv.r wren �ir L awa r +,4- =T • ..3 sKi{_.,._: .} ..Yz„•. -ir-1 r ., L \. _. ! - _ .m�L•n ti ra I II 4r Wpror. 'i�#.su" [�;y . i�{'a - k'' .' `y u. 1' .r*z�'`_ 3�a_�. • �,r�j -L ?- .-_ - f:d gi .'w "7, E ° ` :0 \r _ �,. _ -e. , •fir!'iI$jij • 1;_ ■ -:! Erf.; 111 { 1 . a�111 • = (l�J Q I 1 .� .� « .} 1 11 II Ili . .. ti gtiI I' no L_ 'T, --- tr_'fTl L �2r enom r to cow ter. �''`}• ;�W OD crimp- .ar- snf: e(�1 1ne Q��rRd� Eta �1.1 �iyn- Ov_ i'�}- f4 ;r fl4J �wsM Ireocr20' END UNIT 20' ALTERNATE UNIT 20' UNIT 17' UNIT ""'"w°"'r" pr' u p,.rrnnu.unw uv.x�m tim ... vr, wrrvar..r,n L........ 3-3.-00 n FRONT EL.EV. DETAIL FRONT ELEVATIONS OF TYPICAL UNITS c' EXHIBIT 8 WO is NO CiS I.0 00-0007 -- A� - 1 I— O Z 0 �w w co ^ U J O w w0> J w Q m a L„ tna, ,� 1 I J 11 1 I Win ally:t.la �II�I 141)4,1 ' ' LAM'OSWEGO.OR ,�I 1. :�� ( AL- y imi�>.. CRWOR GREGGN..1G. ..pv.•., _. — "I 1 1 nitpi I I .�ppp� Y�IYS SL SOWM51SE ROM Slt Y -__ , "'1i « Zuili uk, I ! I --_ 1 L CIACKVAS.OR 97015 6 /.211;111 I akGO pro loci+ YSt;C ,Jatitr u..o.�vn - —I . Itlll I �il�.'I � F1-1811111 ,'ICI IBM um El 1 I I Fir..1' /!/Jvawp.r gun.uw � i1�PItiIIt Allit' ■■ - I ■■ 1 .. \ ---• II TIP OIL n j I - A1�1 f/� ^ �I 11'\IM. -.C_ ._ t — I _ Lar rigli rlo ,...�... @ ilU • : .... �u �■■ ---1 — `—�1 ,aim;.:.-I- = _ _ s i P n n a '" ...p..,..i 11MIII� �I■11= loom, ■C i m� - —. c.11xlsrorllLn saestlLtt ' : _ _ .__�._. I!! !'' nurr,� - _f 151A-1Rfi1) .a.i•sc. r•..cslnal N.,,,,.. InLFrl MPH,' j - === ,1 ,L, — .�. ._J _� ,I !. .� ,��lElglilMiila , �� It 1 _ - _ --Mg ,". AVM 1.1, • t i � Pry❑❑*_ ❑❑❑❑❑o❑❑ tOMMENDI❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ i�l-�c In — ,.�. 16, , ac: . °= I_1nnnoaa❑_ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑Y ❑1 JCIE__I L_— Van We'Mr ❑r n.i- • z _ _ nnnnn _.I E ❑❑❑❑❑CI❑ �r1M-1 - S s 20' END UNIT 20' ALTERNATE UNIT 20' UNIT 17' UNIT SJI m.�A +-.IA-00 REAR ELEV. DETAIL REAR ELEVATIONS OF TYPICAL UNITS ASµMOTLO •, ',wet Flo. ci • • ili _ � 2 • 0 • I • I- 164 r-r �n� 0 1 IIIi 0 co ..- T a.�` : i l_, ,- „. O r JDEL p ■ � 00 ` 1 1 I KIT 1' T-c- LLI 'l_psl■► I w L.,, -- - - �,1 1 r,x T KIT -I - - tom. r-..--- -I I-- --1 • � i YJW 't' m .., g -�a I DINING I I I r_ (� —.. GARAGE e�1� I I I DINING 1 t ;;.. !-'I � ��,°i; J W Ia s.cr ' p9 g / -Nil- I I I I + ' ' Cr 1lMT:..CiBi .„Ci...,,i� - #i L---- ' It L---- J PANTRr !��` n () —— I S J • IMI ISMfA.Qt ' I I I° _.Wail I nnoz s!zw.sc[ si v - f•••• .IXxwuSON 4137V..-11:1:11.:DI_=/ —!,/1�� /4if _ — - /7 1.——..,t ; LIVING P_=,t�l LIVING - / ' _ - y�G•1 Ili - tt �,abIER QUITE QF.FCE il6�'Ea o Ivp�•or<r- sienna _. _. 0 is ` +_- r �} _ I ` I (I I CIIRIST OPIIL•i31511LEY + _ r _ ��.. .ILL- lxro.i x ..c t �� &Lcorlr arr _—a �t..J LOWER LEVEL 316 SO. FT. MAIN LEVEL 773 so. 11. MAIN LEVEL OPTION) UPPER LEVI-I 850 50.FT. ;,"....HG J..,,na,,. HIM KIICNFN JD DINING REVERSED «v" r ;." 20' WIDE UNIT 2021 So. FT. TOTAL LIVING 421 50,FT.GARAGE '•—^ °•^•°16 a. VP.1'-0. S.J.I 3-23-00 TYPICAL 20' UNIT FLOOR PLANS YI EXHIBIT 9 LU 00-0007 ""O AR- 3 I— O Z "` 0cD w 1 ,... Ci.... 6 Eft F-— I u) 0 i ' i' I / t_1.1 b' DECK tit -- Iti 0 U f W ` I 1 �� `_ ��I��I J ! 1RN2 in 1 I KIT �� —�� W > I■ 61 . f 1 i m ,. .r 1, ■ I I '-I I ... s.t I 1 .,. Q • 1 DINING I I •w ��_�i I I L DINING I :::--- ___1 w n, II M.N' pp_ CC GARAGE �: 1 .•C�� 1_' -1 .1 I _ ,LDRY:�ifil )1. pi L -'--——-.I l.. --- 1 PANTRY A :D _. ..._..-——- —� =�v'°u' ___ -- - HALL ,r t I -_ 15' ID �� ® r�am■ 'N — �� ! _ _ [: 1 �: `1 II_ ,I: w :�., _:' WIC - - II ^ �.,:� n ."w ': it'd i .�J,I F. - "' •-_ I'I^�\ i 27 '.././, 0 �� ,�J II llL �1 �' � ��s(1 I MASTER w ....,, ;..;,, r _ [__:3___ , i...giali C-3 niSU17E BELaw �i I � ' OFFICE i.rE:: ,i id:1TC — .... _ ;� sienna t ... 4 ft ,$ k...) 0 4 ! F , .... " 13AI.CONY BALCONY �-� - LOWER LEVEL alb so.FT. MAIN LEVEL 821 so. Fr. MAIN LEVEL (OPTION) 821 so.FT. UPPER LEVEL 996 50.FT. AT1 IC LEVEL 227 so.Fr. WITH KITCHEN AND DINING REVERSED OCI••• 20' WIDE UNIT 23N2 50. Fl. TOTAL LIVING 421 50 FT GARAGE e..~ .* -gin ao TYPICAL 20' END UNIT FLOOR PLANS C. AS NUl! r� A — 4 0 0 • 0 Z 0cow .tea r ✓ I IJJ CO \\ PTO CO I�� i• ,.ram O V w 0 i i wig i i I NOOK ia�'Kmiec , : __ _I_d! W J Y l ile_ I :AMINE I�1 ■R1R Bo. .Y: m W cn ! .L , ‘. ______ PNVTRf i �- I ' W GARAGE o-e;o•: mull -I — . i �E` cc PijKp.:� ! if- ;' .=11 am,136 LAS OSWEGO,OR ■ - - 9 ArfSV OREGOR,*IC. ur.r MS SE SUW0S10E ROAO.SIE.P ��w9�� -'n _ CUGwY15.OR 97PIS 110 TY/� —- _ -'ry$. i - ARCO prole 99170 Ilk ape1_,...., ,.„.,....; / DI NG - ;� _Oil .. R__„" .! r f 11_ .urRn J ® oiu m i:�.�ni��0e. '\ r u _ _ :j �- �r sienna WK 11 INj" SU1EE OFFICE ;,- �� E, •l l2 Wr.LNG 6.! �:,1` r-nni;tnrncP E0.9511ter WIC 1 ' LOWER LEVEL .o so.pi MAIN LEVEL m M.IT. UPPER LEVEL T»50 Ff. ........ Onnon By Goo..ly M. J 17' WIDE UNIT 1/9E so.FF. Fora 41VRC 355 so FT.GARAGE A•r sad -an-oR 10.0 MN TYPICAL 17' UNIT FLOOR PIANS C AS▪ WO CoC ---- - - - - - IA - 5 i • • A • 0 4110 H o z __.•"" _ .... , ,,,-.,44....M... -'.^FeifIlipl:, / --='%. /k/aii--4: 'ffa.-- „,, - --.71.7":•-.7=4.=,-.77-4.-17===••=\-- ., ....- .1-t--,-::'-• .- CL N --../. ..-\Irr . rAsi:---._ feet 4:•4-7--41::- itr'Pa4 tial; ,L_Z.C"\`-i-r-/:::.:1____\-,-2,7"...:fil----iiii. ' 'iiiffirmi ';f•-• -. -,•. il-I 6. - _7_7.7. - -'''''- ‘,,,'-,--E---.-IF-W.7'7-2'4'.' t I "e'''' -7.7r.' • 'r• --L.-'. :A ni:il 11= - 1111 --3 1111.+ = "-- 0 ..... .., - ii.• -_, .......... - _-_-'41 111111. 1-1-. ..,'6 . •,,i,',:l'.:14-...--cm, ---- II■..21::1, ,, , It:Mini !II-I:inn:T-7J ,E11-,..-.., __ .,,24.-........-:., 1 0 o0,1 __, ......i., ......,,,tuira-,,-._1......y.....-, 7.-..,..........., '2•' His mg -PIM• _ ----- ----,ri.i..aE:,•;.; .- 1, ;:---1" I.!! risir tin. -.4: AIME ...-51!:-z eming _,-- lilin -- 'MIEN ,-----`' fla MI Eli '...'i--:'._:;--;1,..Ell I ___...,•..10/111.••• W NI K. I • ' - 1 1.- 11111. - - 44410.111rth-ft _J II NI• ' ,•,.L'','',11111111111i111111111''' ' o' '' " -• . ---il miiiii 1"11. - . , . : . . • • ,,, . .„„,..Ilk AA,rl Ah1.1•61.14 Se W 4.76:117:7:.-''-:41 • • • • • .,'' I-.1.1.•an ''. '.*•:•VI......'.op 'ill '''' 1101 NI :I''I I 4,09 LI X —1,.,=-,11.•• •- <CO a .,- . • ' '''..-,(2:'•11 ,-- _.• . jili I :;:,1 IlMill. 'I. 4'1°11141 ,1' -,' :;-. 11h'i I .".' til . III". EMI Ems iq! to.1 - :.., -'...-, ., L r -z..--.-,... / ,I- 1-2'' ',.•-_,, 14_ :-_ ..... CC 11:7- 21.,T7,.. r.r''''' EAST ELEVATION - SECOND STREET .,........ , ..•,..7. J /2, _4,---.- _ __............... lut.r1.__7 I wx,tm IAME MONA QI, CAW*SUM MC SIM St 54.0510f 11,041,$11. P (WOWS,oft itai: AftC0 u...I.K1 no 991?0 . ' il is •.m.\I- , .. v--- I—‘7118 i ot• s ,s••••10 Ho.i•I. ••••1014. .. ..- - •••,...... MOM MA 1,...4111.•••••as ample.—....-- 1411!Meng I•OL e . -__ mid n........ ....111.0a •••••••••••••• •••110•MOM .--....1.4.••••••1001A1A ••.••••Sa•.• a. AS A._..A ;.----7.';11;;1124::E.1:1131:1 -. _ 11•110111••A Oh .::::...,---- •.:** .=.- -----.-=___. ---L---.--..-- .... ,HI-a-_ .••• _________ ,...,,,,,,..„,,,.., ......,,,,„„„„„..,, - --. 141__,.........,..,,I ...••• --....,,..,. •••0 "." ...n...nti it •••••••••a .".....".. /..T.11.............X=••••..wirdia:::I as.. ••11.• — 4 .... •....0 ..... P nal; ill 11•••••• ...i YR - A• 'IMMO-.-..+111••••••••••me aunt••111•V.- - .. •AAA MAMA suPnna ...„,„, .•WM ......,,,....... W.. i KOWA( ••14.•••••I,•••I, .-- • -143.46.1.011 A•••••••4 I 50U•111 Ft EVA rION NORTI I ELEVATION C110.1510P111.1 FRISMAY umnscAtt.A..11,1 , vr•11, •. III 13 I-LW 1----I • L'nr.r,"-------- - • .....„.....,, __ ---N,4\,.. .._.1 A\ \s\ / ;:rw .. V11.11.11171 A•V INT.:. -ii _ .I.P wAl.AA I /,-L_A,`iltr,..q S - ' i•Liis.-- A, .... ...--— ,..----_,,. , --_- =-_ -- -- , I AFir -- - FON•••••••••/:''''•," ‘:.irlrlIN A .11,.., __ .r./11-;•-, _ _ ..z: .0614 Is. . .7;14747,:r'••-'-...'. / =-1\:::;r1,11Y.IN— _2 _ =,_, .:-.0.. ..? 4— E--- - i. rir•Jgtdr-y,,,=------/A\ APV•y-ii.-\ =1.....Z.7: ...*••••• _::-.;:::::.----..,Ir:;!. = - 1,--- .111 -,1)ffliVjia*?,.. s....- --=- ..-.:_ -...-, =-,- .,-p...roi.i.-1,rthliBa .--.m..\,:•,,,,,.. e.. .W.......... -..--- ra•,..,64.alim 0,-1-111. ecatilt.":77;t.i iillii,—.-.:INN..,7,-Mi:Wj::Vann in,_t m- .,.. 1 • 71- .1=---- ' "- - ------ -EMair irJ Mill- .ins=m -aum,NA— _,.,-,--,L'4. if-miiitii ,,,1::,:::.--aginia - -.'"'"•''-'• Ma•••••••ma till TN. 4•1•••••••NA.we,4• __-,_,--7- ,,,..---,_ ,\- -,P..7.• r...1.. :.-----.....---........!".:..... - \ I I I 2.•Tim:gi••••....2.Z., ••••Ok CAM.At p lail I 16- 7 • 'A-01 mil__---7 L-_-_---=1,-: inning II _LF---iiiii ,-ri ..- 13; 1,....*I'--, — rrait.••••••--___,_ ....... .--,---1-'-' 'i,,,.1 l 1 'IL . • ° ' 1..-- II- 1E4 -ERIE 1 im..71.2-. __ ,--- , •• 1.•1'Min,,I '--7.----;I IM Illill111 - ., III[1111 ri PI . M. _is- lam- BUILDING 1 __. C >< ,, .,, 1 ir 1 .....:•=..--.-._.. .... I c-_,. M.-aCO•..9.•1-•K-•4-•1-” ...*..-:44--NT01r-."I--,.„4-Aiti-04 ur 4--i- -ll:ll- -. . .re.cf%W., _._•_4.._.• _,. , ._-----i. i . W1 -i & 1...i gidn , - _2 — — =1 J r41>A C7 NEST ELEVATION ftD*E VSoAloT IONS _ - ...,. SITE KEY As MOM 311•0 No .....1 i^.. kill./ S crl A _ 6 1.- 0 Z O (w wwcr� rIZ a BYO Q OU wJ IE w0> LI Y J w <CD ——. —I w CC ... I 1 .\---,�1 — —--— LANE USNEQ.011 i I I I i G I 1,-- 9095 SY 4 ROAD STE P��--�...1 I i I V.,_,..`.1 �y-- — ��--�y '' -vl' Ir'--.�-.t "tKK69495.OR9/015 "Pa V sb.1 I ` ; ARGp proNcl no: 99:70 dfXF 1.xE sienna lE }[ E i° flu Lei (c iy iafx� txEIs `i,,ra• afCE u3rn j —� —.",'ETA — C}IP IST VPNEP FP E511L EY -OWER FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING I '--I /'� •••••.` Own El,nq.nr es WI WO.040.1 slim ria .ae pea O SSJI 3-za-00 Sw.t Roo W BUILDING 1 O LOWER FIR. PLAN O C AS WOW • Shoot No �= a — • S • I O Z OcOW we O O J Ow w in -J W ¢ OD 0 "'I W CC .I ! r f Ji 17 _.I7 r _ _ 1 ,� �r r -i-- I , I I / I I Oa 4EMAOR UR WEGO,INC OR ` WKS SI SURMESWE ROW.SR:.R \ I / I I I I / I / \ I / \ CINCo$r. OR WOOS ft, u_ i I ♦ I / III / 1 I , 1 \ UIOO vorr no: D91]O a c�\ \, u u u u`y Li c� u 0 \ I o_i_ , ` ; v tt _I sienna Li--=�--'r.. T I I I I I 1 --, — .L.J7 ---- —; . L J CHRISTOPHER PRESNLEY ....V.f.\f.•A....1"C' ROOF PLAN - BUILDING I XNow.A R. .Dole CD =_ I M1 4 -24-00 BUILDING 1 O s ROOF PLAN v IV C. � .i Shoe No. • --- -- - A — 8 ..x�. .,e ....rX 0 z In .,„_,_ /.07"1.171,,, \ A;':'...,.\/N\ -- -‘,..-1,i'''t\;•::.. - .1.-P-;:lt2;Milr:04, - _ .„. .*,,_ _ _,Z.\ _ — CD (.0 '""----7- if,tailiiii . -r .'47/4".:5,-1"*.\., . ,w :,,,,..:,:\,..r,„„ , --- - / A-4,.. ,- --__.s. ,....... _ v 1■■■�I . �t■■, , 'll��' ' lilt =II i'i�Mil 1":o.iii N. 1 iy ,, a,I� �o -. ��'1 ,,,� t. a Ik `_ ■rt96 9 : ., I 1;1i'l Nam rr -I i .,w9'w.a-- , _ .. 1 �Y I i:. rim. r 1'oh B - ■■{� 1 V/ ot, x..t� .a'. R■■ MB■■g ,I11■■ � 1. Yi :H I Bi1IiI I YurYrq I1: • . _:1 �1u1■ 7 in .. ..in ■1.YYI.AIX' L __ _ r.Y YYY • - INC■.' - r...w-Mix w W. - ■ lI� I ma auili nil u. �i:iii Y�C uurr _1 ,.. •• 1I.1 1111111118 IIi 111111 i i nin r..w.. w NEST ELEVATION - rr,.min 1C: ■ --- -s CC 11b 7C, _ =■1 re..... I0 Ha'/ iCB' AO-*- .....11.3 rers u OR WC sit`v ...,,n.r.-W. ��iii ...rlrU. r�,.r r.., - rW...w. .140 w n+ n".fib ..�» �c.I111ra , oof.dlla1rr .. .,„. ..., ■ j Y ..,_ ,.Wx T 9C 'Bif�._ Pr - ■•►"r II� r r. �.r.. • ..r C T`C 1 CC `..x o.aL"(� 1--..�� _ `I.I B/"a ..�,,...»�.- ■�_■ :::! r„ it - _ ...WAS r .. Wx. _. _ ._-- _ _ -• iM■ ri.xn •u..rn— - r.:Bl . 11YYNOM w. - ',i•.r . 111 ~-Yw..t..r." x.. x :.., ..r siel."i nna NORTH El.-EVATION SOU_LLELEVATION 'WUr_n __ G/IY.SIOINIA FIIISNLET ...M. ` •r.vr,r.1Y Rl U;L i ,A..1c tr....e l.Ye1 /� it urru...r. ...-_-_=. —.., :'1, :1.• ••••14'4"...\ ,i,i,i,I.,ti.,..iiiiiiiL\ LA-. .1_._-±_-_-----rare•a'it';:q.'!'.;;.'!.:-.`,:''P.t,.'=-- --=EdE al ` i \ r � hh, r9BBg E' :: -■■ nu tom ! mcn ■ ..;,n r. ■u _ ,.._. .,.,. ,. III _c � _ n1 B'u/F ( _a�--�I f IeBBw_. '�C.Cr II;i1 • _ — r 7� 'Ern B1 I illi'Ep 1..r I I Iim HIE orpal IN- 7 gE) t -1 W.. 1 `"'° IB■1�B al II a= �� E �_■' Ia,II�r :�#I•■ I �r1 �� a.■ I �� 1 I 11�0 � ..�... .«,.a --�-�� rN M (c t� 117� nor ��I�� I II I'I! �� r... .. Ill 11 fit n !wI I - `.Qi�II,,Tim _ .._- - _'1 , _ -= ......, — _ `�_L■ .44 tot 111Ii1IIn111I �-- - sdi. r lnlnnr'I 1 =21 ..x. � �� ;„t. � i •.�' [cc � ■■rY. �LLi�... 6UILDING 2 r Ex IC r LL7_I. f l rya # ■ .r■I■■r 'B LL■. rW f7Tll r I ■■■' ELEVATIONS B~ M sl ■ ,� l3'1 LI L ■■■ - ■ :L_L]C'.I. S1Z]: ■■a• ■.. -■ rYti'i:L (� _h I_l i5 i �y'; LZ a _ _ ... r■S+ _ CUB' - ti. _ _ _N.«... .� aim ri ■ ILLEt i —___,_ — d IB� EAST ELEVATION �►Mnr h ..,,,,,C o co /7 7 SITE KET *s wito -- --I J CoA R. • • • I— O Z O �w w Cr)M T 10— ( O OVJ O w w > m J COLi/ _., < 0 J w • CC LC:----- 1 I �il` I -- I �\ I it i �`�i J I MOM130 LATE OSWEGO,OR I Lr---_.a1 I i\ I �z�y i� � `��I 1�''�_�� ! ��i�` I I iC I L: J 9fl9lusurNN[ oz.E —� 1L r—.-._-J1 6ACRAYAS•OR 9R11! ARGO project nap 99170 ceV6E r_'1.'E GAME �' k IN a %At __ ;ri-rk _ , .. . .. .. _.__ 1 � item h. k a.�.a sienna = r:11 RISY OPRER 4RESIII[Y 1..9acAn•.a 1111,Ca I I LOWER FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING 2 Ak.ir 1u. 1-2fl-n0 g 9UILfING 2 p LOWER FLR. PLAN O L R..1 5., rn 1 Ho. A A • 0 • --• I.. . Z I 0 0 co U.1 , - -...N. \ - -• / IN P • Af'''',1\• \ 1 __ 41410n,"\ /fre•-.4„......m... .17,:,,,raz., =E,..„.•,...-„. -W A7.tiiIiirilli&....et.m.-Viri770 /_ .:1„•\-- ---'"-..„•,.\ ./. . 1.-•,"1--ks7t; — .000..00 EL • / .....\•/=„. =,.. -.--:-A. Amos Am 0 ANNA ill4",iiffiti l'-'4 V 'U.; 7-'•'=-1f,--.P.<4'.4."---110 MI -.'' 477•17:4ZZ • .' 11 ,MEW co 0 1 •Urc•m•or AM— a,se 10•,,,, 1 - -• 011 IIIM:Fntl gait '28-"Illtral .:41“'^ .r .-.-1 z.,.... -. _1_ _ -------- - r.;- fr,glint& lir ApItIf in a......-- - -P =prow. r_____--th:Ilt. `111E ei '• I, .,q;.'-allnUlm,- 11 IIIII VII-•ri lIfoo.La I, 1";1"1;••'8,1' ,. - •••Me....IF mg••••• 0(-) LJJ 1111111g1/ I., _WHIN 1 -- 77- MEN' Ill ,•-rzrartt.tv ....NIS sea /••••'?"'.••VTAAr'''' --,J.- M itle VII 'i'....'''II 111 li I 111: I ..1 AiI`i- EMIR '1 k 4 431 In MI UJ > in . 2 .liniiIIIIIIIII 1011.411,11111i . .. . . ._ - win IN _____::::=„.„ _J eo,SPAE - rr m,./. ,,..i1. •,...e._ /'' ', ..... .,,.. MI a Me 01.1 MT al Lli 7.0.,,m. "----7 11%IT f1:11 IN-1-,11-1/i Blinird i .1„,.-1,1„-, Irvin i . :Hum film ,..... - ill III III ' 11 IR nig 5 nu ism , mull < p I ..... — .,....,....... u j '- '-'= 0.0.0.0 Wen .n.....1.on -Eriv z,.;17,7:,;• -ii::,;.11. tome$0,1 SOUTH ELEVATION - EVERGREEN ROAD cc _ - ...- ._ SLOP< 136 ,..,7 _. ME OftItt4 CR -4,,,,,..., 7A,.‘_\ - — -Jr...H.. 1..PALI - OR OfItaIN NC A695 sr svotrasx RCM STE P - /- ,_ _ ,„,4 mi i-...\.W - COM MAINAS.IN 9,r15 " -2„Let \ /1*`\ ARD)p,401me NM aa.oa.••••---. T:.1..e - -;.--- I :IN r-- - ______=- - f.1,4110 VI ....... MAIN 1111097111:-'- _ --, ,0 NI ...: .ii .,--------.,---,-- -- - r II '- ----- . ---1"--f: k-r-' .--:=T:._;-- r-.."114--- . ,,.. ------• i ii."_';;::: "-- - - --- ' ----.II ii.--,- ....-...-:___ _ .. Se•ryre.11 ,„,. :II "mar .,,...•,-. sienna ,.......... , ,,,,,,,.. . , ......• ...... PM.la MN MN 0 • :-..4. ,..,,,,i.N.,1 ''''' rrIEN.t.'4" . '. . .,,,,, - :::'-•Mrer'''' 1100M,M.010 mem 004,1 001 ma. X••• CI1141510PHEX FRESHLEr LAM/11104/1•AA/A/AEC. NEST ELEVATION EA T ELEVATION - SECOND STREET -- f,.LA.._2 h.1 a......? / :1;7474;1,74- 1. Ar ..441 14 4E11- -0„...... _# _ _ ...4,..,d, MA",frp.,...74111111r-,,..--— Al47 ,---/,: ...4.11.,-ALT., 4Mter14......uvr.tr.t. ____1.141F,TaRA.I. .-gsni ii - =.- I= 4111/MI teltleinitealktr.---TiT- --,tommi-tli i.Pt."`'L...2:=1:4:11111111,---: 1,17.:A7Z,t, allielullUIRV.I .:•.--- .111111•-•77_1 ;#1..i"f'41-177;a.431 ,----.__-:\ 1•4........., .....a.-11 •...,....We / Ilitplift al:1m.ilii El 1 iin4rEimili: 1 1-"-- -.--.-- .-_--a-7-7,1.111ml BEIM ,111 -511' a"' , ' 0/••••10 Noe.0, 0,10 1111113114‘-i:1__. '''-' till...;"I'V41,ion;2141—ji -.7,°-E":1'-11 41''11 jmul,-421,---.._ Lain' . - ' eggit4q.3 ..,,,, i,I i6 1; -2-1-.=:.-- -0-.,1, I. - •J ,fr _elph.6._. --- .7 =com, e•-•m-----•-•_-_---- ,,,,,..... __ - -, 1 ELEVATIONS r ,--- -r ID -7- c--- a.--- -., UtifJX_Itill X 11-1-1-rr IE _9 . -- .12.1 -I, - g-i--.--, .,, • f-CIA I, =-= i*.. '-'' ....__,....______alr. :-::. s Li, !.... . .,- 1101,0.410 MI CD X 0 ' - --..--"-• - 7,; . Ws FR ',mum go cop..IN a. ,-. --A-2-- . __,- - - • sAras.Ira ON• C:;) ix, iiiial Illiall L WM-lei* -IX- IMO'VI• 0.16......E._1._i ..I ..1 Ms . ..... . -to.1........,.... I 6.3•,61.10 MAY ...1 4 I> _J--IRgiti CZ, cy) SIroal No NORTH ELEVATION NORTH SITE KEY ..' 11rui r A - 1 2 c-_-_- _____ _____ _ _ __ ._..__ ._. 1 I— o Z LU 0 CD uJ co CI- (J) 0 U .__Iw w0 ] tn Q CO V ._ , -T __ _x_ 1 1 ,.__.___r___r___if_r-IT--41-\-_-_-_-..1--i__. _„___Er ri_T----I\lilt-.I-11..,_: --±1--1 --- ._, / \ (11 1 , , , I /1 1 i—_ I , 1 , I \ I 1 I / \ 1 / , I / ` I ' , / II 1P!IS ii '.1 I. I �\ ------ /,�• / \ I ` I I 1 `�� / \1(\/ _ \' II alp. \I (_______) (______________...._______.__!4_, \ I `--- '--- `�I I I ♦L_ iI ' N /i _I - i L.._.1 r \� , W-_,`-J-I - 1\.41__. J_`1Ly» I _ _ - . am . n.. 1ll_-I .� , II • SIPn na_ ir.,t.4I•f t.Mr..t UIl ISTOPHF0.FRE5111.E1, Iax Yit nff•411,0116c1 ROOF PLAN - BUILDING 2 N=M.^ .I k s_di. 3-20-u0 p COBADING 2 O —i ROOF PLAN O s O Ul J AS norm Snfel No. • •A - ii I— O z UAW WCO CL PTO O U W W O -J W i _ --� _ __� • _ --� < CO a Eay INS use¢ - ii Z.n..IME*KOOK".c� s n vs SE somnicc xv4).Vt.P I 7,71-ir-po•- :-;:71XL.._ ____._'") _rt, haj�, tha ha • %k,i do 71i Ala I —r LL sienna C.tin IS PIIE0.FRESH1.EY ' ...xe.c.rr••.eNfr.ct LOWER FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING 3 e....4 ch..4 on. C— SJ.!. 3-28-00 x BUILDING 3 2 p LOWER FLR. PLAN CO p --1 O 'y Shed Nu. C•> V.: ______IiV-v.., --ip — 13 • • • • O Z CD�w W M Ta 1 co O O-I w LW" > W S. W Q CO J / 1 1 /1 l I -- CC 1(., / ,1 1 _ _- _- --_..A \ 1. .., L_i_ / uurx,w ` I r �\ I I 1 I / 1 I I 1 I I ` I toll[osT�cw.OP .: \\I': ;I: ar I I .�oR oR(ppR,PiC W 1 , , PM Sr$WFS IYL}(kW'STC P '- I / ( 1 l 1 � r� SIACIf�wS.O4 9>O15 / ) 1 ''.--- 1 1/ _____, , tit 1 I \ / I \ / I C I T 1 Yi. �__. a_ �I, nna Isie I I , PEMICIP/eP4,Montt.. CHRISTOPHER FRESHEST ....1cri.1.nPCRIrICT • • ROOF PLAN - BUILDING 3 m ry ft..„ ...V, w Al!. dlen.MY_/ r• x �_I 3=1R•CO CD =_rl Ina.Ma BUILDING 3___ Q ROOF PLAN C. --1 -- - - -- - A — 14 F- ;I';:"..."-"'--„ i .V.:4,"=.1.7•,= /--ItZ=.,;,""' ,4.L..„.- \ 0 CO ''t4;\era% •1:1.1.,..‘s\ .1 it:at•—Atlf(1`.1;.\--\----\://,..Z_4, -\,•11111, ,,,.,,,,,,..,,..., ,',',"'" //%7X\---\ .,..dr_.1111'‘ \\"\. .-1-.•;,'" ',. VI.I.t:7,....11.7*. ox-,; -.2.7:-..\, LJJ CO .....-.. -— "I- g ........* iiiriN '4:2 I:iit tit 1 CL T-- P.P..Pt ..•--......NI I 111 ' ' -... if .1 Al imic, i•pfG•Se Pep..n. 0 Pk•P 152.r•P p•••• 1 .. ...111, Cn """"."'""'''...' .: ::ti/1,iiine 1 ..-- --I --• .. to litirsil I I 'NIL-,"_,. '"•,!• -..... " - ;1 MIN 1 1 :: 1_.i 1.1.1 0 C-) ...........___ . t ...m., P.11•*•••• NM=PPM M EP -' _.1112 III ‘- ,. t rt,,,- 1 141..c-I,Ji LLI, IILIIIIII R - ,,,,.._........ 0- 1 144••••1!PM.----, PP,4•011 PM '' .•I ,,. I nos w 1 0......_..---- - ,- ••alrfTS 11/M'II III. LI_ rm.....fm, IIM III It b III at w Yu I I_ win: ili1111i NUM . . • '' ' ft---#.- ....-111111 i : liN HI 'M ill -...fig.p:,...... ...,.....,,,,,... 111k.... Insinli PP:WY.. _I LLI — ,-- ,-:..;• .......,..... CO _ PPPLPW•kall-Pick < 0 .11212.1 r•VANO, . -MP 10415...•••• . V IRMA O. MM.'PIP -I NO Pk 1111, L .. i Ir,rtt r,.. L11 SOUTH ELEVATION - EVERGREEN ROAD 'P.P., 5.1.....,•• 14••••ino ool mum 1.13'.i'-j CC 1 k • I Ln.ri____..1 131(4 R 1,45 I 1 t I OSWI GO.OR -.-..---AMAPA. OPP•01.*(..411.D.4 INC _ -_..-_ A. .....Pommy... -.-40.4•Ims we MS 1E SONWIRIE ROW.SIE.P P.I.PPMAimm.• OR 9/1319 IIIIII•iptaliMiliO 1 •• ...• ..' •Plia‘. i,,--!--.--T-7-- i ,..... ".... .---.-.1.1.,... 12.mm,- ------•------.I..-74,ii `-'•-•••--...b.. 4"....... ..-.--.7-:III:: :=,_•_-_-_,:z;-_ -•Lt sTatg.. -- ,...._t.t.. —•••••••••• Soo Imam .•-- -.....,..2,.,•-•.__-,-_--._... ----—M. =ill' , -,=__--71-:'•••S'• :--•••L=•-- .... .... - •-•-•-•-• -_ rEl- Vomm.m.. MI raigl:initti"--- II gillulni •- ..--::..-- wrao*****a. _ I • •, ._-- • •_.• mi• -•....PPP.7.4.:4•••......, .-,'1111 -1Elli-7=•--f-E---• ..--1M,. II :1•11.7• mow., islIrM, :::1 I------:.-.--_-_.-=_- . ---- .191 - ii=..-.- m...=.111 .111I-=-,---:=--.-:--__ 1.1 /4:: /use?. • keIIIIIK rIPOITITIAPPIt ea WIPP 14- -- -----•• y -FEF---.7.--7-..---,••••••••••M Om di ow pm •11(11•IP ww w••.m--. -= __.=-_. -- 1_ --..- •••....•.•**•* ---,-- -__-_-__:_____ 0 ..., . 1,- - '--- ELI. nigl-r----.;".' "'1'.7 ..,...... "`• I=1::-=--z in' ._ :' ......,... ::v.:--- —...=.- - . sienna ,,==...., i___.=.1— .•., IMPII* imines/I P V PI. -.•V•y,..gj IP.101111••PM.PPP Ws.MOP. IN•11.• 01•111111 0•NI• i. :i2.,..!..A.la.,:,•,..-.,11.,1,..,_ %ORM flit EAST ELEVATION NEST ELEVATION - THIRD STREET . CHRIISTOPIIER I'RESHLEY 101.111CAPP•AMP 1111,,i 44'•1.-0.. I t.r,r-1_7 FLrLrl____7 . , 7Pg::::=7"‘ ". .....____—.....I.., •i.PPP•PP,P. ,.. _. k '.7....._7.4' ....-. . ,,,11..;,,,,,/•-•••'..•.... M_,.. _,M.W .-•‘,, ....._-..-..-.-.1__ '- - '—'j1.-,:—v.--m . --.-... Is.“..01,,,, 1.-.L. illillg. ..-..1.. ...411 Mai'.7f.g iffille.12.c*,').- Z.all:::E.-- 04---2. :IT:2.-.-__ - 0 5.--,m--- "-us . •tr... PP)...Pi•• MY•••mi••••VW•••00.or -....'-......'•-•,--.. . ---------- =---. a.7_1-01=1•aNIU ---. . .11111111=7* —VIM••••• - 1- - ••••••••••..*PS PO No id' ... ,-.-111110. 11.1.11111111111011111Mil -------.•••\. zi....H,r.::., =_.. _ rrlr-_-t.F---j , .f Nti=IMO ff,:11143: ifigZ1/111 g:, ni .1 •••• ••••"":01:•••••••...“"t•Daa'.""ec...7rt''. Opmv..4 P.p..Op ...• P-4.-.....•MA, -_ I 1 -3- ,,-; ....-..-t ,...-4 M S,1 3-31.00 _ -- I T.,' ' 1 f F l -s-linizoin It _,,.....7..._ ___ a P----:1 Ent Immt — -- R..Al• ,..-, '-' X - - -- f ' INV 1_111111. I t,'I;,I'I'I-II'':i!: . BUILDING 4 wo•Ommiopa.-- =ism=litiow. CD M - --- L ---r.'rx,..,,,,r 0 Ex, ELEVATIONS . ... .,NIJO ....-- ...... : ..,-4.1 it..A 1 VAT, . ...mu - ["{: Z..'.:-., r --1 t4.- ,...,'4:-.:...:- . i:--10,_--EL-- -, -- - -- i - _ ri•t - . , ,-,t en', . v -P.,,,, 117 7.7111 11". • <I D c:-., ..... c...., row Gm;lie - , •1 I NOR 1 I.1 0 CO Cm NORTH ELEVATION r SITE KEY ,..L.04.2\D VP ',howl no 144. fill *r , _ 1 5 • • • I- 0 Z LU 0(0 W c*")2 r U a—' O 1w WO> Y'J W '---:- —--s cc LCS':!R ��-twwy I R rRWO LON 72::, Ifi I OM!!L tY1:1�.^OC A 9 n1! ► rl- - - .�wI.RE�IT M, -Ica=:LVila �I --: II 1 tt . --- P s� nna arum►-.,.,. .,.�.,t C HNesrf,P111:R FRESHLRT �nxi•....� n.a Rltit:t LOWER FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING 4 u..„n cr«.wr w N. x BUILDING 4 - O = - ---- — pp (LOWER FIR. PLAN _ As Norco snEa No I - - AP - 16 I-- Z C). W 0 Lo W CO 0 (ID 0.--it, 0 L..., , CCI ---1. 0 _1 W I2C /ME OSVItC4.OR I i • ri I 1 /1 1 / 511 I \ 1 I I V1 1 l \ ....._ 1 I \ ! i Ilic'GRmai''''REs.. 7:49..7'1P sip. nna ------) C1-111.15TOPIILR FRESNLEY tal/VSLA/l•na.noltC1 . . .—.--------., ROOF PLAN - BUILDING 4 —Momal.ai Mt IMMO,PI Mt:MCMCI emo Mil Mt,a RN AMMatili...APR imma• MY.MA.1 W•r,r la M 6 a/ cn.,1.0 0.• rn ml. '-- C.1 X BUILDING 4 =c) _ C) CO ROOF PLAN i — 0 -I --I .......s... ?§_i_trig0 Slwael No 1 / _. • • o • • __ , ,1\ -- Z :=id kte /-7//"N .41?-7‘ ' .tt'\- /. \ • .'"!".'_,/,.\,\, 0 co W ..........•--- -r.E14M,IIIII s MI I in' 1,,,-12.'"f...4i'fite...,'fli".71;4T4cf;4141:\..,-- /3. "\N._ ./..1,763\...„ 7\ '11' .. " • 1 ...,.... 1.,,,„ ...„,:i 0- "4""Ir"7---- 1.' 1 gr4111) 41111111111t .' rl"In! Iri“''A Willrlfld a ir 1'1'MI '• 011intnaY AcriA1* ev,,, .... 1 ,,,,,,,.,. 'iro-, ,-.. '-.1.. j:::9. ...10,4.„,,,.. ..„, /. .,,,,,,,.• _--- Js....r,..,,, :=7.„..-___...i.......*..11,91,g •_ !•1191w, , '..--1---:,..11 Hum.,,,.. r 1 i , , , ,„,,.., ,,,,....,,,, d, ,-atamm4-6% '.,::.:-/4" "ti, _ --- --z=t:...7.;. ..,,,,,... _ . .. . be, - ,.111111111C1/1 3I11111111.11 i s11:m 1----1 11120 .liMki.lI.11 ii•I 1. 11I 0-1.„'-I-I li MVlAi :,,,,k,,i,,k,,,.i..g•.. .`'... '•'' M iIt Miii.rITIli.l", I'tc.'''..''.'.tk'.•i.i-'il,, -mi40.I NI I-1n-I-'11-7y111-Ilk45't:111-,L e:4 Num111 al Ai to0.i. -L, lk,. i-1•-,•.,'ie.I i•l„.l.1'' L =,,,......-=‘,..r... • 0W.°0-J W>...J ..- .:-13.jMI I . NEIN AIM Xt. 03 11111 Iii a tiiiii NE ;,....... ....,..,„.. 111...831.•• ...1.11.1.1e3 MIO•11. < 0 •• ••••••••• .112.1.42101.111•100 1 W MI 41.MS N.M. --.1.1...10 . . 46•fil IIM.6 _.......,.... — .0111.101,11 Mal CC R01.9.11• fa ma maw ....... HEST ELEVATION - TI-I I RD 5TREET hi u-- --.7 1AKE/MEW,CA 7_1, --..tromaat. - GRIMM 010601/.vie 9905 5L St/110rADI:14040 Sli P .--- —- - CL/CARIMA 09 9/015 • -- a re A awasat Nordr4d.."."''... _-_-_ ---- 'INII11111r/ .4 '1 111,---L.-_- ;.q:..,111 116' ,, ... -----•IA IOW I.. --'-'...::"........,...___ _ _I- - - .._._,...._ .-.-.- ---- --. . 1 _ d.W.111..... ,II '-' i:11111:g a r--_•'-..•:t.-111;:la.1 ' #.-. -... .,._....7 .-7.- 7-.,.___2: , I wow.tot 1 . 1—=:: - -7-_--7.•-=-_-_-,7 ' . . .•M 4311'.'' - - •-• . - • - 1,7 - ; _.. a.11•40 IV. --.ORM,Mit.illata• ........,.... t''',, "''''.7.,..'.k I '''' '. • ... .. '.. iTiii...---'-n"..... =I. ----..-L. - .._ --,---.- ..V7.-...- .1110 M. CID, sienna - - -- I NORTH •oar urr.o.' — -Mil I MI Vnit.........I 1......• :In:: •ms•cat. SITE KEY ......_ clutivrorneR FAISHLEY 111,1.l...•..",1111,1“ SOUTH EL EVAT ION NORTH ELEVATION - , „,....,,..-m,._..,,...=,,,,,,. 1 .... rri4.7.. . ":..,, It. --r- Alg -\. PrZ..."'iliti'Aftg.7 irqriru--'n g,•0:i_oi L II 1 •!-.,,,L_ 7_ •_• =,.. , --- --r'..,, - -,g• _ xpel-5,,Ft . Agt,..4..,2,\ ---,:t.,,,,..a.zzo$T, :trait- ,I;;H:1 .:_.:_,-.-.1ipiis...7.up:, ..,,u.u..,-, 1 T-.-li .1.!II, i iff ; _ ,-.. ..1,1,.. ...tr. c .11= --.Z. ..4 I I --'%Vs:-014 gr-gpg: :MIN . •:F-2.-.'ff-A 1---- ,- -'---__,:-,-r niiiiiii Ilig! 4,-. , , , ,„,1 ,,,„ ,....,.,„,,,,,,,,” 4 r 'Ott.t.• ,,thiliplh:- --;±' ''''''j-341S1-74rIalrt441141111 ri Igirl 1111-'.e.t.i.t=r,3.1uns., "1",7 - siM1111111 1-r-r11111=111. !MT '-. ^ - - i '. IIIIII IIIIIII1 „:,.--. 4:1.144T,fiti'Ir'''''''”".. -!.'-ifili-ti.i- IIIIIIIIIIIP1VPRIIIII 41'.q.::,,t1 • :.-7..----• __ _ •••ILil MI:-_,. ,.-4 1 0• 1 !-__,._•,...,1_, , r. 1„„:.Liio r ••-• 1 I_____ t.:'-- --; '1.1111'. .'c---''-= ',.'! IIIII!11.. ---rf__I --1' ..,,A. a.m.,u, ..• ......" -...1 I :14.- fill I Ill -..-':.:2-1 ',,:'.°.'W-grf.-i-iia ---- - - 11111111 uP-1-1; --1—----7 3 EN ,--, ---li 1111..iU I. -.-:sr: - 1 =---- 7---: ,.!.1•ti ___-4.-:.41729-- ,1,7-I-':-1111,1 IMPI.r41;'....'.1-.F..; •••••' -L.'"-", - "'"I____ _- ppriIirnirli !HI l',I!_:1, 1 _-_-__1,. .,_'--LL'.--INt mi., _iii.,4:14 ,:-I-.--,. ...=.1.-...z-._,.t7= — '71----J---.------ --I. i - -•77-' '''''''' rur..... ...„1:. TN.4".4.16......--- •:-- - ' -IA •=" ••• I • I' ----------:" • MR. El • , •-t•I•,•TEN . :_I': 11111!111"11 111411!!".::T...-;7'!.:-2-111IIILPII1 lir!'.. _R,...---:),.tilldn1.1 —=_T-=---- -----2.7-1 2_-- : -4_..: - Dr.:1•EiT h,f gf---r e--0cI.,..' .:, -,,..I _4"i'' i xi • '! 1. i riri 1 I-OUILDING 5 ELEVATIONS ..--z-- -. - '!!!!PI 1 i.;,.: .--,1,--77-_- . ........- 1757- .!!, 14... - —= ' -- •---•- '74.: :,, ,,,. ...... ,:.-7.7,: ___..—.....,.m.,._ .....1-17-r-,vImer ... .!---f. !It! . ----:ar': MUM / TI.. ITT. Trri lir EXHIBIT 22 I I. 4 r in li i 1 '.;•:.. • Ni,..1....,. ••-•1:X:LJETi.1" (t i El ir.r.•:, or. 7 .IL -A . •/ ITT 00-0007 r_rir_rrx•r: ... foq-i. ELEVATION . . . - • ' •1, ......a I- 0 Z O�w taco) Ta- 1BYO OUJ Ow LU > J W Q CD 0 J w cc EIOE 139 IAKF OSWECY).OR _. 000NINC ON ORECON.I I'— _ YEW SE SUNMYSIOC ROAD.S(E P 1 T—T—--- l---.- —-1 _• 41KNuakS,OP 97013 r _—__—— 1 //-—— r — _— �I —� _ _ I '� AftfA ProAci nu 9UI70 I �_ l i i I i� I �C--�"' I fC I I >< I I �.�-�� II I ):: I -- I 1 _ VNo-a J ICE...y ^+NR:L sem( GARAGEc"�ce uwhcE ylljrt w„wF �,cF iffiK� R� • xit ;..� I.,y> sienna ;N.,� O y�� i ha {/ •- _ /• _ • I 7iL/'� CMNfSTOYI/kR FR ESN LEY % ' ha �. Me ' •: ill^ a.NPfCAFt•.1TCNITtCa X1� , ittla LOWER FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING 5 G..,.0, a-...W 0. Sal 1-70-00 BUILDING 5 LOWER FI_R. PLANS EXHIBIT 23 LU 00-0007 • NOTLo No. i :: — 19 S • • I-- O Z Ocw wch� Ta I coY U w O w w0> J Se W Q m O —I w CC • 111.41CO 136 LAKE 0fi®E W.OR GRWOR GREGOR.RIC __ .__- L__-1 J•- i E SR 9095 C n�f R[OW:MII[[5___ paoil 97701_ '' � AR501.01 no 99n0/ ___:_�I_-- _-/ __ _. 1j ___ , i,ii___r / _ _ II , 1--11, _ _i I I II / � I Iw.,f1,2 , .Iu,i // ` I- ,i \ I \ I I 1 \ 1 / , Il I I , I/ / \ I 1 , , s , 1 II \ I , 7,__, 1 / , i , , , , , . \ I , \ I , , , , I � --- , I / 11 ---�I 11 / 11 11 — - 11 supnna , i ( — — /\` ,I/ / I / \ / \ \ / I 1 I I 1 CfRIRTOFIER FR[SHL[T1 \ / 1 \ / 1 \ / \ // L1 - I � 1, —!J -1- II 1_--_ II 1 / i L J + tailm AMOren ifQ*a sr 611[ [J.1• 3-20-00 BUILDING 5 ROOF PLAN - BUILDING 5 ROOF PLAN EXHIBIT 24 SO.-5.- I LU 00-0007 Sheol He. A - 2 _v —-- . -- - - l' .. Z ---1 0 ,--iro iiisSIt•vitit I LI-I • .4114— .- no........ , MASMAgl /AMMO --.4C...Ttar O. rattit..\pr...vit \InAlts 111=. 0 CO altd. / Vitii117,11 1.5Ceiti 1 COW MOM Elf40 iti.21 -014110.1.04, M___ .,...... -Met".fkitati aittacL I / 001C ItlL KO LLJ Cr) , 1.04Vtttx Kit ._.... Siii••,.. 1---- • .4,,:,:ti_;-...„- ,--.,,2„:, __„. ...,-0,1h. . CL 1 :::, :._..... =mt.. ,‘; ••-• 0 . co ... 111111141 'I- j---— - ,--- f\-..,.. : ----- i , ,_, 71"4; ="1' ••1•• ..••••'--'---- •'.."-- —1 , [AMP.si KM.AInt '. I 0 111 '". iii a" —14 a .a - • - 7•' all' Ili 1- c) I s I ii • • LL1 f , —.''-' _'--r_illci-VAYNI JEN!?elpl MIS_ ,4 F11_2 0 i .e u i 0-> Hop,--- i ', •i•r•-••3'--• --it!", ,,'---, -.-.•--' -,t'noir- ----;:-- 1 '...., , -f-,:-..-4:-..•-----,-f-, ..,....1,,.lia; , _ ___.1,, . 5W,... .-..- ..•,, ----- ,_11•6114>411111i-' / -..1 '• ..I ' . • A. 1 1 ,. - Mani l''''Aduir- gi=1=N — ----. V.Pr411 - 1 ---...•‘.. . ' lap MIEN i-• - 11P11.1---L CO 1 '-c . _L__I,,!j. • ', ' . ,• , , , . Mkiiit L-- -64 . ii .. , ill tin r L , ,, ...-- . --1 Ft+ Wilma•- -H-r.,1.- 'I FIE _ i.±=a-; ' --:_li .',,.'1-• ''--- - .1 . , 1.1J ,.• - vc„. II .. • - .—. - • . .. _1_1 1.0tRIt VA. L.Et,44 t!MEET ' IRWil tti CC , '''---..,..71.....0 Itott, nowt moon ..---MA0.11M.1.1110 s ,, ,.erom 7.50 .91009 mut SIM PS NEW,, ClE4R CUM ILL tua .I — . - -• _ - 1 j fft:r5e:c..•:`"'" KUCK 136 — -- -• LAKE OSVC.0,OR C.7170.70R ORECOrt,PK 969S SE SUHR1S1OE ROAD,SlE.P CIACKAJAS.OR 97015 NORTH ELEVATION r. '".. __qzt.__ I I•.:- ..... ---....-- isnna _ ie. P.4 ttostVe i•; /r'''' I t ... 0,1,40 °FRIA.E - • Amp AMP.OM Ingja.mgaimest f A pf.s.ti 1 - i 44riAarr . . 1 _ . , .WM13 - ..• .— a,min , am, mi, . , A...........h.rveg.g nesrg.lsg, .7.tt.-, . , , ' - ' .___ Ill ill I , gAglogiMM WM..K. I MEI .....,WittiatIOnt - ._.,.-_. 11111 P111 , I.-t---.7?,,_.V:.,,-, -i-. -•t!-,:i. ,, KgItta L.., k="7.it,ilil I.1 ,, --111 E=51•''-'''' "I'AP- " --.---I r'"r-1 V ,-, I•FL1 • - k.i,1 il.:.----,-ATit ,,I,L_,--4-:,.• '.1.1' • ./. 4iffirer--- . , . . . SHOPS , i'Vl4i,IF ..,' ..1 41 :8F,, ,,, .1 jpp Liam A . EV 11111 ' 1 •••tal111%XL \ ' -ii'-.-2110T1—"''.,'... .i.;,.,.. or' t-'-'t•.--it:-i, ' -• Ai'' l'''''si‘ P.C:' I. -L'ij 'i-- , _Ir----.! tfr ...‘ N 1, ,....t 3-41.4- ' PRELIMINARY 7:emu REVIEW ...7..-.-.........— , -'I'-_-1- .1' 4. - t - i . . „'•::.• ,,,,,F,i. ,,,,..,p,i,...f.„,„„, -,.. ,,k,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,.„.,,,, 4 i<PL\--1flor •.,..1.7' -__-...1 , ,I oil- .., ...,-,i• .,v..• ,,.. ,.•. .., ..0„,,,, At, Ell], -f1.1 i - ,•• ',. .. . IfRit ji . IJ' 0 Ortli$ gmm mgmA.......,........ -i.t,illiii r,fi •ni% li ,-, - \____...,,...... 1 0......., ,L......4 tit D.,. ,,:r'I'','t,,i,j....FFI'IT*t• r• . -.- .11141 / •I,.____.... t4Liott srirtm ett, aim itt.4% . - ''''''..4 ' . . ••4t.fttOt 'I midi. %VAT COSMO ttottli, i - • • S.....1.... •,,watt.14 • mar 2%401.1.111t AO tiLt•Iti.I Ui 10.04 ..V.2 '!MIXED-USE/COMMERCIAL ./.....lg.:a...SY 11%,•,`":'•.1,.":4',,t''.-,?..•• "''"'''" ............AV EAST ELEVATION ii3.4.11114.A War ti BULDING ELEVADDNS 4 0 IY.411., -.. _ ---- _ EXHIBIT 25 AZ MINN LI I 00-(1()()7 ShRel 110. if—2 • .._ _.• . _ • • 1- 0 ._._....OA.-_ _ .LOGY OM.TV. IIYV..0.PWIM "7C_ me u roo �R '4. r .T- .. 'lam/! /^. 1 a 6at'— 'Mp 'Ls �y j f�' 1 w_ /"1"'r W M u4 OlN ualmd• Puuwjtwm' ��ilb m mn�e I.'mw� �' Haul y .�I.c mlmle ' �3 ' 1 n qr O III Al •\AI''I' ligili —_-° �Gli^i 'V■ili■jr■q r■��!IV■�i■9 rig ii AI 1'+■��gim o �lam, SDI ,� c/Iliad Tt� .f�'ta��f� taI 4R rtsy�C�3Yt� �nu.,.. �nn ter# prta Ins (n Y _ Y- I I;I ,_9NKdw—..'�4 I '.c 4"•a-M '" 1 1 / -' '''- ,,1k; �..f., C�W 1 ,.<- fr f I) �IIMIapl r� �tr -�� F' �'. .^RVInWwa..xa LLI O .• r- a ...� ;' -` r+a,I'Iv tF; r � ?JNir F� a--�il _ ��Y11 ��Q� �!� y£t* Vidi 1 met 'Mi�w 4y Y J > �J B r-� ',qq p:atcltrttllal F a 1 iL' '-, w CD /.w fiiy �.I. I L 7 _C y .. v C r f = t'-. L :�','A.,,-: Q m ._ *-- '_ lmiC ie.. L__.,�� "6� 4 w ��y 4 _EraiRiAlgil LYu(2 SMX:n80 `y,pD al'.I{SV Man Lnln[f PIPS M Igla ly.yy,Pam, • papa Pal up.LNYL ,W'cww.a,-Al, :34 WANK.Ma coon Ma K-' WIE n,4M CW40C G0000FEWN,INC 9095 SC SUNIIISN)C NWO,SIC P papal nos I•304 SOUTH ELEVAIIGN r' �t ^ I N.i a]'NunIN[l 61L , - . � nut rut+e'.rMr a ,. lu fl .e i;i.N..67 OPPaal.MD—., "TTI a � sw.nWN. I i n n al� '( __; I: •• E LbII a ■ Ep, aaI . + -1 Itta i NW t'...• r+.iwti�'snn°.�. I 'j (.�i�iolw,..en+rr«rl II (t'C Ala•A.L,ONaNCI WW pi If I I N..'�l • I 1 1.W 1.'-' 0 I I 111 , 'yJII� --' l N M 1 W' !l 1'.�1 1•1� I mMoiurr i GRILL DETAILp��yy -. ..� p4' a.p. SI711Q 1 1! � �eNCPs ; 1 - I 1 T-=/_ I 141,f.r " E •'-� - _—A 1. -- >� �'I I'' n': I,L .DWI (I rN o11mw."... I, Its I r- I I (- 1.1 ,uM, // 4IOOtM,Ns I: ' 1 � �¢+ w. , , ! 1 11at.®[ama lam+^ • PRELOMNARY DESIGN REMEW 1 -,� �• " Y�rw1EV'�dl c�Mn IP • LAI iImo'• - -- -_" I r I I.Y, 4 / AAWI.! r—� Ir..ttO rcrLL '.• { G� _ 'ar -- •i �.I�. it I 'I-ly .i..-. In �N s4ml " —— —.EN n "„''". n.".4 ea w. X/rYAYi 111q0))1,1 ,/�7,7 4„'i 1,1I�. j �,1a II /, Y.: wcaus • .! M lu .n • _ ;,.I: �N�Y 1 = ��1f 1�! `lj J) 1 1In smut'Win `ti !� .,. 'I ��h F: j . .1414 , b I 't YY /E kY Y.II 11 Y. ', Y "" wl nIt: I : ey awATn.o;Qi]•00 u Anww I.1II 9,L ram.,1Mp.I]'Ir.t I.'I 1111019XC -a.m..•n'"�'raU',u,n i�--- � tlaN.,M ., ' MIXED-USE/COMMERCIAL �laa'GXan'WW1 a.m..CI •.•L...I4'I uw 41CLN VWiSp ' .rLlrC 4!:nfONC,R,I{MN•,MO0.W - ___ 1[Wll 1-La, n,n rar w.t•r:tM,uaa Mn wr.lxrn il'K.a nX,Nu:s •BUILDING ELEVATIONS N•.uI IA..rc. ael awa:ua.l;' ICCI"alI.w�WU. n.N nuu.,,. RAILING DETAIL 1(t VII I\MI FAILING DETAIL WEST ELEVATION(ALLEY) AS SHOWN �...- Hine! No I-, AC-3 0632 0 0 • ----__.--___.____-..._._-_. . _ . - - ..-- - • ___...-_.. _ _ . . - _ I- 0Z LU CU ciD 2 1 - R.11.1.MR MIR.CO.St ORKR ..._ ---._ _—.=-- ---•------- -- -- ..../ U) vt14611 0 C.) ....„ .51.1 6........,...RN.CORM;--.--...... ......, '4) . I • ....., UJ 1 N. N... ---... ...,ICY IMO VtAtillt-..., '‘ • i ,—I ...... ',.....„. •-- ----- C.I.Skt ...A KAM. IN...... . -----.- ........". ..-. -..... •------. IIII I -...., ....., CI3 *--..... . .:_=-77--. ..•"'-.... --;••••..._-....., :L...=_.:2=' , _-______ ---. ''......., 1;.. ..--..,, .:777_.=----7. • , -.--..... - .-- . . .--.. l•0 _I UJ 1111_,—.1C... .. ... HP.* - ; ---.- . I 1 CC r - .__ --- - I.ANC OSMILOO.6.1. WW1 0...........4...114....g..=...... .-'.-7-:•"•':'—''... —----#-. __._ __ _A; , .7-,. ._ . R, •';' num, CIAIT,It OMIT NW...Witi.a.3 .. I'. GRAIROR PRL0011,RIC 14; MD SI.Solo..61114 KM.%IR P ''......., '.1.-_"•''77,; P . 4.1.410.1 oRism 14:11=61,..t..44• RA...0.M n.....7.2nr=---...,....,........... '"•• • lE P,DRIalno 6.006 ' i'' • <111 . ,,.. j .- ........... MAWR Oft.114.016.1=6..=-.,>.,,., ..."-, .-,, -s. ....... ..;•-• , •FL:. ".*!."'!"'''.17:=1.1r=- ' 0 0 i .. . \ \ 1-1 81 11 II III 1 I 1. ,1,Iliin , ..---,---r-, illilnil 1j111111 kit.1: .1 I'•• • i 1 lit , ,I ..I I ,:). . . !-- —... .:\ :-. '— — SHOPS - ------ • ,. i sI_.... . . ./.. .1., ... . • ...,...„..._ _ , sienna , -..., i ..... ..,..........Irma.6.w.Mom \ .•,: _:•_ .,. ... 41. .., ,,,:,: . II . ,..1 •- [-,71::.,_1_ 7-, .. . ....I.. .: , \ ..,, 0 .0.0....,Salt•ER GOIRNE I kpff 6..../11.lawn.. Rallatiou am,MOCK CouRSR M..-, L: I II' II .1 , _# /1-------H . I ElliNiTg?,:nk..:1:•;,111! .....,,,,BLA•,.:e,. MR.6 wry R.k er......-, ', r !.r. ow 1 ,• , .1..LtiF e-t_!::-.2' _ .. Amen ., _CA.L16,..._, , . . lj 0.7,.x I:...ea • ' I_ / I I •••••-•11.• Do.ww•Voiol..Z.%,:se-\, s 1 . ..--„„ . .. -.------ I 1 AVYWAlo Mir 4 o A"...owe - - .4M I \........ ,,; ..-...- •-------,- 1 . H ',C1':'. . 1 ..., • . 1 I . , Slim Mr. Su.linil ,' .,.1 . ' PWELAWIART DESIGN FteVt.W I......1.0......0.1.IIIM.M.. 1 . i I ;, 1 . . i.. 1, - , ._. _._ 1- ''-' ...--- - • am um...wor101 a.MI. • 1 , , I i r I V Il I • -4 N-li 11,1 1.1711- 1 1 1 .i ' : ' r_ -- 1 0.,..,.lay Pow......1.. 0•16 TOM WAT 032,00 ow, 1$7....MIMM"iticirik I _ ........... •,...,... -- ......rr REIM/ ,.....- RIO..r.O.t.Mut-SI....L.V41, MIXED-USE/COMERCIAL ..- < 1) / '.! ENLARGED ELEVATION _..... AND SECTION I EXHIBIT 26 CAD NORTH ELEVATION WALL SECTION A-A LU 00-0007 c.A..) a_____ f . ...-___________-.--... •-- -.--- --•----- -.- . .. -- - ----•-• Ai, . 1 •••- - r r -r 1 1 7 I i 1 _ Ae...alim41^ r 1 ....".:21•111110311 ki 11 INV' . o 1_1 ' 1 I 1911919 tnerAT namalill 9111 if:9•90115 '--T-1,;•,1=‘_ II -- : 1 CiD Cf0 I 2 i ro..• T- IL.,..1 .3 1.....1 0 . D , co E 41 ,, r MN -, ,.... 1..._________4._........._ il--. ) -1 Z '.. I.....I > rogP• f. : .• _ . 0° < ....... Lifil •,.• ..,, .f. :.< ,.._, . ir, _ ,.., _ _ LLI > I i . . ----- __ ...J umdillI4 :1=11 ,- i ......, • '1=) LLI 4 miamissosim nun a fr4= 1.1%V CC kW 0•16.6 ^ 14 'LI' fifla CAW 9 •--•-- CCI '1 /MINI 9 11091 itafaff u C___- < 0 __.....a...t __L s, AA VActs r. 7 4 ohLa .__ • } -I' 4.. 4._ . el . ii i i 11111111 11111MS1111 IN .. r- — - :II, • ;.1 1.:- ,4, —... cc- -"-1111r111111 .1111 i - . ,_,..111 )------ -,., .:— _ it0 1 VA.099991 &CO.136 _. .,, 0 41 9 %., k ,r1 • _. Si : 1 : r LAKE OSWEGO.OR CRANOR ORICON.INC. P.NIT . .1 _ a 967S SL WNW=ROM 51( P CLACCAIIA5.OR 07015 -''''' ---14 Iiii . 44 li .II I;1 IL:19. •+LI i- - I -— -- PUN f.9- t 17'71.6.2 - ft" .. P.0.91 99 604104 , . _,....i , _1- :Liiii;11. i/ TP,1111 Ir.__ •.`..r.: pitir ----77'-f-LA:7.r4-._ •,::-.0 4,1-1 tt ill," L it--•- ameorimmarnmart .' 11 .t..„.7.,/ ---1-•1.1 ' , - ----t•7,----4,--,---- ••- 1 ..I'll -1-.I I 1,15:11,Ilittlyill.,1IL..fIjr::_"ci..ipid; E---- 1 • PARKING PLAN irla RETAIL FLOOR PLAN 0 1116'.T-0' " Affi Inv-r-o• . if .. •11.911 ,..". II_ . f..7t • Isienna / . II . IMEIV•aory.rowtdv.1 1 . ,..I _ --L ---- .— 7 :: __, . IR. 7-,------ -,-:•7, :t!•;!. . .Al2 996S S, 440 AMA 9 i',. • 2 9.2 999 If 9•11.MIA.off Qf 11.9.,49II 59 / I — . L '."........ .i ... .9----- ., .' .. :1 11e4?;,....umts -— MU ott,lif.9 cam 1 •I. PnaPANAHY DESIGN REVIEW ——._ - 1 3 •-•,;.--Fo--_--1.---.--60. 17:474-4r"-- .!:.:1•!ii ---- ....,„ NSA S 1-- .:,..k..,:'.:,!.' Mt Laft:Ta:•;• :,,,J,,i _ ........ .,--- t___ • ,•L tt_.,-.Is__ .,'.,._....k--c - _ lEti .......____ / i_;_,,tH_ ...,•:„1 _..__,, ...__ ._._ _..... 1 „...,,,.., ID, , .---- _ ,nw. WO 03.76.00 CD M .• 'e ;PI!IIII iI,I .• . • .. ! 199 'I:,•.............. MIXED•USE/COMNERCIAL _-.: i ,I, —17......!iit;;,:;..li.; II.. . —.-- 0 —1 — I ., I' - 1.:!ii ;'`,.:! .. BLDG.FLOOR PLANS 3 I-Iir ......._ :-.- 1 AND ROOF PLAN ---1 I .... oFFICEFL-0 OR.P.L A N 74i rn' . sr. 10 .141'11-;1'4)''.... :;„1-.. -- 1:Illit11 I I•i P:7-.'!.I '..i.:, iiii.:Ii1V-, , • I . ..- _ i.,.I., ,t,.......i311 . ._. -, ni LT1- 1,•..1s,-.21,±11- -711:iF518,. f „ -... ROoF PLAN ukr-l'-07 • • • o ° I .. Lii 1•®.8�sfI61s1`QIn . e.• -L.raflit‘ co I I EL___EL___1_1_11-..-' ..oc J SITTING WALLS t MONUMENT EI.EVATION SITTING WALLS 4 MONUMENT PLAN r — "` Q U W w.,. w.n., L 1 r.....__ . __..m.rz...a : 39 1r ....' --. 2... .Hiivir.,._: _ iii..... Cri ` ___rival 1 / tun " ' Eau, —sI '—:.',..— FM. '� W'IPA -. q } •'hl S •� .�A _.�°�iPa "--_mitsi �[- MAR CC • ine 1 . s ��■ aoc.lu .. FQ, I.. LN E asxro.ON SARUM ORISON he. a��a�v-=`y ■IMg10 secs s[sul«rsnr no.).Or.P CIJCNNNS,ON 27015 I SITTING WALL SECTION 0 MONUMENT SECTION MAILBOX ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONPERGOLA AHCO°`"f"`" °°170 I "w ,. ,C•r, ELEVATION I I till IN� - y.UM..u.l.v.w .roc ',Ir.-:,:,r r, 1. •4 4 _ I _ I I I - CNNISTOPHER FRESHEST U P P P -� I I 1"NP.C"P.,n.C.ITCCT — F - - — — -_- • -- - -- -'1--.-- 1 [ — .:"'. •4<1. [ -1-- NM ! Eil ____ LAM On W441400.444 -_ li-- Iii ., So memo Or pram.P c .a ON. S.J.I 3-2e-0e ...I no. X PERGOLA PLAN SITE. DETAILS O 2 .....•ta. PERGOLA SECTION p CO O -A O N C o " 5ha.l No.C yr CB `_ C.. A - 2 " I- 0 Z (DCw weo� 1 T 11. i'w \/O O�J ,. m — tr. r { O w m. j - I n9Nl,51eec1 ii ISECORD STR'2T MONO ' _ ¢m w 20 LAIR 20'MIT 17'U1111 J w CC SITE CROSS SECTION EAST - WEST ..( 136 AA O r•�� SNEGO,OR I,YIANOR OREOON,9 BLOC1. 136 LAVE.OSWEGO OR. rt.� 9095 Se5W.11rgIGE R0.1U.St[.p 1 1 -�-- CV,CIUMAS.OR 97011 G R•10 10 K. ARC.O rn..f.cl no. 99170 tt sienna CHRISTOP116R PRESKEY Pe llir r- d __gg .1 s y Ji uAi *V..w w.1..* o.. SITE CROSS SECTION NORTH - SOUTH 5.11. 3"2)'0D µ rt fl1 LOCK q36.LAKE OSWL'GO OR n.r-"'L�_J SITE CROSS C-, X ns 7a >b 10 00 SECTIONS co O —I A$N)fEp Shea!No — — •• Ilk i - 2r • 0 • - . - - --- -- -- -•— -.. ...... _ . i— Z 0 _e. al 0 co .. .. • . .. • ' • . • LL.1 CO a_ It • . /' • .40' .. u) 0 a . . . • .. . .... • • ., _J i .. . • , . ..-0,' '''''' , :.2-' • . . V.I. • - . . _1 ...• ,. .. „. .;-.'k•-.1..--;.. .---'7':3'.:1-'':-* .,....--'''' . ' . ...-•-` . .,.<-• ,...- ...-- , -- .., , ...-- .„ CC .14.1t,111,1:1:::mitii_.,1- ...ii,_ 1... t..14..ais, .._.___7E.) .,..1-4-4 ,iiiii.k-031l_wttivir‘t....i..11_.1.1_,':i...:....:::_ip:-.I.,.. ..1':.:: 1.. : . •,• "..';':,.-"':'".''''1;-- ''' " a V'''': / .--- ' . . • ' . . , ,.., • ROCA,58 --Zi'Z'77--'-' ` • . LAKE OSWEGO,OR ' 4.3..:".' .7.'Y. - ---1"7-1•f.:'',.--'7•::::_7'.L,--'-. "-r-•.ii":-.''''.- _ . I ...• • . GREAIOR ORION.INC :r.rE.9-•i .. • ----,--- I•-•-• • •,.". I. •-',. ..,....--•`,-' ,.it--.1-fLi• _-- 9895 St SolltirSDE ROAD,STE P EL.:WAS,OR MIS H177--- :•4•Irl'Iri 0.• -r ,r---4 - ) , .144.11i:4;1;i ''.11t..-t...4s--.., -----2::-.,..--7-'::.:.--.:::\-:.;./_Al'N---c-W, ',\- : te , il to i ! i .•„:441 ._,,, .41 ..4.41,1 . . liaitit 4--_,, ! : it 0 .- -__., ,,,Nlvtu, . I ..? WA • il"MON'''Ettiigri d't' 2'all , • 1 , : ..--:i!".,....;' -, ''...:..„--:.....tw,.. . . " _.. j : ' ; - ....-.'I.- its.' ''':• Ill.i:141liv;"....'M . ' '-' • • , ,.21 111 1.:I , ..-- ile.::4'"• . ilatt.1.:21=-:--1, - -__ ..,.. . -- - "--'''''''. ......"-!....; ::::4;X:::1% _.11.111:1Kfil!'.:::,VII .i il,. I . -:-__ -.1 . 90/ sienna 1„ ..e,....astm. ,4.,,o Wt.:":II tilill+-77..,-,...' - 7—..--- 4:17 .' 'I".e. . `-4' ''''4111M1117ppligrat * —I-•-''''Y'-)1•,1,''.:srrE,J.-' # , ,,,„,,,,,,;:. , L...,.„,.,„?..., ................,,., L. ''''' ..7 ty.NUILIT ' .... ,4: 4 lomi...-r-IP 4.f. .41Lt'l ..,...r,"",,,•&: / -•,-,.: , .-: 1 "' . 411r II 1 tante.;ill.t.. CHRISTOPHER PP.ESHLET LAKO.CAPF,APCMITtC1 , ... J ',...''....el',,is',F,......,,;„:::.. . • ,,,h...:1-,a,..i;i:.iii, :•.:.f,FA.,,.•,•tt::_, .„,„1.•-•.-:*,., . II OIL -•'-'- r. F1-• . 1 'illigi bArlii49110 4 it'll ' Vitaiiii ! . . 11 Ilk .,i' it Mr41111I...1 ir lip .., ,I t.,,f . .. s .1. itv:it 4 1 ,-:...!.ir' 1,14400,119,1x01 i ...."J L.....2 •'' . • • ' A 1 it . r.. ";1,,.! iii.'111:. , 11.,0 .',.1,,,,. ..s...:,! 01 110,Fitr h" ' -11,-. -1'*.ji.V..'m '11 0 -- -. .._, -1. • --I ' i Ishi., Pliligingibi 11;,.2 1L1 ''.-- • ' . ' v..."41 ' j '. gifigui-r-', -tii:' 'tiliiiiirsii:ell__i ...Asir:gm -, ,,.._-,...,, -1...._,,,,,..:. .. -, ii..... f 1,•litlittl All #altlies.i. ais 1 i 1,..,,,,, 1r, iimiii„„, ..,...,,,.... it, 0. ." ' A 1 i%wit:0'ft ti,".=I- - ,i-,.,..ik •-• - -. •-• ---- :- -- _. .. )1 1 • 1 flit\ w.1 01141irrm.4'.._.-:'' •---- -; .4.1/41P:11-7,•'' .4'..7..- -..----------. '-'-'- -- - JO 1 1 1....-.. ..-- • • ,,,. , . _.... _ ._--1- - PPIFJ_ISENAPIT DESIGN REVIEW 1 '----::'' '-- Mr--'7. • ,..P--:•':..,!.7!...k' '..--*". _- 1 i) E---D;Gic...,•-A--"----•- -----'7" • . •-,.._ .,5_,,...---.--......- .......- I .... ' '....-........=...".-' . --.-.._..._,...„... ' ....f -•-------'--'" .. '‘ .- ___ , „....--... ..._ 0------ _..... WAT D2-21100 -----,,, EA.E.PA• PERSPECTIVE EXHIBIT 30 c.• c.--.- VIEW FROM'A'AVENUE AND SECOND STREET LU 0()-0007 . _ ....,1 iL I— O z W (/) Y O (-) i_i W ClU W O e % J 4 / / r ., r �'' L ,..-- ,„ _. 7 ^+ J''.>7 ,may _- ,(-17 ,_. ..._. :.. : ..„/ _• / ,� � .( ` _ .L :t ice --=---- LAKE�SwEW.OR "17 �- / ! t — 0NAu0N OREGON a.L L f(-1 / - / - 5695 5E SUNNeS.pF ROAD.$'IL P r-' .\ -\--74\t 1 111," AN . /1/... ..zi.,,,, .•.---e'•--::..1 -...it...;". .. ., f ..--.....,./ 1.....t7.7",_-2,‘,'/:"41.-.\-...' -,.4... • . ...--•••". -"730:A..11;;.1!-1:11.'.erliriiii....11.E.---''''.41 ki' '...;.t7. ,,A.:•....-% _ •1:, _4,--- ____---•. , 1 ,•,-, :, ,,„ ..,. Km-4,-e- -----z-a ---;-_,-.„ •,,-.. „• (4� Ali; li; Ill(i(l ' < W,: +i � + I I`vM,:*/ , NA: •1 1� llre; /,.� i�' i :�Ili j IIII`�� ki,-,. .,.,..,,._.,... . ... ..„....z.: 1qI '711�/�, �Y,.�IiL1:i..7if1� _ _ � ..TAT.:s.(i I� it g f N .- r ` -',' I'..=L ...77i'!'• f Ft�?.z4 / - f ', j• .. [I t, 't '!. 1,'-t.''tfiri!lrrs'! .- ;c.�:Cit >5, r :1i•M-1J•. 474011��9,1: 6�.., hF�j. .!F ` ri1'1'Irv, . I.{' 't . tt1 ,...a.. •�.•I • • .L ,f �1 F' ;, 'i z. II j r i` { i �f 411#'iljj7 *fI1" ., , •�I 1 1� �� I�0t: i S M '\\ /''.. - 1{i• ='P. ./ IIR,L� r �'If ve--- r I 7=� ;-miL. } .N r 'I� ' 4 :r r l -y�T _ II4 _r- �`p' , f -- - �r r '' .sr ;, ' ii+r�re 9 f d - wr-41,. sienna E. �y V`. , j� 4y`44 J'-,,v Lf`C 'Y/, I•irII,I�f /. ,dam ,.u i,. f •h-_ �' ,..� �, t1'6 f` - �� f •L I r� 1�' �r i�s 4(iR { t �1 f {.+ y f� CHPISTCIPNE0.FPFSHLEY ��- •ir �a.w��l � ;11 Ram.�S'f twit I� Rr. S- .)III 1 e > , ,.+({'�tli, *y v, 1, _ ,.Nasc.ra....cNirecr Jew • � i �=� '��,,• r 75C. � 1.�� r,,r Id-.� " i r I( i. r. .'" - • — ' --•"" -- •1,, — —1..=.14- ' if .4% __,...„,.._.,‘, ei „ittli ..,ItigapH il r .A., - 'r IA '1,4.'...otki ..:114 `'"-t (.— �` '1 f j��1 PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIE ..S.gag+ wAT 030.00 wl 1bY Pe3SPEGTTVE VIEW FROM THIRD STREET AND EVERGREEN ROAD EXHIBIT 3 1 ` ` • LU 0( 07 • • • LANDSCAPE LEGEND Zw.,„c..xr r<. I cP Cum*.Mow ^-a::w: a— q.. V(0W :. ......PI.... M•�/� e... y y ....x rII• rK ,titrsonWw' .fCL i 1 ,c .srw CO to. w T I ` W OW >' "� x a,. • ., Y K .O Z.- yn l , Fx ^M W. r r w: , r« et y, re • � i f � �T4jii I Ir,:Willi mEw...,xA,. XI... ; li1m �llUlUUWl ull lI� (l 'j1 111 '�n IIP�II UIIII I `Palm 11 Ig�rt�� t lull' • woos ma 'I- f. , ax. i/ III`r11_ a. 'I 2? 1� ° (Y ,,., wwr.x....wx. .,.w ,ate V ... (,/ .u�` .'L ''Ma 1if 111pL■ AEI rWit,j1■� ,,C u,�'=r.,o...r..W •• a' � •'l Dti .� NM I .; -}— 2d"'i= /..� RLDCN 136 `rM."w r:rrru° f a. ••••• illj • � {, � 9 �• INCE O51YEC0.OF rn sr,.no.... «'], ♦., �N I'. •anfillo at 1i■ ,x„ CRN AOR OREGOI INC. — sy 11 /r ''!+/!5'�I�Ir Y vacs SE E ROAD,9NI o s ' °1:=.:..x o"...r"'. ; a,- ,... } °", ) i , 2 r,J �' ,'vi�'''�I < e1 �yu—_a/ a it d VSR I . /Y"r.-- 4�i61`Ir,° :i ;_ a r«' .., f a« u `:: ? D - �S+` illlll� 1 z'o FOR :NLARGED �� qq CYiaJ _ a j. ,I oit r ' 1 41dN THi: AREA Cat.Pin a"' ,f"• NL� go i 0 im..2f. r +'■ )x;' 11 ;1 o. t• 3. - ..Ytra 22 •� - V t In :.:m.n,.-I S.•."w'.x...cru.. u• F ■LLt� �p• Eye 3nry• ■ + - «. •.1., °n 5v.n f+�„°°4.�.u,.rd . 1•41'1 • ■ ■ _ , w .,r"."ww.w'..■ .'c....,s ar-W ,a. ` : �5l� 1r r -�1•`" 'J • V■ C.a -}— .. sienna p • L i !a� / :.°'y,w4:w °o... a w.« 1syn.` I 3i�x., �`,``,�`µ T='as. I,r�f C«ti j ,.tea •,• .m.IVW ! �1C'` ewr lot e3 5 ` l ■yy >W `t ,Yu [e.,ulflW E//.//Yrarn,I -11 ■ a.exr-.u...r w[ be r W 1 11 ir W l',�S• aR ! n,a..,r n,l,.NWffi CG 11 ARGO .'+w .d W.r'. ufr •.< a �f I li 1 nY l� ryyl- IC LnN•FSl[1�3NITii1 j �.A f • V 1 � S6S �yJ+E� P�1_f of 1 - r 16 4 SEL IlL1A 1 J.SHEET A,rr ... « •• f.—,I,•I�In 1 I 4t"-w al If + : r r E 12 D raft ;A III Il dU11f11Wh 1{ iilluDl likipl lv'Rliiiilt 41111 IIU II 9 PLAN nu ARCA « `.—• '1' .y..c J `'i- il1W I ...un4_s,w�474 u.- 1it...l.ip 7.10. i ar .7:7,'',....".,.. >+•fr ,f.x „„,_./ L Nw l y, �T°T PIA \_ a � ^ >ro..+., W r.rr N.ww. n..rw ,... ,eao '�� l- .a• ».o-. _ :ia. a,r °' ..arr.1"... -'f. ff,. LANDSCAPE PLAN ,we.«,. OS °"r.'',"...,.. >•-fW ,a.. ND. MOOED FOR DATE i Da ru xw...r ' p. a'°°• r.n..7Z.rn� p v.. y I • v.r nw r '•,17...`..'4"°.ru,..x•,....r..' r w LAME/CAPE PLAN .,• U--' EXHIBIT32 �•- MOM `ra '°' `" LU 00-0007 c „® 9...,l.. rI, :::..:.........F.... .. ..r.....0,ur.arr..r.. •sp.. .. ......,.....:um M - �. Slrnel No. -- ._._. . L1.0 i LANDSCAPE LEGEND 1 v" tt�e —_ 3 HZ if ,1 ,' �-a�, � t�ii MAS.N+__ w w..e"""<«.r a.� .."._. '— $ D V R a-�`7�: TRASH O Z 2 I2 H B v INcPH rlar: w w, .w.. d'.a d 3 LC • > „r— .. ter. 114 1111i2' imair•Nilil,iir.r Ii 1 4i. .4.!, 4 BH I----- W C7 5CtV _ r0 I�i " ,"".lw..a....▪ r.... m..e /--`' y e,- \N� ie ".��i iCCD,C .i�.• A ' p � O io • Y. w". "" . • `� BENCHES If % J \ 2 PG I' WOW I "" ; . r. (2) r 3 DL a w . w r.. " 7 LEji ; 12 SKM — —5 DL - Y -� W 1 :'^ :,a. a... 19 P .:�..,.. .. 6 DL I ,xF Q W p AM o w-:• s.. 14 JE--1� .. �. :.. 14 PSA (i ✓i4; ._ILLI .. ..rw:.w r▪ '",w.. r.sr .... C `,g FIC+ED Po.uA PLAN s.e... nco u"., _ r rx A," CHI 7 OSWEGO.OR ..0«o;� w'M'aw... n w xr. a... V ��N1 3 •--F DU MPG __ m. r' ,vim., 3 �■ r l;Yl, I ORnA OR OREGON,Inc. u. .. w'N ••>_ FD —\\ ---_ �• 1 j ., I --6 ' )G YEAS SC SUN SIDE ROAD,Sib.P "� fl PJM — rFT �1! of IS JH 4 1EIH —ti CP vq.nao-omot .. wd� .ate ,..a 4 E N K iy�H� ��n� 3 CP 6 PJM «. _ � ra. < 14 HB� las,319 ooL S1111PJG WALL_ 4 DV 4 LC \ I H o J \ ▪ '""+ s".x..,r ;te.• as..a. `AII . i I� �.vKj 'I,1 _If a ▪x .� = � E��I<- ; I sienna '" .r`'—'".�"w tr- Pwr• K i'.0 7f 7 �C'. Y I 3 D4VVE--_!G ��,**4' f ENCI-1ES (2) • `—. r . ( — CD " 3 Hhi �,� �L ur --SITTIIIIG WALL SI"ITtNG WALL ( ac n '�• a. rrer' 1� O GMT + � 4.airs .tarnirtsr •1w ...• r.aa• 3r.. /\ 1EtA.AtICaEDLWTflYP1.ElL=d.ar:sce• �1R•I.AP F4f1N L13Ati_eaEi_as 11 "ark.• w imv.A..t..Y a )a a a. `� ..•..w a. tw,"ut..n I I ..w• a• .I .�tetar —f ' rem -star n 2/2 .a. + �, 1 Ii I w "..ww"'wwir .«aw t.t., fc •" •" a C. as. -! f AFI. 141■'I QL _ I'�^' wru_ wruss na.c.rrc c..sro-c- p ,F • w s"..s.• s� :.,•• a•wr.r vurtc" 19 i Wiz= 4 I w:.so d•.ar is_a \\ �� }, 1 _ 1= I. .r ~ �..• °�.aa.e' "e.W. W. w. "w • .e .«�.c..... Ar.aa - -- __ JHr 0h 1.g I_t •i.F9• 1 I, y w" _ _ __. _._ —__....—.......__.__ rn �r,t'7 rs __..._. ,�.. .. '111.1 R • "� "awe. y.. r..vw. 1i u' 3 ai —E I PgfC"tf tORWt - nr: '— t.Ari1BCAPE COWLS o..,.LLc 9nea +l i r[[An, r^_� i a'msxr.,ae3" ._ -x"rrn"I.r1msY .._ r Pot ... Awn ': -J _ , tC;q4 aAx. a a toy a.....a.......Ns... ...,... ELEVATION cwK.c-' ..vtnuc 1111 ...M....w 10.4..w w ..,.""�.... SECTION sr.µ. -u:c �, ilea/ eal No. ,'4�PLANIEfJF1tTAIMNG WALL DETA�..,..,r..b- --� ..• 15 P __PL rAP IC WALL DETAIL....•._ 0 . • i Y• h • • ro MHG w` SECOND STREET �• C5 CO W uiv.tmm' it Ua W jl ,I-i u.•.,nl " �� ..• ♦Z� " ` W R.I,II IC^14a 14.441.14, _I �Jl ... O III � 1 'yIIi •�I x Cniii� II n lill ' Y „IIII '1 pi:11.;Ef ,^ I I , l,, , .L.u - I,r� l, , LL1,01:1:1; ini 11 Ili s . 1(i• I ; da� a.,r, � • 111%.,.:It • I Lox I , 1fM I ri.u,CO I fr.tO•u0 r.1. IFF_„4.00 , yi` NIm I . i I l\ iUniN-iO.W 1�� Ii1Li^21CY/ i,,, .Y J jf �; I I.I. I' I .sI. 1_I LI. _ LI�l1 I ..I. _ '�� '-" LLI iLT II `_I, 1 - _ y�py y�,��MA ., J I LI':Ill ,l 1 I I Li l.�r1 .�..+. I I I-I J l i ' .� I '�f �,ormm Cllw,� �••/W84'f NIkYA • ... 35 ... V'�uf im BLOCK IOR J I n7 ' ti - 1 i f9 lAN(�(1$w[CO3 ON ppp CFAUO CON.Pit MIN i i 1 i I I 9465 a R uus OR B us ,_,»..• wixa no SOYA w L,. 1 ■. - -rN•a I�F.nnaol n-nana 0,11010 rr-,an 1 I I, 11 �'' �1t,I ,' � ( 'tr 'P }•*.uajn n-n,. i • ir7.,00m I I 1•I� P'Th / 1'ci'� J I7-IEl Llp; 'i! .10'T ��l L i a_ �::. CL•]U. a � � I.•, _ -.V J ., r., c ! ,...-.... � � h � _ 4[M9N.M�ii'•ram• I nes7.o,ae ►�� .' �ILvnm /";- — I , 0hy`� -^ I _•AL - il Midi I >zlim• �B i 1 rY Ail I� 41 . ..o �,� - I ; sienna p.,n.n .' I I. "F: i.: 41 11 1 I !j ;.1.-i'• 'L. I.. 1 ma1 I 41 • � ,t • ,i-1V.ltA, I I -i t;1 -9 �n_wrm a I_I I I I i!. .Li_!f -1 -1 1 III - -'l- j I �/ - '-. - 11 _ t■� p! r T� -I {h- I' -'- J 1I 1• I L I _ f 7.laad tsn 1 .n• �' .I '•• I rhn..ao 1 nru•I 1 n.Nr 1; n.iva:u I I rlpl 1.A.nnro l naml rF'1.,o•m .I- •—� - 1 , I( I �` I _.,..• I , i' auAiI uww I I { g I 1.. '1" nJl rtiAlrAr Ile II • ir- . ,...,- _..._ / ... �I�mbli1 �371ii 1 Ugailifilifir ri?�.I �:41 —. �•' • No.69Q)PoA DATE �., .. W� . _ \ tiJ^'_ �'j`,.._._ll..l.li , 13,1,411101.1111L. . m Y` x '" r,,,',21 ucvr-171r THIRD 5-MEET 0 = wovsrnmre- O ii ..�i !/ Sill UNN }ta-i Na6 i-/ l frwlCul i m,i - GRADING PLAN CI_ W CT' _._. _ 1•-1C _ i'r 1:1IAPISE SCALE ' Shoot No. t.'rnmo tt. ......• C2.0 III 1 ITITT I _ It 1 1 i. I -mi^^ z LLJ w�. ,64 '\\ SECOND STREET I ` .' 0 CO 1' R w CO W '— al 11 LLI r. I.. u•.�xx i Jg f1,ixAUrA is wait II I i 1•l aly CCI 7 �•� • 'AY��•nil 11,' W W.I ir I i .__I Li] I_� —I LLI 1 p .10,1C Wa.la& ,• J • I CC • I' � CRYIUR UOCC..1,MC + nlrsu ROAD.5n.V�:",•^ : ----- E4t[ RVZIAICAl7 I MCi4UW.0$4eU1,wgw R�i I 1 u7(�kIw wo,lurw°1, nw. ,I .W I,( I I ,wl1 1Dil II a W C II I)" L.I I 1 AV • I L "4 it Cr i � Gi) -—— •�rf .7 .��. 7 % - I S P n n al l i - - - - — — -w — — I �� IG I k — r u I I ( 4 YCTIR 1 •I 1 IvRwc.y lir H 5•' ' , : , fW(M _ ,. • ... _.. --.. I� _— —.— __ _. ..,�'� _ [; I I NO.63UED Fon 'OAT! rcasr:w _ -- - • m _...1 - a�. bar q Der1 X THIRD STREET p =_ / sw.__ I... rarao O fZ 6m, ; r+.m WATER SYSTEM PLAN O - • — w — O ,A v . Tar ( rt__. 11A1.111C:WALK r-J `nrem I •�-a C5.0 • 0 0 II,1 7----'_ ..- • 1 1 3 I -11 ECSE1\ , ,.. 110 I 1— • , I I / , .- = "I 0 r v.. 1 ., !MLA'AHIPI RM#1.1_.. 1.1.1 I .1*4----- CD co - I 11. SECOND I ;1". 1.1`i Ik, i au. 2. . ___.Eit....1,___. -,- ! LLJ ce, ; •— -•..._ .• ! if 4. I. I ;, L.I CI_ /I I' . 'i• — ' 1 ."- (1) 0 1 1141.7i.% ‘• . i .---- • -•":2 . \ 1 I fl.--- I 7, - 1 In.:., I '. ! . .- e ,.-----' • . i . vt.T.t;, 0° i 1 .....,4 ,, . 0 w 1 r I \ LLI > I - _J LJ__Lg." , . I'', r-r . Lu - rialliffif T,IstC.;'.'T III ' ri-'if. II ., , I I VVII I 21; .I i , ii III ,I, I < p, . _ i I ..ii. ____d_ I = -._'f__-ii_Li Y.:-.L -!__'Ii,:_": 1, _:I 1-1J_L-i..'.'-'•-•1 ‘, , __I 1 L1J . I f 1 If i 1 , . i " , is i, , ille - _: is .!*. ,,, I ii::: atocx 136 I .1 1"1111 .---'"7.,••ri --.t7:1' -- I 1 I. I 1 i „.r. . 1 ., „ LASE 0311000.ON I sus ss sj""CP°A"°"sircii '4,—.,,,„...,°,...:--.,•4--^- -.,,,..,,, -''' "--A.,,,, ..,.,...._ NA1433-• . E' i r?'\ i ,,, . 1 1 I Cucx....u.s.Gs aims 1 ' 1_..11, re.1 I, E.771 1 'Ma, L 11 4 , 1:J.: . - . . -.1 ______ ____ • \ ,, H.,filo. -z - . 0' ''''"''.1 .0,1- 1r,...-.-,...:.-•....I. '11,.- - 7 --"-.'" - , 'i• irilia i ••••-.1_ tarsep- gs" L'IAS " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " """ " " . '' " " "I‘7 \ "." " . ,fs=7,- -..'-f.r7_—.— LI I.:1-1-1T7 I 3 )I. F - ' *---- - „---. „----,,.11 i I....,r . . EY II ,..y. 1 :. / 1 1 ,I r— 'r---4 -rt .------- ---f.....ff- . I II sienna _ , - 1 , 1 • ,1110-' , • --I -.- __I- .--_1 -1"--"-L- -I - of _ 1 - 1 - • , . 1 E 1 1! 1 1.1111 .. t- ,It',,,',"? Villi ' I • '' `' . I 1 OW 1 1 1 I 1 i 1! . .1 . . . 1 . .• ...... / ' --fi.----,-- .'. s -. •., 1.'.... I ND*BUBO PENI OAR I‘ ...... -"N.. -) I _.„.... . ._... . ... . . _ . . _ .. , ....- . _. . .. ., . ...' -...'1.'' ---.- -- rt...., M 1 1-1 THIRD SlREET — — .___—__ _ _ - • ' 00•01 11YE- ' - - ' I , . 0 co _ _._...._. _ _ . --- •-• -••--- 1 _... - . . 0 —1 i'::%I. '" t Ri-,4 ....... .. . . , ......, I ...,. c). ...........a---*-- • - .• ....... _ ,:.... ._ ..... .D GRAPHIC SCALR Snood No, si=lb k.'"... T—Ii. 1, C4.0 (WIWI•B it . A_ i I I ; I I, _-- - -- - — — — — — -- - - - — — - - ----- •I1:1 • 'rI ' • 0 co . SECOND .- .. -- ....Jr0 , MS Ih'� ' ' w ]O.W IWI M �' _SE2 �,m)>If.- u 'I • I' 1.,1,>> 1 ; w 0 �1F-IOIn 1 ! 9).W IrylS.u, \ g C-1 fn.v�• 1 �I I: cqr 1o:-rl tlQ c-zr Cm) I�InTso— yy �_I'4i3S- Y J w -- F.Iw y8 • '_..PTI 1 t- -, x. qyj I CO J w © r Iv. '[dry QL I: -•'• I:�i j6 CC I • I K.Olin K.IW.r a - ::.• I I I ..E IME OSWCN. OR -- • j I AC9s 5t 91 1 GRAMM MOD SIC P • R F n' -- �k ! G!• �f°u_ttl I } c✓cwws.tar a ols J� .e n x�> gill :g?e .. , 1,1,t7•— a1nT�ai a-AVA c17R :/q qfi ;r° I ; Mt Pr�dm99mE a@a1 JJ .l9aw it/(5)12.,11. .4, r.J 99,n b .,V ` ' �. 1 I II -I. II -_. _._�y`._ ,�,s(uo.1 W1(41r .n>,.'mg non mu TO WATER tt ,. �I ��.F 4a - I PI rW -" ryry RI9tr 1• >eiw'Ir nw w.v +'+ Ipp _ I III 'i - l*+') 3u 4 y l 1 I n ; < Ill 1171 t 17•- �`l ) Ir u1}oW;" (i I \ ! .� j � rd� I1 = s k:nEm /- v I t I ICM a-'- I I v I 1 \,��i. '- ( ...Ili q . rm-n�n +,rn /®ems �IIVf_�9LL1 11 , , i, nna� ( 4 i mNl iirr._�A_r 5. M ri:(7,0 f �tC-R ouilsl>'ni z Y Ie �•_ a ui xn 1Y ouwiu *1 Q I {C ; : I r u"z1,I I �� -' Iw • ` yY �i � so p>z•a Iewollu,"° .1��p 61 I 1. r,uui<il is q♦ I, • I , .� tlL.1_ _ {I ,` �w... >olll.w• MwIW INm 'IIPI91_II _- (IrP.) 0919>_ �1 1 Q1C)IY'•11r91.� I, m C.RSY �II , IUI- �' �I t' WC�! U .Qa 1 (tn')�• A A-.- I S I 'E-root11 (VVVVp K:Iany -r. �� HIIf ..�,rs aq�(• was 1u+o/ Y" ra.OWED FOR Date €a � R rf 'r v i� ( .• __. _ . OcC C.0 11'111W �w11 .[i [41-na.b 3.[A out )-]0-aJ 1 W - —_____—_ •. _ 11 11 1f'•.u,lT 9re1 rw Y CD 5=t1��0' [II_, STORM DRAiN PLAN CD —_ - o r. • rw 11l.6 no. GRAPHIC SC i5........ .."1.1( , �1 Pr.* ---0 pA /tEm7 0 • • CONVild j_5_1.1 4 i 1 — ....._ .. - -0 I— '01141'‘ - I I • _7MT-fa'I O EXIS1.SkIVER_ WW lt. 'I, ' .10 eon 61.w... L'1I 1 , . 1 . "..-..-..7---- * 1 I 0 4-..., MO z-OAS- ' - — 1-----I----—'-- -- --1 I' -----7-.-----.__ w (Do -..........._ 3 ,. SECOND 1 STREET. s ...•-,, ur allptIPI, i I '\ 1, ) ---____ me*_ ...,._.___. ' • W CO -\\—....6R(IV/11.1.1.0061 1 ipOoN1/64/11UX011 , i some,. \ • ,. CL_ I I Mt VhiAt 64 0.0%..9.AP OD 1 I . '' 1 ttf 1'1 I 4111.1113i11;;;;In 1 I 4r.-/L 0.:I.--!,., • • . , ., ;_... , ,SW', r11.1161Y.r2,7,11, .11.1 1.1141,. . -...., I Cn 4_,L4 1- i --Ifri , , . ....nr __, ....1 1. Ilia,.• •-' . I 0 i.1 111 • I ....-. I .,,,,r 11.-- • , il;'.,.127 ,.: ,I I \. 0 1 LLI I daiLT-I i •-•. . 1 :I _.> ! ,.-'1,11,"" , c,...r..01 • ,_ 1!".7...., I ,. ir. ,i i 1 ..T._ u_1 I KLVIT.4 ! i , 03 . ,rr. , 111NCAL) I ....1.. 0 1 PIP) .h.„.._'..._-,..,, - ....... - - .. 11. 6. .#1.. . 6 ., i _ I , .._ I J.,-1-.,...,_ ii ; I , .._I L1J — I All _i_ I . le f1111160.-a.... ,it 11 1 11 C--..1 Affirm 1 1 . 11 I 1 1 I ,• I' .- e.... CC PONE11/111/NLICOR . ) ll .laranLi . . • I• 0-- k . ...11 pia. i' ! - tagear- I 111.C.CK I.16 ;Mr 1.15615.1.11.OR ,_.. ---7—) , - ---. - ------..-'''k -,-*-- A :.- ! .. .4.- MANOR MELO.MC t e u t•SO stRV: I I 6'Sualar.St TM.; , --I It195 SE 51/1011110(RaI.EI S11. P . a.m.*,ok 97015 0.0.1 m=031 i ; 1 ./ 6111 I I. 1 .r' Ogili ow...) f I ,••,.. -.......11................p.atiapww . i , I , . 1 • ,. . _, • 66;166.;-L., I.! L.... ' 1 I SLIER IaiK•E I----., ' A ._ II MO -mu ____- ' • ' I, \\..yi • ;., \,...... ... /.II 1 . .< SMACS -N....... r , • ' ! !i! v.4 / 1.1.1 .• (....i /i 1 I ' 'sienna! i WW1 - Mill I I :: 1 I I . . . i . 1 I c , k_p_f f .....,,......... r.:'.;::•',.;7 7,; 7,-;',..`- ',1!I 1 .i :1.7.. 1 • . IA' ' • I 1 I I 1 I 'S-1.6.Oil. •SANT.ill SORR, .., 4:- . 1 , 1 , NW • _ I 7.4.1E16 IMP/t) ,. Arta ' I 11'I WOW oal. . I I I • 11.1%.1.1 I. . . I* NO 11.9111D FOR OMR 11'11 i "k11•••1 • , ,--• .-,,, " • ,. . TI• , , • -• , • :, , •':.„..• II II 171;011'.1. 011 • I 1! •I " • •• • - ' • 'I .J.Ii.11:-Ii.‘14 ''' •11, ...}.....„.,,.., iii r" m . _•. ____._..._.__ >< ^' II -- . .__. . THIRD STREET : - 1 • --- = .. 8 , CD 1 ..,,, •- 5.•••.44 111-110 0 --I . • . lawayiid,oge , . . COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAI, _ . C.) C> L,..>, . _ _ _ _ - . • wipepoom,.*.,,,,,, Cl --./ I , kLli cl :"1--'*--- 1...I Stoo CICAPHIC SCALE Sheol No. k........1.;;; C6.0 J • I— tIC4IT FIXTURE SCHEDULE 0 Z inn melorectioste eliSSI —Ica 1.ree moo nutter teWlefee ell LIJ -WI 0 CD *mat____ tr ou.o-g-t.--amiit-aareaA— .10) s......i.1/4 * 86$8 xe or re pa 16, 1.0•esi MAIM or 49 1O0r!1 \r•MV O - •ar r -- W Cg o 1 M ' arowrMWr r te . oe 11•1, CUM. W /s AIL n.fie sins t.gm Of NJ,*IL r 0 0el rir-1.1 Mr.or Warr* — r, . .. 21.1.01211M4 LL1. t. LLJ > ,,,,,...ay armor a • .IP - Mr — ma .---rti,rt . or p LLI -----' W.all mamma ...,,,,, rro•••r or .. --arall111M--.. r CO r < 0 a r" ,............... _____L__ . ,, CI necIsser a . USW els elseeurf __1 LLI CC —— ISOM 136 t AsE L,sEt.O.Ok rAtAtew ,• •0 tr.:; OM Si SiNsioWt ,,It P MOHO MU:. A..10c B.i CO I:.025 CLA,,••• •MI5 1,.....•••..-WWI 1.".....S. 4 AMS' • % : ; 71"-'''''- -r--- ...,-- ---- -IL \ .....__ ,,,...w....,,,,,:p- str,r--A --,,a,-----46‘6104. - '•' il.`,-,, _ ...**\ i* .1..aorms. ..,,;____.._..,,,. . .i.:- 1 F.-- - - aftiv.f.iaUfkiii7.1171r-tal r''4o:4'.L0.0-'- '. 1 ' l's` .._........... J , •Ak rergerrir,tot••••tni '. '• I _j— if'In .ONE 11 • •., ..f. , . .,•••°:_l,rZ7744 ;1 .' . -- , ,0.-Ltr. ...':-. - ' / 1 - ''''.."-,11 utitip-- -,1' ''' ,1 . i f ' 1 • 1 ' ' 1 [1 -' 1 e. i : . I ' r • . i: - l .: Jr . , . . 4,; a : .A l". ; 1'. ,,ai' V. % 1 ' '''''4 •""117.. . ..1.' t. ' • .r,--, -aa• a _I 4 •,„,,,.,, •;‘,I I:,. '.1.1...y•i.„ ,.. "„: , LI: 4 " , t;.4 . '--.1. - —,,.— . -]. (\.: .'• _• : PrialldR4ARY DEMON REVIEW T ; ..• ., 1 -1 ''''' '13,-;.::1::';; . f;;'i., ''''''''' " '-f-- ..'-- ' ., • j'. POW(ISOM 000000 c) x c,:p co c) ca , --, ..., L 41,,./..-11-7--trit..,.. a.,v: .--..---_,_,I, ..-.:..,‘.-,..,,,t • LI:i;:i.t:,,i-i-ii,-;:i - — - jr';',11- ' 1 ;"4 - •' P*1 41' : -T. - I • ' - 1 .: •:1 ,-'.411 •.__L4,41 i.!1 ••oor.or room••••of,e.•••••• :„..- ..... t mo,dge#5410113P '' ..,..,,.... rumour/we oo PLAN vA.A NAN . _ ..it.AAI Nv ES-1 c-)- - 1 0 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING DEPARTMENT LU 00-0007 EXHIBITS 39-44 TOO LARGE • • 0047 April 19, 2000 • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE Summary: Applicant: Gramor Oregon, Inc. 9895 SE Sunnyside Road, Suite P Clackamas, OR 97015 (503) 245-1976 Contact: Barry A. Cain, President Matthew Grady, AICP, Project Manager Tax Lots: 2 1 E 3DD, tax lots 8400, 8500, 8600, 8700, 8800, 8900, 9000 and 9100 Area: 85,679 s.f. (1.97 acres) Portion of Alley 20' wide to be vacated (6,102 s.f. and incorporated into site) Land Owner: Eugene J. Wizer Comprehensive Plan flbDesignation: General Commercial (GC) Zoning: East End Commercial (EC) Applications: Development Review Approval (Major) Planned Development Unified Site Plan Tree Removal Lot Line Adjustment Subdivision Development Proposal: Forty-One (41) townhomes and 8,232 S.F. of retail and 8,612 S.F. of office, parking, landscaping, open space amenities. Preapplication: Held March 4, 1999 (PR 99-0011, Block 136 - Gramor Oregon, Inc.) Neighborhood Contact: Meeting held November 18, 1999 • EXHIBIT 45 LU 00-0007 � 11449 - J r TABLE OF CONTENTS i. Summary Page 01 ii. Any applicable regulatory policies of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Page 09 iii. The requirements of the zone in which it is located Page 32 iv. The Development Standards applicable to major developments Page 34 v. Any additional statutory or Lake Oswego Code provisions Page 66 vi. Any conditions of approval imposed Page 75 • • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 �} U50 Introduction • Block 136 is situated in the heart of Downtown Lake Oswego within the City's urban renewal district immediately south of"A" Avenue between Third and Second Streets. The redevelopment proposal comprises approximately 2 acres of the entire 2.4 acre block. The goal of the project is to redevelop the parcel into a mixed use configuration with a commercial building situated on the northeast corner and residential townhomes throughout the remainder of the project. This narrative explains existing conditions, development proposal and responds to the applicable criteria contained the City of Lake Oswego's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Development Ordinance. Existing Conditions Block 136 contains a total land area of 2.45 acres. The project area excludes p � Key Bank situated on the northwest corner of the site, therefore the "project area"contains 2.11 acres (91,781 square feet) including 6,102 square feet of existing alley. The project area contains eight (8) tax lots according to Clackamas County Assessor records (2 1 E DD, tax lots 8400, 8500, 8600, 8700, 8800, 8900, 9000 and 9100). Record of Survey for Blocks 136, 137 and 138 First Addition to Oswego, by KPFF Consulting Engineers indicates twenty eight (28) lots of record (Lots 1-16 and 21-32). The site is designated General Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan and zoned East End Commercial. The project site is owned by Eugene Wizer and the alley portion is currently owned by the City of Lake Oswego. Elevations range from 126 feet at "A"Avenue to 102 feet at Evergreen Street. The average slope across the entire site is roughly 6 percent. Two steeper embankments are indicated on the Existing Conditions plan which are features created to maintain level building pads on the site. "A" Avenue slopes from west to east at about 4%. Second and Third Streets both slope from north to south at about 6%. Evergreen Road is slightly sloped away from the center towards Second and Third Street. One of the five structures remains standing located on the north east corner. The remainder of the structures have been demolished to allow for environmental clean-up efforts. Vegetation is primarily limited to the western side of the project with a variety of trees and shrubs documented in arborist report attached to this narrative. Twenty-three (23) trees sized 10- inches or larger are on the project site and adjacent right-of-way. The existing utilities serving the site are as follows: Water: • There is an existing 8-inch water line in "A" Avenue, an 8-inch water line in Second Street, 12-inch line in Evergreen Road, and a 6-inch water line in Third Street. Sewer: • An existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line running south in the Block 136 alley. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 2 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 % i� Jl • An 8-inch sanitary sewer line running south in Second Street to a manhole about 150-feet north of Evergreen Road. • An 8-inch sanitary sewer line running diagonally across the southeast corner of Block 136 • to the alley. • A 6-inch sanitary sewer line turning into an 8-inch sewer line running south in Third Street. Storm Drainage: • An existing 24-inch storm drain running east in"A" Avenue. • A storm drain of undetermined size running south that connects three catch basins in the lower half of Second Street. • A 12-inch storm drain running west along Evergreen Road. • A 15-inch storm drain running south in Third Street. There is also existing 36-inch storm drain in Third Street, running south of Evergreen Road. Streets: • "A" Avenue is a 75-foot-wide street with two travel lanes in each direction, a center turn lane, parallel parking on both sides of the street, curbs on both sides of the street, and sidewalks on both sides of the street. There are existing curb extensions and landscape areas on northwest corner of Block 136. • Second Street is a 44-foot-wide street with one travel lane in each direction, parallel parking on both sides of the street, curbs on both sides of the street, and an 8-foot-wide sidewalk on the east side of the street. • Evergreen Road is a 36-foot-wide street with one travel lane in each direction, parallel parking on both sides of the street, curbs on both sides of the street, a 4.5-foot-wide . sidewalk on the north side of the street, and a 5-foot-wide sidewalk on the south side of the street. • Third Street is a 36-foot-wide street with one travel lane in each direction with curbs and parallel parking on both sides of the street. Private Utilities: Power: • There are existing overhead power lines along"A"Avenue, Second Street, Evergreen Road, and through the alley in the middle of Block 136. Telecommunications: • There are existing overhead telecommunication services to Block 136. Gas: • There is an existing 2-inch gas line in "A" Avenue from the east to the alley, a 1-inch gas line running midway down Second Street, a 1-inch gas line running midway down Third Street, and a 1-inch gas line running midway down the alley. There is also an existing 2- inch gas stub at the intersection of Evergreen Road and Second Street. i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 3 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 `� JE.. Proposed Improvements • The redevelopment proposal calls for building forty-one (41) townhomes and a commercial building sized 16,844 square feet in size with parking, landscaping and open space amenities. The commercial structure will contain underground parking with 8,232 square feet of retail space level with "A" Avenue covering the parking area. Another 8,612 square feet of office space is situated on top of the retail use. This structure will be accessible from "A" Avenue, Second Street, on the south side and from the alley on the west side. Fifty-three (53) parking spaces are required with modifiers and fifty-five (55)parking spaces are provided. A total of 38 parking stalls are provided on-site, nineteen (19) within the garage and another nineteen(19) in the parking area immediately to the south of the structure. Another seventeen (17) spaces are available on "A" Avenue, Second and Third Streets and Evergreen Road. Handicap parking stalls and long-term bicycle racks are provided within the covered garage. Elevators and stairs provide access to the retail and office levels directly from the garage. One-way ramps connect the parking garage level to the parking lot outside. Integral to the structure is an enclosed unit on the southwest for trash and recycling. The northwest corner of the parking area provides access to tax lot 9200 via an easement. To the west of the commercial structure is an improved alley that will have hardscape, benches and landscaping to provide an inviting pedestrian environment and a more useable retail area. This north portion of the alley is the gateway to a path system leading to Evergreen Street to the south. The entire commercial structure will be constructed of brick and brick accents with a tile roof and metal awnings. The forty-one (41) townhomes consist of two (2) types of units, either 20 feet wide with 2,021 square feet of living area or 17 feet wide with 1,798 square feet of living area. The proposed mix of units calls for twelve (12) 17-foot wide units and twenty-nine (29) 20-foot wide units. Each layout is designed in three (3) elevations with the garage and office on the ground level, a kitchen and living area on the second level and bedrooms on the third level. Front entries for the units are from the adjacent streets with the exception of nine (9) units in the interior. Vehicular access to each unit is gained from a series of private streets measuring a twenty-four (24) feet wide. Thirty-nine (39) parking spaces are required, using modifiers, and of this, 25% must be provided for visitors. These ten (10) spaces are provided on-site and on the street. Off-street parking is accommodated with the two (2) car garages in each unit. The elevations of the townhomes displays balconies and windows facing the streets and garages with decks facing the internal private streets. Overall height measured from the front entries to the mid-point of the roof peak is about 36 feet. Materials consist of brick bases extending up to the second floor elevation, with lap siding extending to the roof lines. The brick wraps around to the back side of the units on either side of the garage doors. The private twenty-four(24) foot wide streets provide a through access from Second to Third Streets and provide two twenty-four (24) foot side connector streets. Short, six (6) to eleven (11) foot wide garage entryways flank the private streets providing an overall maneuvering area of thirty-six (36) to forty-six (46) feet wide. No hammerheads or cul-de-sacs are provided at the terminus of the private streets because fire fighting and emergency services have sufficient maneuvering distances. In addition, the units will contain water sprinkler systems to minimize • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 4 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 53 fire damage. The Lake Oswego Fire Department has confirmed the provision of water sprinkler systems in the structures acceptable in lieu of providing turnarounds (Appendix A). Pedestrian and bicycle access throughout the townhome site will be accommodated on the • private streets and on the north-south path connecting"A" Avenue to Evergreen Street. The path system is anchored with the plaza at "A" Avenue and a gazebo and plaza on Evergreen Street. The connector section of the path meanders near the internal cluster of townhomes with landscaping and lighting on both sides to provide a safe and aesthetic experience to the residents and those passing through. On-street parking will be provided along Second Street, Third Street, and Evergreen Road. All the parking is arranged in a parallel design. Presently twenty-six (26) parallel parking spaces are available on "A" Avenue, Second and Third Street and Evergreen Road. The proposed plan provides for twenty-three (23) spaces. The loss of spaces is the result of curb extensions. The plans call for rebuilding the sidewalks along these street frontages to seven feet wide, to continue paving and street tree design elements found in the "A" Avenue demonstration project. The proposed landscape design for Block 136 will provide a significant aesthetic contribution to downtown Lake Oswego. The design intent is to provide an immediate landscape image and character that will provide a quick and compatible blend with the fabric of downtown Lake Oswego. The commercial component landscape will provide a continuation of the "A" Avenue improvements adding one more block. In addition to the "A" Avenue improvements. a pocket park adjoins "A" Avenue acting as an entry to a major pedestrian linkage on Evergreen Street and to Millennium Park at the south east. Extensive plantings throughout the residential ID portion of the project utilize residential quality plant materials to help integrate this project with adjacent properties. Close attention has been given to color, composition, texture, fragrance and arrangement that will provide the project with year round interest. Evergreen Street has three (3) major pedestrian focal points: 1) at the intersection of Third and Evergreen; 2) mid- block along Evergreen; and 3) at the intersection Second and Evergreen. These three focal points provide wider pavement with texture and scoring, low granite seating walls and an array of plant materials. Overall, the landscape plan provides plant material that meets or exceeds the City standards. As mitigation for the loss of 21 on-site trees, the primary street trees will have 3-inch calipers, the internal north-south path will be flanked by 3-inch caliper cherry trees with two clusters of large evergreens at either end. The planting plan indicates 202 new trees, of which 39 are the street trees and 163 are on-site. The introduction of new trees represents a replacement ratio of 7:1. The landscape coverage for the townhome portion exceeds the 20 percent requirement for the residential uses. The landscape coverage for the commercial portion is 8.87 percent, thus less than the 15 percent standard for commercial uses. This deficiency can be offset by including the proposed pedestrian and landscape improvements to the alley just west of the structure. The landscape area calculations are shown in detail in Appendix B within this narrative. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 5 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 � G54 — 1 A series of infrastructure improvements will be carried out to support the project and are discussed below in terms of each utility: • Water: On-site: • Four public 8-inch water lines are proposed to loop through the Block 136 development and connect to the existing public 8-inch water line in Second Street and to the existing public 6-inch water line in Third Street. Sewer: Relocation of existing: • A 10-inch extension of existing public 8-inch sewer in Second Street is proposed for the south end of Second Street to replace the service that crosses the southeast corner of Block 136. • It is proposed to replace the northern 110-feet of public 8-inch sewer line in the alley while abandoning the rest of the sewer line within the alley and to abandon the 8-inch sewer line crossing the southeast corner of Block 136. • The public 8-inch sewer in the alley will be diverted east to the existing public 8-inch sewer in Second Street. On-site: • Three public 8-inch sewer lines are proposed to service the Block 136 development. Storm Drainage: • Relocation of Existing: • It is proposed to replace and relocate the catch basins in the public right-of-way at the northeast, southeast and southwest corners of Block 136. On-site: • Storm drainage for the commercial and residential lots are proposed to be separate and private systems. • A 12-inch storm lateral connection for the residential development is proposed to convey site runoff into the existing public 12-inch storm drain on Evergreen Road. • A 12-inch storm lateral connection for the commercial development is proposed to convey site runoff into the storm drain in Second Street. • Each system is proposed to use a Stormwater Management Filter to meet the City's water quality requirements. • A 36-inch underground detention pipe is proposed to meet the City's runoff detention requirements. Streets: Off-Site: • Curb extensions and landscape areas are proposed in the public right-of-way at the northeast, southeast, and southwest corner of the block. Parallel parking will remain on "A" Avenue, Evergreen Street, and Third Street. Angled parking is proposed for Second . Street. LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 6 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 On-site: • Private 24-foot-wide paved streets with concrete curbs, generally conforming to the City's • public work standards, will be constructed in a common area that will also function as an access easement. Lot Line Adjustment!Subdivision: To effectuate the development a lot line adjustment will take place to create the commercial parcel and the residential parcel. Following this adjustment, a subdivision will divide the residential lot into forty-one (41) lots and three (3) tracts. The lots will be for the sale of each residential unit. The tracts will function as common area for streets, pedestrians and utility easements. An association governed by covenants, codes and restrictions will enforce and perform maintenance through out the site to provide a high quality level of standards. The timeframe for development is as follows: TABLE 1 DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE Target Date I Event March 29, 2000 I Submit Design Review Application July 31, 2000 I Design Review Approval (including Appeals) October 2, 2000 Site Development and Building Plan Approval October 3, 2000 Begin Construction May 1, 2001 Commercial Building Opens/ First Phase of Townhomes begin occupancy. • Note:Assumes "No Further Action Letter"provided by DEQ for environmental clean-up prior to beginning construction. Development Review Application Section 49.22.220 Review of Criteria for Major Developments. A major development shall comply with: a. Any applicable regulatory policies of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan; b. The requirements of the zone in which it is located; c. The Development Standards applicable to major developments; i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 7 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0056 d. Any additional statutory or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be applicable to the specific Major development application, such as the variance provisions, the Streets • and Sidewalks Ordinance (LOC Chapter 42), the Tree Cutting Ordinance (LOC Chapter 55), the Solar Access Ordinance (LOC Chapter 57), the Historic Ordinance (LOC Chapter 58); and e. Any conditions of approval imposed as part of an approved ODPS or prior development permit affecting the subject property. • • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 8 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 f� n57 A major development shall comply with: a. Any applicable regulatory policies of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan; • The following section addresses those applicable sections of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan. Goal 2:Land Use Planning Section 1, Land Use Policies and Regulations Policies 1. Require development to be adequately served by the full range of public facilities and services including: water, sanitary sewer, transportation facilities,fire and police protection,parks, open space, and recreation facilities, surface water management and storm drainage facilities, and schools. Services shall be available or committed prior to approval of development. Response: The subject site is a redevelopment site, as such services were adequate for the land area and the existing uses. The proposed project consisting of 41 townhomes and commercial/ office space is adequately served by a full range of public services including water, sanitary sewer, transportation facilities, fire and police protection, parks, open space and recreational facilities, surface water management and storm drainage facilities and schools. The applicant • has been and continues to work with the various service providers to ensure that utilities are sized to accommodate the project demands. This policy is satisfied. 5. Maintain residential neighborhoods at existing zone and plan density designations, except where: a. Changes to higher residential density designations are necessary to be consistent with development on the subject property at the time of this policy's adoption; or, b. In areas where applicable and adopted neighborhood plans allow consideration of zone and plan amendments to higher density designations based on: i. Locational criteria and design and development standards to ensure compatibility with existing and desired neighborhood character; and ii. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. Response: The proposed project does not seek to increase residential densities beyond the existing zone and plan densities permitted in an EC designated district. More importantly, this project density has been designed to meet the desires of the surrounding residents and to be compatible with the character of the neighborhood. Further, the project is consistent with the applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies as discussed in this section of the application. This policy is met. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 9 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 06c58 12. Allow development of permitted uses on legally created non-conforming lots subject to 410 all applicable regulations. Response: The proposed project includes a subdivision plat such that each residential unit will have a separate lot, serviced by three private streets. A cluster of residential units in the center of the project, Building#2, will form "legally non-conforming lots" as they will not front on a public street, nor will there be a minimum of 25 feet of lot frontage on a public street. The applicant is proposing to provide access easements to each lot, thereby meeting the legal mandate to provide access to each internal lot. The private streets will be separate lots connected to a public street and designed to meet most of the public standards such as curve radii, and pavement and base course requirements. This policy is satisfied. 22. Provide opportunities for mixed use commercial and residential development within commercial zones. Response: The proposed project provides a mix of commercial and residential uses within the EC designated zone. The mixed use is predominantly residential in nature to be compatible with existing residential adjacent the site on three sides. The commercial portion is adjacent to existing commercial activities. Because the project provides a mix of uses, this policy is met. 29. Comprehensively evaluate proposed land use actions to determine the full range of potential negative impacts and require applicants to provide appropriate solutions prior to approval. Response: The applicant has undergone an extensive evaluation process and shared various alternative land use concepts with the City of Lake Oswego, surrounding residents, organizations and neighborhood groups. The plan included in this application is the culmination of these previous efforts to create a project that is economically viable, yet compatible with the surrounding neighbors. Based upon response from the neighborhood meeting November 18, 1999, those in attendance approved of the residential and commercial concept. The attendees had various opinions on the design aspect of commercial portion of the project, which the applicant has addressed in this application. A second neighborhood meeting (not required) that was held on January 4, 2000 to review the commercial portion of the development after the previous comments were incorporated into a revised design. Based on this comprehensive land use evaluation, this policy has been satisfied. 25. Require developers to bear the burden of proof to demonstrate how a proposed land use actions are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and applicable codes and land use regulations. Response: This application addresses applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, as well as applicable City of Lake Oswego codes and land use regulations, therefore this policy is met. S LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 10 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 26. Require developers,prior to application for permits, to discuss development proposals with neighborhood groups, residents and City staff • Response: Gramor Oregon, Inc. has met several times with City of Lake Oswego staff and the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA), and members of the two neighborhood associations (First Addition and Evergreen). These meetings have taken place prior to formal applications being submitted to the City of Lake Oswego for permits. Because the applicant has complied with this provision, this policy is met. 27. Require new residential development offour or more units to address all of the following design criteria: a. Preservation of required open space and natural resources; b. Provision of a street system which provides efficient connection to higher order streets and major activity centers; c. Development of transit opportunities appropriate to the scale and character of the development; d. Development of safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle circulation system; e. Management of surface water and storm drainage consistent with the City's Surface Water Management Plan; f. Assurance of privacy and quiet for future residents and abutting properties; g. Energy conservation measures such as energy efficient design and solar access, and the preservation of trees and the planting of new trees to provide summer cooling; • h. Buffering and screening from adjacent uses and streets; i. Building placement and locational relationships; j. Provision of adequate emergency vehicle access; and k. Reduction of dependency on the automobile on a per-capita basis. Response: The applicant is proposing 41 residential dwellings within the development application. Design criteria "a" - "k" have been addressed in detail within following sections of this application. Open space in the form of private landscaping is provided in the required percentages for the overall project area. A private street system is designed to service the development that is efficient and functional. Transit opportunities are available to this site as a central transit station is within 300 feet of the project site. A safe and convenient pedestrian system is provided by sidewalks around the perimeter, a north-south landscaped walk through the center of the site and pedestrian ways along the edges of the internal drives. Bicycles are accommodated similarly through the site by sharing the private drives and sharing the streets around the perimeter. Surface water and storm drainage is designed to meet the City's Surface Water Management Plan requirements. Architectural and landscape design has provided privacy and quiet areas for future residents and abutting properties. Energy conservation measures have been taken into consideration with efficient structural design coupled with appropriate landscaping to provide shading and cooling during the summer. The buildings and landscaping have been designed to provide optimal use of the site, while providing safe and acceptable ingress and egress acceptable to fire, life and safety providers. The landscaping has • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 11 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 ( (� 0U60 also been formulated to screen parking and adjacent street uses. The provision of residential dwellings and a commercial structure on one site does not necessarily reduce the dependency 111 on the automobile. Automobile dependency is a life style choice, given the proper proximity of employment and services to one's home. This particular project provides a reasonable opportunity to reduce reliance on the automobile because individuals are in the heart of downtown Lake Oswego, close to shops and city services. Because this application addresses design criteria "a" - "k" throughout this application, this policy is met. Goal 2: Land Use Planning Section 2, Community Design and Aesthetics Policies 2. Require developers to submit site and building plans for all proposed new development which show building, site and landscape designs for all development phases. Response: The applicant's plans show all new development identifying buildings, site and landscaping for all phases of development. Because the applicant has submitted these plans as part of the application, this policy is satisfied. Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic & Historic Areas & Natural Resources Section 2, Vegetation • Policies 6. Require landscaping for all development other than individual single family dwellings and duplexes to: a. Visually enhance development projects; b. Provide buffering and screening between differing land uses; c. Reduce surface water runoff, improve water quality and maintain soil stability; d. Provide wildlife habitat; and. e. Reduce energy use by using vegetation for shade and windbreaks. Response: The proposed landscaping plans satisfy the above requirements. Landscaping has been used to enhance the visual appearance of the project and to buffer and screen from differing land uses. A direct result of appropriate landscaping in this project is to maintain soil stability and reduce water runoff. The new landscaping will provide limited wildlife habitat, as the landscaped areas are relatively small and within a very urban setting. The landscaping will provide shade and wind block in certain locations. Energy reduction may be achieved through the proper location of shade trees throughout the project. Because the landscaping plans comply with the design requirements specified above, this policy is met. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 12 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0U61 r 7. Require the establishment and maintenance of landscaped areas in all new parking lots and expansion of existing lots, to provide shade and visual amenity. Parking lot landscaping shall emphasize: • a. The planting of broad spreading trees for shade and to mitigate the negative visual and environmental impacts of parking lots; and. b. Effective screening and buffering between parking lots and adjacent uses. Response: The commercial structure will require a parking lot at grade, sized to accommodate 19 vehicles. The residential townhomes will provide internal garages, therefore, residents will not be parking their vehicles within view. Guest parking stalls will be available adjacent to the linear green open space within the center of the project. All the parking areas will include broad spreading trees for shade and to provide a positive visual enhancement of the project. Adjacent uses such as Key Bank situated on the north west corner of the site will be appropriately screened. Because the landscaping provides shade, visual amenity and screening this policy is satisfied. 8. Require tree planting for all development other than individual single family homes and duplexes, unless landscape standards are met by existing vegetation. When required, trees shall be planted along the street and throughout the development site. Response: The redevelopment application provides new trees along the adjacent streets and throughout the site as required by this policy, therefore this policy is met. • 9. Ensure the continued maintenance of vegetation required pursuant to development approval, within landscaped and common areas. Response: The proposed project will provide continued maintenance of vegetation within the project through the implementation of Covenants Codes and Restrictions that will require uniform and regular care of vegetation within all common areas. Goal 6:Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality Section 1, Air Resources Quality Policies 4. Increase the opportunity to use alternative transportation as a means to reduce air pollution by: a) Requiring safe and comfortable pedestrian and bicycle pathways as part of all new street construction projects, where feasible; b) Ensuring new street projects accommodate existing and future transit requirements; c) Requiring the design of new development to be supportive of pedestrian, transit and bicycle users; • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 13 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0 \. U2 d) Requiring payment of a systems development charge to be applied to the Citv's pedestrian and bicycle path system; e� Providing appropriate pedestrian and bicycle facilities as part of a new park projects; and, f) Maintaining an ongoing program to build and maintain pedestrian and bicycle paths. Response: The proposed redevelopment site is situated within 300 feet of a main transit center serviced by regular bus routes to surrounding towns in the Metro region. The site plan includes internal walkways and sidewalks along the street frontages. The internal private drives include sidewalks and encourage a shared use for bicycles. No new parks are proposed as part of this project. The new Millennium Park is one block away to the south east of the project site. Because this redevelopment project is designed with multi-modal transit opportunities there is an opportunity to reduce air pollution, therefore this policy is met. 5. Encourage land use patterns which, while reducing dependency on the automobile, are also compatible with existing neighborhoods. Response: The proposed land use pattern has the potential to reduce dependency on the automobile as residential units are in close proximity to employment and services in the heart of downtown Lake Oswego. The project, through its various public review stages has been reduced in density and form to be compatible with the existing neighborhoods. Given this land use pattern, this proposal satisfies this policy. 1111 Section 2, Water Resources Quality Policies 5. Require all development to: a) Comply with applicable local, state and federal water quality and erosion control standards; and b) Implement measures to minimize run-offfrom the development site during and after construction. Response: The proposed redevelopment project complies with applicable local, state and federal water quality and erosion control standards as demonstrated within the plans and specifications. At the time of construction, contractors will be responsible to carry out erosion control measures to minimize run-off from development during construction. After construction, landscaping and proper drainage will continue to minimize run-off from the development. This policy will be satisfied at the time the project is ultimately constructed. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 14 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 �� v (i3 Section 3, Land Resources Quality (Solid Waste Management) • Policies 1. Prevent public nuisances, health hazards and unsightliness by prohibiting the accumulation of solid waste on private property. Response: The proposed project will institute Covenants, Codes and Restrictions to require proper storage and disposal of solid waste on the property. A common area management system will be responsible for maintaining clean drives, landscaped areas and pathways. Since the solid waste storage and disposal system will be in place, this policy is satisfied. 7. Require adequate screened and enclosed space for recycling, solid waste storage and compacting within industrial, commercial and high density housing developments and ensure proper access to these areas. Response: Through the design of the project each residential unit will provide internal locations suitable for recycling materials. Waste collection will occur from the private streets serving the back side of the townhomes. Similarly, the commercial structure will provide for an enclosed area for recycling and storage of solid wastes. Access will be made to all collection areas for regularly scheduled removal by a service provider. Since adequate screened and enclosed spaces for recycling and solid waste storage will be made available within the project site, this policy is satisfied. • Section 4, Sound Quality Policies 2. Ensure development complies with state and local noise regulations. Response: The proposed mixed use development is not a noise generating project in and of itself. The construction phase is usually the loudest portion of a new project. Contractors will be required to adhere to state and local noise regulations, including limiting the times and days construction takes place. The habitation of the development will contribute to the ambient noise level experienced in and around the property. The applicant will comply with state and local noise regulations. Future inhabitants of the development will be subject to the same set of noise regulations, however, the applicant does not directly control compliance with noise extenuating above acceptable levels. Given the circumstances, the applicant will abide by state and local noise regulations, therefore this policy is met. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 15 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0U64 Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Section 3, Landslides, Erosion and Unstable Soils • Policies 2. Require property owners to include erosion and drainage control measures in site planning, during and after development, to prevent increases in surface water runoff erosion and siltation. Response: The applicant, as part of their plans, has included erosion and drainage controls. These controls must be followed prior, during and after construction to prevent increases in surface water runoff and erosion siltation. Because these erosion and drainage control measures will be in place and followed, this policy is satisfied. Goal 8:Parks and Recreation Policies 7. Plan and develop a system of pathways which can connect open space and park facilities with neighborhoods. Response: The proposed redevelopment project takes advantage of a former alley that bisects the parcel in a north-south direction. This alley links "A" Avenue, in the north, to Evergreen • Street at the south. In addition, new sidewalks will be created along the project frontage of Second Street, Evergreen Road and Third Street. All these walkways connect to Evergreen Road, which leads to a major park (Millennium)just 300 feet east of the redevelopment project. This system of pathways provides adequate connections to park facilities with the neighborhood, therefore this policy is met. Goal 9: Economic Development Policies 3. Require new commercial and industrial development to: a. Provide a full range of required public facilities and services and pay commensurate system development charges; b. Mitigate adverse impacts such as noise, traffic and visual aesthetics, on adjacent land uses through methods such as buffering, screening,parking controls, height, bulk and scale limits; c. Comply with design and aesthetic standards to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses and Lake Oswego's overall community character; d. Participate in the development of a street system which provides efficient connection to higher order streets and to other activity centers; • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 16 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0065 r e. Develop transit opportunities appropriate to the scale and character of the project; • f. Provide for a safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle circulation system to and within the development; g. Provide adequate, but not excessive parking for customers and employees; and, h. Preserve natural resources and provide required open space. Response: The applicant will have the full range of public services to support the redevelopment project, in addition the applicant will be paying their fair share of system development charges. The project design is not anticipated to display adverse impacts. Proper landscaping,berms and fences will mitigate any potential adverse impacts. The traffic analysis report identifies the potential impacts and mitigating measures from the proposed development. The project is fully designed to comply with the aesthetic standards identified in Lake Oswego's development and zoning code which represent overall desired community character. The applicant will participate in their fair share of off-site street system improvements. The project is designed to allow access via multiple modes of transportation including transit, pedestrian and bicycles. Sufficient parking spaces have been provided for customers and employees in the parking lot under and adjacent to the retail/office building. At this point there are no natural resources on-site, however, landscaped "open" area will be provided in the amounts required by the City's codes. Because design items "a" through "h" are accommodated in the project design this policy is met. 3. Support redevelopment of existing vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial • lands rather than designating additional lands for these purposes. Response: This particular project is a redevelopment project utilizing vacant and underutilized commercial properties in downtown Lake Oswego,therefore no rezoning of the property is required. This policy is satisfied. 4. Ensure access to commercial and industrial development is taken from the major collector or arterial street system except when public safety requires access to be provided from other streets. Response: The commercial building fronts along "A" Avenue, classified as a major arterial. As proposed, four (4) parallel parking spaces (including frontage from the improved alley) will be available on this frontage, providing direct access for pedestrians and the 3 to 4 vehicles. Due to safety concerns, all ingress and egress for this building will be directed to Second Avenue to alleviate congestion on "A" Avenue. Since this policy is adequately addressed, this policy is satisfied. S. Prevent further expansion of"strip commercial development"and encourage redevelopment of existing strip commercial areas to become more attractive and oriented toward pedestrians and transit. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 17 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0066 Response: The commercial portion of the project fronts along"A" Avenue,which currently • supports a "strip commercial" store frontage along the main street. This project redevelops the existing single story structure into a two-story retail/office structure with parking underground. The retail portion will be entirely accessible to pedestrians at street level. The office component will be accessed via an elevator and internal stairwells from the parking level and from Second Street. As a result of this design being more attractive and oriented toward pedestrian and transit ridership this policy is met. 12. Place new utilities, and where possible existing utilities, within commercial and industrial districts, underground. Response: Utilities, existing and proposed are planned to be installed underground, therefore this policy is met. 13. Direct commercial and through traffic, other than that generated from the adjacent neighborhoods, away from local residential streets. Response: The proposed redevelopment project places the commercial component on the northeast corner of the block closest to "A" Avenue. Access to this part of the project is from Second Street, close to "A" Avenue, thus commercial traffic is directed furthest away from the adjoining residential neighborhoods and local streets. The residential component of the project uses Third and Second Avenue, both local streets, for ingress and egress. Given the circumstances, the bulk of traffic associated with the commercial portion of the project will be focussed on a very small portion of Second Street. This is purposely designed not to connect to "A" Avenue as a means to maintain proper traffic safety along "A" Avenue. The policy is satisfied. • LAKE OS W EGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 18 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0067 Goal 10: Housing Policies • 1. Maintain the following residential and land use designations and locational criteria which support the above goal: b. Medium and High Density Residential Density Classification Minimum Square Feet of Area Per Unit R-5 5,000 Sq.ft. R-3 3,375 Sq.ft. R-0 1.2 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) *Maximum Medium and high density residential areas may be designated in areas: i. Which are currently developed at medium and high density; ii. Where there are public services and few development constraints; and iii. Near arterial s or major collector and transit service, and particularly for high density residential, areas in close proximity to commercial areas and/or employment concentrations. Response: The residential density of the townhome components represents an approximate FAR of 1.58. The EC zoning permits residential uses with an R-0 density. As such, the proposed density exceeds the minimum allowed density. Pubic services are available to the site and the closest transit station is 300 feet away from the project site. Therefore, this residential component of the project is in keeping with the policy density guidelines. 1110 7. Provide for safe, comfortable, visually attractive streets in new developments. Response: The proposed redevelopment will not contain new public streets. It will provide three internal private streets with public access easements providing safe, comfortable and visually attractive ingress and egress from the public streets. The adjacent public streets will have frontage improvements providing for walkways planter strips, curbs and gutters where in some cases there are none. The development complies with this policy. 8. Link housing density and location to reduce automobile travel by locating high density residential (R-0 and R-3) and mixed use developments within walking distance of bus lines or transit centers, and preferably clustered so as to avoid strip development (was Policy 7). Response: The proposed redevelopment adheres to this policy by placing R-0 density residential and office/retail development within walking distance of each other and within a major transit center serviced by bus lines. The Lake Oswego Transit Center is located at Fourth Street and "A" Avenue within 300 feet of Block 136, and less than one-quarter mile for the entire project site. Tri-Met currently operates four regular bus routes with connections at • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 19 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19.2000 • 0668 this transit center. Because the mixed use development is in close proximity to transit this policy is met. S 11. Place higher density residential, employment and shopping opportunities and public facilities, such as transit and parks, within close proximity and where feasible. Response: The redevelopment project has been designed to provide a mixed use development that includes office, shopping and residential close to public facilities including transit and parks. This policy is satisfied. 12. Assure an orderly transition from one residential density to another through design and development standards such as landscaping, buffering and screening. Response: A key component in this redevelopment project is the majority of townhomes flanking Third and Second Streets and Evergreen Road. This residential component mirrors adjacent residential uses, thus creating an orderly transition from one street block to the next. In addition, the Lake Oswego design standards for landscaping, buffering and screening will be adhered to throughout the project. Current adjacent zoning to the southwest of the project is zoned residential (R-7.5). Property immediately to the west is zoned residential (R-0). The project site is zoned East End Commercial (EC) and the required yard adjacent to a residential zone is twenty-five (25) feet • from a structure. A height restriction of thirty-five (35) feet is imposed on the project site at this corner because the project site is located closer than one hundred and twenty (120) feet from the residential R-7.5 zoned district. The intent of these regulations is to provide a similar building dimension with adequate distances between the structures such that there is a transition from one type of land use to another. The applicant meets the height restriction of thirty-five (35) feet. The townhomes in Building #5 are setback 13 feet from the property line on the southwest corner of the project site and are thirty-five (35) feet tall. The buildings therefore encroach within the acceptable twenty-five (25) foot setback zone. To alleviate this encroachment high quality landscaping is planned at this corner extending along the Evergreen Road frontage to the southeast corner. The landscaping includes sidewalk and curb extensions into Evergreen to create wider plaza type areas and to create a visual statement of reaching a "special" location. This policy has been satisfied. 13. Provide for active involvement of neighborhood residents and property owners in decisions affecting their neighborhood. Response: The applicants have been providing opportunities for involvement of neighborhood residents and property owners in the formulation of this project. These opportunities have been i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 20 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 Ju69 provided through informal meetings arranged by the staff at the City of Lake Oswego. In addition, the applicant has held a formal Neighborhood Meeting on November 18, 1999. When the City of Lake Oswego formally processes the land use applications, additional opportunities • will be afforded property owners and affected neighbors to express their concerns and opinions about the project. The applicant has satisfied this policy and will continue to do so over the course of the project. 14. Provide a wide range of housing types to meet needs of various lifestyles and family types. Response: The proposed redevelopment project provides for two sized unit types, both designed as three-story attached single family units arranged as townhomes. The 17-foot wide unit contains 1,798 square feet of living space and the 20-foot wide unit has 2,021 square feet of living space. The units will be priced between$225,000 and $275,000. This project adds to the range of available housing types in the City of Lake Oswego. It is not economically possible for one project with a site area of less than two acres to provide for a "wide range of housing types." Given the circumstances, the proposed project meets the intent of this policy. Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services Section 3, Water Treatment and Delivery Policies • 7. Require developers to: a. Provide water service to meet domestic needs and fire flow requirements to all new development; b. Install all required public fire hydrants; c. Pay a systems development charge and other costs associated with extending service; and, d. Extend adequately sized water lines with sufficient pressure to the boundaries of the subject property where future extension of water service is anticipated or required. Response: The applicant's plans include the provisions "a" through "d" as shown. therefore this policy is met. 8. Require unobstructed access to all public water lines and easements. Response: The applicant's plans demonstrate that there is unobstructed access to all public water lines and easements, therefore this policy is satisfied. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 21 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0070 Section 4, Wastewater Collection and Treatment • Policies 1. Require developers to: a. Provide adequate sanitary sewers to all new development; and b. Pay and equitable portion of costs associated with extending service. 2. Require all new and existing development within the City to connect to the City's sanitary sewer system and pay a system development charge. Response: Both polices 1 and 2 above will be complied with in the redevelopment project. It is anticipated that the project will be connected to a municipal sanitary sewer system and that the commensurate share of system development fees will be paid, therefore this policy is met. Goal 12: Transportation Goal 1: Major Streets System Policies 4. Where residential neighborhoods are bisected by existing major streets, the impacts of • traffic - noise, safety, aesthetics and air quality-shall be minimized by the following actions: a. Where feasible, traffic generated by new development, shall be routed to other available major streets that are not within or adjacent to residential uses. b. Ensure that traffic generated by new land uses does not exceed the design capacity of the street system. c. Provision of safe and efficient bicycle and pedestrian improvements to connect residential areas to other areas of the community. d. Measures to physically re-orient residential area away from major streets. This may include installation of major landscape elements such as landscaped buffers and tree plantings, and the development of neighborhood activity centers such as public open spaces,parks and community centers. e. New commercial use and neighborhood activity centers such as parks, schools and community centers shall provide direct, convenient access to and from adjacent residential areas to facilitate walking, bicycling and short auto trips. Measures shall be implemented to ensure that such routes do not attract or serve traffic from outside the neighborhood. Response: This proposed redevelopment project has been carefully planned by the applicants, with assistance from city staff to provide access on local streets, Second and Third Streets. Both these streets connect to "A" Avenue, a major arterial to the north of the project site and to Evergreen Road, a local street, to the south. The traffic analysis report conducted by DKS • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 22 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0071 r Associates dated March 2000 determines that the capacity of the local streets with full buildout will be in keeping with the local street design, not exceeding 1,000 vehicle trips per day. The • project does include the provision of new sidewalks along Evergreen Road, Second and Third Streets. It is planned that bicycles will share the same right-of-way. The residential portion of the project has been oriented away from major streets. The commercial portion of the project is situated on the corner of Second Street and "A" Avenue, providing close proximity to the residential units on-site and those surrounding the site. This facilitates walking, bicycling and short auto trips. This policy is adequately addressed in the development proposal. Goal 3: Neighborhood Collectors and Local Residential Streets Policies 5. The City shall ensure that new development which will use new and existing neighborhood collectors and local residential streets is compatible with these street's function and character. Development approval of new land uses shall ensure that: a. The quiet residential quality of neighborhood streets is fostered and maintained; and, b. Street improvements required to serve new land uses are designed in accordance with the adopted neighborhood plan and to the minimum necessary scale. Response: The proposed project is a redevelopment of an existing site that once contained a • variety of structures and businesses. The new development proposal includes a commercial structure fronting "A" Avenue, away from the local neighborhood streets. The residential component of the project fronts along Second and Third Streets and Evergreen Road. This proposed use is suitable and in keeping with the character of these streets, maintaining existing residential uses with marginal affects. Each street will be improved with sidewalks, planters, curbs and gutters meeting adopted design criteria. This policy is met. Goal 4: Land Use and Transportation Relationships Policies 1. The City shall use the following criteria when reviewing proposals for new street development or for improvements to the existing system: a. The service level and scale of the new street improvements are appropriate to the land use or area to be served; b. Surface water management considerations are adequately addressed; c. The character of surrounding residential neighborhoods are defined by the adopted neighborhood plan is preserved. When improvements are made to major streets that are adjacent to, or bisect, residential areas, measures shall be taken to mitigate noise, aesthetic and safety impacts and discourage cut-through traffic on adjacent residential streets; and • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 23 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 i iJ , d. The project's impacts upon the natural and human-made surroundings are clearly defined. This includes consideration of topography, hydrology, • distinctive natural areas, vegetation, and surrounding land uses. The commitment to mitigate impacts shall occur in the project planning states through the application of specific design techniques. Response: The redevelopment project will be creating three internal private streets that will accommodate the townhome residents and emergency vehicle requirements. The private streets will be accessed from Second and Third streets, both local streets. These streets will meet City construction standards and include the necessary utility easements and provisions for proper drainage. The design will allow safe and efficient passage of vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. The retail/office building will be accessed from Second Street into a parking area that will connect to an underground parking area situated beneath the building. Street improvements to "A" Avenue, Second and Third Streets and Evergreen Road include various landscape extensions that increase landscaped areas within the right-of-ways, street lights, street trees, sidewalks and special paving in certain locations. Increased vehicular trips through the Evergreen neighborhood has been the single, most voiced concern to date. The amount of vehicle trips generated from the redevelopment project are discussed in the Traffic Analysis by DKS Associates dated March, 2000. It concludes a traffic calming device will be installed along Evergreen Road and Fourth Street to curtail cut-through traffic from the proposed development. The details of the improvement are discussed in the attached traffic report conducted by DKS for the City of Lake Oswego dated March 21, 2000. The applicant will continue to work with the city and neighborhood residents during this planning phase on resolving impacts as they are identified. Based upon the project plans and ongoing planning • the design items "a" through "d"are satisfied. ?. Mitigation of the negative impacts (safety, aesthetics, noise, bicycle and pedestrian mobility), resulting from improvements to a street needed to serve a specific development shall be paid for by the benefiting property owners. When street projects are needed to improve capacity, operation and safety of the street system as a whole, the mitigation of negative impacts shall be paid for by the City and/or appropriate funding agencies. Response: The property owners of the proposed redevelopment project will fund the necessary mitigation facilities. Design and construction of a traffic signal at the corner of"A" Avenue and Second Street will be funded by the City as part of an overall improvement to the downtown circulation along"A"Avenue. Since these improvements are identified and funded by the appropriate sources, this policy is satisfied. /O. The City shall require new development through building and site design measures, to address the needs of the disabled and those who utilize alternative transportation modes such as van and car-pools, bicycles,public transit and walking. LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 24 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April I9.2000 0u/ 73 Response: The proposed redevelopment project will comply with rules and regulations to assure needs of the disabled are satisfied, therefore this policy is met. • 12. The City shall discourage the development ofprivate streets. When private streets are allowed, they shall be constructed to City standards. Response: The applicant is proposing private streets built to City standards enabling vehicles, emergency services,pedestrians, bicycles and utilities to use such facilities. The reason for private internal streets is to maintain extremely slow vehicle speeds, slower than those on local streets and to create a narrower right-of-way shared by vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. The only way to achieve this is through private streets. Proper City construction standards will be followed according to adopted City standards. Easements will be recorded to ensure access to the public utilities. This policy is satisfied. East'End Community Business District Policies Pursuant to the City of Lake Oswego Zoning Ordinance section 48.10.315.5 this application is subject to policies and objectives of the East End Community Business District, as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The ensuing sections address the applicable policies and objectives: IA. East End Community Business District (PA 06-86-02-383, 10/17/86) Lake Oswego's Central Business District has traditionally been the focal point of the community, as the location of City Hall, commercial shopping, Fire Department, and banking; the Library, Post Office and Adult Community Center have been located near this commercial district,focusing community identity. The streets of this business district have also served as major routes for commuter traffic, to and from Portland. In recent years, traffic congestion has increased, causing problems for neighborhood residents and for business owners. Citizens and City officials have established goals to encourage revitalization of the business district, to solve the Sate Street traffic problem, and to assure the residential living environment of adjacent neighborhoods. To carry out these goals and policies in the East End Community Business District, the City will: I. Provide for a 5.52 acre expansion of the East End Community Business District. This expansion will be maximum district expansion and will be limited on the north by "C" Street, on the west by the alley between Fifth and Sixth, and include land bounded by Fourth, Evergreen and Third, except that major developments fronting State Street and abutting the Old Town Design District may be allowed necessary minimal expansion to the east, but only in accord with conditions set forth in the Old Town Design District Policies. (PA 5-84-151) • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 25 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 G u7 4 Response: This directive was for the City to provide for expansion of the East End Community Business District. The current application resides within the district and must comply with the applicable rules and regulations. Therefore, this policy has been satisfied by the City of Lake Oswego. 2. Develop, adopt and implement an East End Business District Revitalization Plan. This action plan will be developed jointly with private business interests, the City, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Lake Oswego Development Corporation and should include: a. steps necessary to prevent deterioration and encourage redevelopment b. methods to implement solutions already proposed in previous studies, both short range solutions to be implemented immediately, and long range solutions c. the involvement of property owners and the City, in stimulation of private investment d. criteria for the intensification of commercial activity in appropriate locations (see Design Standard, Specific Policy 9 and 10) e. a schedule for provisions of needed public improvements, including traffic and parking improvements, pedestrian facilities, street trees f criteria for re-examination of commercial requirements, should a substantial portion of present commercial land located east of State Street be eliminated from commercial use, or should industrial area use change g. as re-development occurs on State Street and "A"Avenue, encourage development • to re-orient toward alleys and interiors of blocks Response: (a, c and d) Gramor has spent over two years working with the Chamber of Commerce, private businesses, neighborhood organizations and the City of Lake Oswego in formulating this plan for Block 136. The plan is a redevelopment of existing uses, using private investment coordinated with planned public improvements off-site. The applicant is guided by criteria for development standards that includes intensification of commercial activity. These standards are found in the applicable Lake Oswego zoning and development standards. Policies b, e, f and g relate to the City of Lake Oswego or are not relative to this project area. Applicable policies are satisfied by the application. 3. Plan for adequate delineation of adjacent residential neighborhoods to enhance living environment and neighborhood stability. This includes the following: a. peripheral traffic circulation plan which separates commercial and through traffic from residential neighborhood b. specific land use designations and district boundaries, which specify allowed uses and densities, adopted as part of the comprehensive plan c. means to provide separation of incompatible uses, which will be developed as conditions of zone change, conditional use, and Development Review approval, such as: LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 26 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 Uu75 i. tree planting, hedges,fences, walls or open space ii. walkways and alleys . iii. landscaped parking lots d. restriction of new commercial uses on west side of fth Street and south side of "C"Street to non-retail commercial. e. Means to buffer residential properties from the noise, glare and visual appearance of commercial activity (both residential and commercial property owners will be encouraged to us landscaping and site design to screen residential property from commercial activities. f Considering commercial uses in residential zones to be non-conforming uses g. See Residential Policies Response: The above policies place directives to the City of Lake Oswego to maintain the livability of residential neighborhoods. The policies provide the standards to which projects such as Block 136 must meet. Conformance of the Block 136 design to the above policies is achieved by compliance with applicable City of Lake Oswego standards and codes. The project has been designed to provide separation where needed between the townhome and the commercial components. Included in the design are appropriate landscaping around the parking areas and against existing fences along the north adjacent to Key Bank. Therefore these policies are satisfied. 4. Develop a peripheral street circulation pattern, to guide shoppers to and from the commercial area and into appropriately sited parking facilities. This circulation pattern will include the following components: , a. peripheral street circulation pattern, which will: i. Define and limit the commercial district to the squared configuration ii. Allow convenient vehicular access to parking in all areas of commercial district iii. Provide uncongested access from the commercial district into through traffic iv. Include necessary measures to protect neighborhood streets from through traffic v. Route southbound to westbound through traffic as follows: west from State in to "D"to First, the south to "C", up "C"to Fifth Avenue and south into "A Avenue (see Through Traffic Routes). Response: The redevelopment of Block 136 is not applicable to this policy. 5. Encourage the development of an interconnecting network of bicycle and pedestrian ways, to encourage shoppers to leave their cars and circulate easily among shops, restaurants, cultural and civic activities. This network could include: a. covered walkways and mid-block pedestrian paths where feasible b. alleys as paths,places for benches, outdoor eating, kiosks, and landscaping c. bike racks and lockups, covered where feasible • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 27 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0076. • d. sidewalk extensions (using up to eight feet of parking lane at street corners) to decrease street width pedestrians must cross e. stairways or possible elevated streets crossings, to connect adjacent properties which are at different elevations. Response: The specific design features in items "a"—"e"have been incorporated where possible into the redevelopment project. Walkways are covered along"A" Avenue and a mid- block pedestrian path is planned running from "A"Avenue to Evergreen Street. This north- south pedestrian path includes landscaping along the edges where possible and seating places near Evergreen Street. Bicycle racks are provided under cover for the commercial structure. Curb extensions are planned at intersections to decrease the street widths for pedestrian crossings. Stairways have not been used to connect adjacent properties but have been used on the north-south pedestrian path to accommodate the changes in elevation. These design elements have been addressed and incorporated where possible, therefore these policies have been satisfied. 6. Develop a traffic engineering plan incorporating appropriately located parking facilities, to assure that State Street can best handle expected future traffic. This plan will include at least the following: a. State Street as a five-lane street with center lane designated as a left turn sanctuary b. traffic signalization system,programmed for maximum flow or traffic on major streets during peak hours c. widening of Oswego Creek Bridge to handle though traffic in each direction d. removal of all parking from State Street e. additional parking lot space of equal the number of spaces removed from State Street, North Shore to "B"Avenue (See Parking Facility Policies,following) f parking spaces sited conveniently to State Street between: i. "A "and "B"on west side it. "A "and railroad on west side iii. railroad and North Shore and west side iv. Village Shopping Center and Foothills Road on east side g. continued pursuit of a way to accomplish a grade separation of the railroad at State Street h. negotiations with Southern Pacific, to minimize railroad crossing during peak commuter hours (7-9 a.m.; 3:30-6:00 p.m.) and assure that switching of cars will be accomplished between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. i. a relocation of the access to Foothills Road, as far south of"A "as possible, to provide adequate left turn sanctuary for left turn from State onto "A "Avenue 41111 LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 28 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 J ; 7 Response: This set of policies directs the City of Lake Oswego to develop traffic engineering plans to accommodate existing and future transportation issues along State Street. The redevelopment of Block 136 is situated two blocks west of State Street. It appears that the City • has instituted some if not all the directives, therefore these policies are satisfied. 7. Require adequate parking space to be provided to serve each business and public activity. Businesses will be required to provide such parking either on-site or in shared facilities. The City's role in provision of such facilities will be determined by the City Council, and may include such actions as the following: a. planning, designing, and approving location b. administration of parking time limits on-street and in municipal facilities. in order to increase the availability of parking for shoppers c. acquisition of land for such facilities d. construction of some public facilities e. arranging financing of such facilities by appropriate means, such as: i. bonds payable out of revenue from said facilities ii. business tax on all properties in the business district iii. local improvement district with assessments on appropriate properties iv. state or federal grants or aid v. general property taxes • vi. parking fees or special charges derived from users or commercial enterprises benefited Response: The above policies require adequate parking for each business and public activity. The policies provide the City through the City Council various means to assist in the provision of parking facilities. Redevelopment of Block 136 is providing parking, both on-site and on- street in accordance with the applicable standards. No participation is required from the City Council to provide parking facilities for this site. Therefore this policy is not applicable. 8. Should Council determine that a Civic and Cultural Center will be located within the East End Community Business District,policies to guide its development will be made a part of this Plan. Policies will outline criteria to guide development of the center as an integral part of downtown revitalization. Criteria should cover: a. location of components (e.g. City Hall, Police and Fire administration offices, meeting rooms, City Court, exhibition space, Library,public parking, ets.) b. size, location, and site design c. traffic and pedestrian circulation d. orientation to the Lake and to commercial activity. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 29 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0 78 Response: The creation of these policies is not applicable to the redevelopment of Block 136. • 9. Provide design standards which encourage revitalization of the business district, including: a. fire code standards which encourage commercial development in keeping with revitalization policies as well as safety b. height and setback standards to facilitate pedestrian convenience and appropriate site design c. business of floor area standards to encourage more intense use of land, within the limits of available parking. Floor Area Ratio may be increased and on-site parking decreased when provisions are made for customer parking in shared facilities. d. Procedures to allow for transfer of development rights between private owners (or other available means) to allow more intense use of certain lands in return for public view easements adjacent to the Lake of Lakewood Bay. e. Standards which encourage: i. Combined landscaping projects to protect significant features ii. Substitution of significant trees for larger landscaped areas iii. Multi-story buildings where compatible iv. Mixed uses including handicrafts, housing and cottage businesses v. Signs which are adequate to inform potential customers and provide aesthetic appearance vi. Joint use and central parking facilities f implementation of these standards as a condition of zone change and/of Development Review approval. Response: The requirement of provide design standards which encourage revitalization of the business district are not applicable to the Block 136 project. 10. Develop design standards which will improve the social interaction and aesthetics of the commercial district, including requirements for the provision of a. views of the lake, river, and Mt. Hood(could include open space, roof or other on- building public view points) b. pedestrian orientation to distinctive features,particularly recognizing the aesthetic value of the lake. c. Street trees to provide shade and aesthetic relive from concrete and asphalt d. Pedestrian walkways (covered where possible) and bikepaths in alleys and walkway easements e. Street furniture and landscaped areas situated to encourage people to rest a while for conversation (could include publicly owned pocket parks). • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 30 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0U' 7;' f Lineal parks (could be developed in alleys like court yards, with potted trees and furniture). g. Implementation of these standards as a condition of Development Review approval. • Response: The mandate to develop design standards is not applicable to the redevelopment of Block 136. 11. Attach specific conditions to new commercial use approval, where appropriate, to assure that development is in accord with Specific Commercial Policies. Such commercial use approval include: a. zone change b. conditional use and expansion of conditional use c. conversion of a residential structure to commercial use d. development review Response: The redevelopment of Block 136 will be reviewed and approved through the development review process established by the City of Lake Oswego. At the time of approval it is likely that the applicant will have to accept a series of conditions. Therefore, this policy will be met at the time of approval. i • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 31 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0080 b. The requirements of the zone in which it is located; II) The proposed project is within the Commercial Distr icts J of the zoning code (Article 48.10). 48.10.300 Purpose. 5. East End General Commercial - to implement the comprehensive plan policies directing revitalization of the East End Business District. The district should guide and encourage the development and redevelopment of the East End Business District. Response: The proposed redevelopment of Block 136 lies entirely within the EC district. 48.10.305 Uses. The following table identifies the proposed uses relative to the city's standards for the EC district as being permitted: TABLE 2 PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE EC DISTRICT Proposed Use Status Comments u Residential use at R-0 with Permitted Proposed townhomes —i- r max. 3.0 FAR (4 unit min.) 1.58 FAR II IIgServices - Finance, insurance Permitted g 6 real estate Services - Professional Permitted Offices Services - Business I Permitted Retail Sales - General Permitted Retail Sales - Restaurants, Permitted Drinking Places Retail - Personal Permitted Retail - Food Permitted Note. I. The above listed uses are those ranges of uses most likely to be within the proposed development for Block 136. This list does not exclude other uses listed in 48.10.305 that are permitted in the EC district. II LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 32 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0081 48.10.310 Site Development Limitations. TABLE 3 • SITE DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE EC DISTRICT Limitation Standard Proposed Development 1. Required Yard Adjacent to residential zone: From a structure 25 feet 13 feet from property line at the SW corner From a parking lot 10 feet Not applicable I From a vehicular 5 feet Not applicable accessway 2. FAR Maximum 3.0 Townhomes-1.58 Retail/Office— 1.02 13. Lot Coverage None Townhomes—47% Retail/Office—50% I 4. Vehicle Trip Max I Applicable to OC District - 5. Height 35 feet * within 120' of R-7.5 Townhomes-35'@ 20'unit Retail/Office—43' (greater than 120' from an R zone property) 45 feet between. 120-240' of R- 7.5 Note: 1. In the EC zone, the maximum height within 120'of a lot zoned R-7.5 is 35', and the maximum height between 120'and 240'of a lot zoned R-7.5 is 45'exclusive of intervening public right-of- way. The adjacent property to the southwest corner of the project site is zoned R-7.5 and is • within 120 feet, therefore a 35 foot maximum height is imposed on a portion of the site. The methodology used to determine height restrictions are premised on drawing an arc 60 feet from the diagonally positioned corner of the R-7.5 property(refer to Unified Site Plan C1.0). Sixty (60)feet represents the right-of-way dimension for similar adjacent local streets. From the 60 foot arc, 120 foot arc is drawn representing the 35 foot height limitation imposed on the property. Beyond the 120 foot arc and up to 240 feet away from the 60 foot right-of-way, the height limitations are 45 feet. Beyond 240 feet, a 52-foot height limit is applicable in the EC zone. 48.10.315 Special Requirements. 4. All development in any commercial zone will be developed under a unified site plan. The site plan will identi&circulation patterns and access points, method of provision of public services and general placement of lots and structures, general area and type of uses. Response: The subject development proposal is submitted as a unified site plan identifying the circulation patterns, access points, provision of public services and layout of lots, structures, and proposed uses. 5. Specific Conditions in the Comprehensive Plan for this EC District are as follows: Response: This application responds to the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies under criterion A previously addressed. Specific conditions for the EC zoned district are addressed in this application under criterion C in this application(LOC 23). • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 33 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE 66- Revised 4/27/00 0082 c. The Development Standards applicable to major developments; Street Lights 100i Response: Arterial and collector street light standards are applicable to "A" Avenue and Evergreen Road, as well as, Second and Third Street. Specifically Appendix C, Figure 8 depicts the acceptable standard street lighting pursuant to Title 23. "Acorn"type ornamental streetlights will be specified on "A" Avenue, as well as Second and Third Streets and Evergreen Road, to blend with and continue the design themes of the Demonstration Street Project. Low level lighting will be installed on-site. Light fixture specifications are shown on the separate fixtures board. Transit System 6.005 Response: The Lake Oswego Transit Center is located at Fourth Street and "A" Avenue within 300 feet of Block 136. Tri-Met currently operates four regular bus routes with connections at the transit center. Route 35-Macadam operates between Oregon City and downtown Portland with 15 minute headways during peak hours and 30 minute headways off-peak. Route 36- South Shore primarily operates weekdays between the Tualatin Park & Ride lot and down town Lake Oswego,but also provides limited peak hour service to downtown Portland. Route 37- North Shore is similar to Route 36 with service to North Lake Oswego between the downtown and the City of Tualatin. Route 78-Beaverton/Lake Oswego provides weekday and weekend service to transit centers in Tigard and Beaverton. The headways between buses are generally 30 minutes. Based on the close proximity to the transit center and the various destination points available, transit improvements for this project may not be necessary. • Off Street Parkin Loading and Bicycle Access 7.005 1. Vehicle Parking. a. Required parking spaces shall be available for the parking of operable passenger vehicles of residents, customers,patrons, and employees and shall not be used for the storage of vehicles or materials or for the loading and unloading or parking of vehicles used in conducting the business or use. Response: The required parking spaces will be used for their intended purpose and not for storage of vehicles or materials or for the loading and unloading of vehicles. b. Number of Required Parking Spaces. Response: The number of required parking spaces for the development proposal are shown in the following table relative to the number of parking spaces provided. Appendix C identifies a worksheet for both on-site and on-street parking. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 34 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0083 TABLE 4 NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES Type of Use Standard Proposed Minimum Proposed Minimum Number of Spaces Number of Spaces Units/or G.F.A. Required Spaces Required (with reductions) Residential - 1.5 per unit 41 62 (39) 70 spaces within I Multifamily 2 or garages, 4 guest more bedrooms spaces Commercial - Office 3.33 per 1,000 8,612 29 (18) 19* GFA Commercial — 13.3 per 1,000 2,744 37 (23) 7* Restaurant GFA Commercial - Retail 3.3 per 1,000 5,448 18 (12) 12* GFA Totals: I 146 (92) 112 Notes: 1. Twenty-five(25%) of the required parking for multi family use shall be located to provide for cotnmott or visitor use. ?. (*)Existing on-street parking along the property frontage shall be used to calculate parking requirements. Using 24-foot lengths, there are 23 spaces at the curb on ":A"Avenue and three streets (Evergreen, Second and Third). 3. Except for residential parking requirements, the maximum number of parking spaces shall not exceed 125 percent of the minimum number of required spaces. 4. Modifiers to the parking requirements are used: TA of 0.95, PA of 0.90 and 0.75 pursuant to LODS 23.405 Response: Based on the requirements, the development proposal complies with the required range of standards. Thirty-nine (39) spaces are required (using parking modifiers) and 74 spaces are provided. The townhomes provide parking in each of the two car garages. Residential guest parking spaces (25°A) of the 39 required spaces or 10 spaces) are provided on and off site. Handicapped parking and ramps are shown on the plans and conform to the provisions in the Uniform Building Code. Four on-site guest-parking spaces are included; one of which is van accessible. The commercial structure assumes office use on the entire top floor. The retail uses are assumed to be split, 66 percent retail and 33 percent restaurant uses. The restaurant use requires a much higher parking standard and was used to determine a worse case scenario. The proposed application provides for 38 parking spaces on-site and another 17 spaces on-street to meet the requirements. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 35 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0084 c. On-Site Location of Required Parking Spaces: I. All required parking shall be off-street. • ii. Except for tandem parking in residential developments of single-family detached and attached dwelling units, duplexes, and zero lot line dwelling units, design shall insure that the parking of any vehicle shall not interfere with the parking or maneuvering of any other vehicle. Response: All required parking is located off-street except as permitted through Title 23. Residential parking requirements have been met on-site, within individual garages, for the homeowners. Guest parking is primarily located on the street surrounding the development as permitted by Title 23, with a small number on-site spaces provided adjacent to the interior building without street frontage. Parking spaces have been so designated not to interfere with the parking or maneuvering of any other vehicle. The internal circulation driveways provide 24 foot wide aisles, in accordance with LODS 7.020 Table 7.2 for 90 degree parking. This is in addition to maneuvering space in front of the garage doors. Interior driveways will be posted no parking so the full 24-foot width will be maintained throughout. The parking spaces within the Retail/Office component are dimensioned according to LODS 7.020—Table 7.2 for 90 degree standards. d. Parking Options. Response: This provision allows for shared use of parking spaces and the use of parking spaces up to 500 feet away from the property line. The applicant is not proposing to utilize the shared 1 illoption approach with the redevelopment project. e. Reduction of Parking Space Requirements. Response: This provision allows for reduction of required parking spaces. The applicant has followed provisions in Title 23 that permit a 0.75 reduction. In addition, those modifiers identified in section 7.020,Table 7.3 of the LODS have been used. A detailed worksheet contained in Appendix C shows the on-site and on-street parking requirements and proposed parking. f Parking Dimensions. Response: The proposed parking stall dimensions are shown on the plans for the retail/office portion of the development and the on-site guest parking for the residential portion and meet the minimum dimensional requirements in Table 7.2 of the LODS. The enclosed parking spaces located within the individual dwellings units are typical of single-family homes in size (20 feet deep). The sizes that are indicated in Table 7.2 are not applicable to the residential garages. The 24-foot wide interior private streets provide maneuvering space for ba5-,king out of garages and two lanes of travel for two-way circulation. O LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 3 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April ,9,2000 085 II g. Loading. • Response: No loading berths are necessary to handle the needs of this development. Typically the small size of the structure, and the mix of office and retail will contain small leased areas. These tenants handle the movement of products usually through vans. According to the design standard, off-street parking shall not be used for loading and unloading. The retail/office building will not produce a large enough tenant occupancy to warrant an on-site loading berth. Should the City determine loading berths are necessary the applicant proposes posting loading hours from 7:00 am —9:00 am on two of the parking spaces located on "A" Avenue. Loading areas are not required for the residential portion of the development. All dwellings front on a public street or private street that provides adequate room for delivery vehicles. h. Employee and Carpool and Vanpool Parking. Response: The proposed development is within a commercial district, yet the commercial portion of 16,844 square feet does not require 50 or more parking spaces. Given this circumstance no employee carpool or vanpool parking is specifically designated. 1. Bicycle Parking. The following table identifies the minimum required bicycle parking spaces based on standards contained within Table 7.4 of the LODS: 410 TABLE 5 BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS Land Use Proposed Units Standard Minimum No. Proposed No. of or G.F.A. of Spaces Spaces Required Residential - 41 1 per 4 units 11 Room provided Multifamily within garages for bicycle parking (41 spaces) rRetail sales and 8,232 G.F.A. 2 per 2,500 6.59 7 service S.F. G.F.A. Office 8,612 G.F.A. 2 per 5,000 3.44 3 S.F. G.F.A. Total 20 51 Note: 100%of all req .'i. 'bicycle parking spaces for residential and industrial categories shall be covered. \-N. LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 RE EVELOPMENT Page 37 LAND USE APPLICATION NARK, TIVE April 19.2000 i 003E Response: a) —b).Bicycle parking stalls are identified in the above table and are in conformance with LODS Table 7.4. No modifications of buildings are planned as this is new development. C). This section is not applicable for the residential portion of the development or the commercial portion, as it is new development, not an increase in size. d). For the residential portion of the development, bicycle parking is assumed to occur within individual enclosed garages. Actual placement of bicycles within the garage is at the owner's discretion. The commercial portion of the project positions bicycle stalls an adequate distance from vehicle parking and circulation to protect from potential damage. e). This section is not applicable for the residential portion of the development. The commercial portion of the project positions three stalls in the lower level parking garage in the northeast to serve the office users. Seven bicycle stalls are located on the sidewalk along"A"Avenue and/or Second Street to serve the "at grade" retail use. f). For the residential portion of the development, bicycle parking is assumed to occur within individual enclosed garages which are fully covered one hundred percent (100%). Three of the commercial spaces are covered in the garage; Seven commercial spaces are at grade level by the building adjacent to the sidewalk. g). For the residential portion of the development, bicycle parking is assumed to occur within individual enclosed garages. This location is illuminated, secured and within 50 feet of the entry to the dwelling. The commercial portion provides illuminated, secure spaces within 50 feet of the building entrances. h). For the residential portion of the development, no exterior bicycle parking is proposed. • The commercial bicycle parking stalls will be within 50 feet of a public entrance and clearly visible. i). For the residential portion of the development, bicycle parking is provided on-site. The commercial parking will provide six of the stalls on the sidewalk adjacent to the property's frontage, while still maintaining the five-foot minimum unobstructed sidewalk width. j). For the residential portion of the development, bicycle parking will be located within individual garages, with space provided at the owners discretion and shall have 7 foot head room. The commercial spaces will be designed to meet the 2' x 6' dimensions with the 7-foot overhead clearance. Park and Ooen Snace 8.005 All residential development and office campus development shall provide open space or park land approved by the City in an aggregate amount equal to at least 20 percent of the gross land area of the development. Commercial and industrial development shall provide open space or park land approved by the City in an aggregate amount equal to at least 15 percent of the gross land area of the development. Response: The landscape coverage of 19.75 percent for the entire 2.11 acre site is achieved for both the commercial and residential components through the Unified Site Plan provisions (Section 48.10.315 of the Zoning Code). The park and open space standards call for meeting • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 38 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0387 separate standards for the residential and commercial developments that are applicable to this ar.nlication. The cumulative landscape coverage must meet or exceed 35 percent. Appendix B =als the landscape coverage for the townhomes exceeds the 20 percent (15,040 s.f.) • ...ndard by achieving 22.15 percent (16,657 s.f.). The commercial portion of the project is less than the 15 percent (2,487 s.f.) standard, achieving 8.87 percent(1,470 s.f.). The combined percentage is 31.02 percent. Essentially, the commercial component is 1,017 square feet short of meeting the standard. The adjacent alley to the west of the commercial building contains landscaping and pedestrian amenities amounting to another 2,146 square feet, benefiting the retail/office area and should be added to meet or exceed the 15 percent requirement. This land area is not under the applicant's ownership or control at this time. The applicant intends to vacate this portion of the alley when approval has been granted by the westerly property owner (occupied by Key Bank). Until such time, as the negotiations have been consummated, this area will be improved by the applicant and a separate request will be made to vacate this northerly portion of the alley. The addition of the improved alley into the commercial landscape requirements provides a total landscape coverage of 19.18 percent. 1. Open space and park land in commercial, industrial and office campus areas may be provided as a combination of reserved land and landscaping. Where no RP or RC District Resources or public park land is located on the site, the park and open space requirement can be met by protecting non-designated natural resource areas and/or providing landscaping which meets the requirements on the Landscaping Standard. • Response: This requirement is not applicable to the residential portion of the project. The commercial portion of the mixed use site is providing landscape area under the landscape standards. Given this, an 8.87 percent landscape percentage has been provided and could be boosted to 19.18 percent if the west alley was included in the calculation. Should more park and open space be required, the Millennium Park should be considered as an adjacent facility accessible to those users of Block 136. Landscaping_ Screening and Buffering 9.005 1. Commercial and industrial development, other than in the Office Campus zone, shall provide 15 percent of net buildable area in landscaping and/or open space, including courtyards,planters, raised beds, expaliers, etc. Office campus developments shall provide 20 percent. Response: The subject property is zoned as a commercial district, yet is being developed with a mix weighted with multi-family and a smaller commercial component. The land area devoted to the commercial structure less private street area divided by the 1,379 square feet of landscaping equates to 14 percent. Should the improved alley be included in this calculation the landscape percentage will increase to 17 percent. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 39 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0 83 1 2. Multi family and mobile home park development must provide 20 percent of the net buildable area in landscaping in addition to the park and open space requirements. • Response: The site is zoned as a commercial site and being built at a mix of uses including commercial and residential (townhomes). Using the net buildable area for the townhome component and applying the 12,697 square feet of proposed landscaping equates to 24 percent landscape coverage. One of the tracts of land will be devoted to pedestrian access through the center of the site from"A" Avenue to Evergreen Road. Should more park and open space be required Millennium Park is situated 320 feet to the southeast of the redevelopment project site. This park is a major park site providing recreational opportunities to the entire downtown core. 3. Public and semi-public use must meet 1 or 2 above, depending on use. Response: The proposed redevelopment project meets Standard number 1 above. All development abutting streets shall provide street trees at the proper spacing for the species. Response: The proposed redevelopment project includes street trees of an acceptable species properly spaced as shown on the plans. 4. Parking lot plantings shall be designed to allow surveillance of the lot from the street at • several points. Response: As shown on the landscape plans, the planting scheme specifies plants that permit visual inspection from the surrounding streets at several points. S. Screening and buffering shall be required to: a. Mitigate noise, lighting or other impacts from adjacent transportation routes or dissimilar uses. b. Screen public or private utility and storage areas; and parking lots. c. As separation between dissimilar uses. Response: As shown on the landscaping plans, screening and buffering has been carefully selected to satisfy the design standards to mitigate impacts from dissimilar uses, noise, lighting and to screen utilities and parking lots. 8. The following standards apply to PD and cluster developments: a. Lots which are located on the perimeter.... b. Housing types located on the perimeter.... c. In a PD or cluster development located in a R-0... 11111 LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 40 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0G89 Response: This project is within the East End Commercial (EC) district with an allowed residential R-0 density maximum. The project does not rely on the Planned Development or S cluster development provisions, therefore this criterion does not apply. Drainage Standard for Major Development 11.005 11.020 Standards for Approval. 1. All drainage management measures, whether located on private or public property, shall be accessible at all times for City Inspection. When these measures have been accepted by the City for maintenance, access easements shall be provided at such a width to allow access by maintenance and inspection equipment. Response: The drainage facilities proposed throughout the project are accessible at all times for City inspection. In addition corresponding access easements are provided at the specified widths to allow access, maintenance and inspection, as shown on the plans. ?. Storm Water Runoff Quality. All drainage systems shall include engineering design features to minimize pollutants such as oil, suspended solids, and other objectionable material in storm water runoff. Response: The drainage systems proposed include engineering design features to minimize pollutants such as oil, suspended solids and other objectionable material in storm water runoff. The type of system proposed is Stormwater Management's below-grade Stormiilter, For specific design and engineering calculations, refer to the Storm Runoff Calculations for Block 136, prepared11111 by KPFF and included in this Design Review information package. 3. Drainage Pattern Alteration. Development shall be conducted in such a manner that alterations of drainage patterns (streams, ditches, swales, and surface runoff do not adversely affect other properties. Response: The proposed development drainage pattern, as identified on the plans does not alter the pattern to the extent that adverse affects other property. The drainage system is designed to catch all the runoff generated on the site and then meter it into the public storm system at a controlled rate. The type of system proposed is a series of catch basins, roof drains and area drains that will collect surface runoff and convey it in underground pipes. 4. Storm Water Detention. Sufficient storm water detention shall be provided to maintain runoff rates at their natural undeveloped levels for all anticipated intensities and duration of rainfall and provide necessary detention to accomplish this requirement. Response: Detention is not required after evaluation of the drainage basin and the capacity of the downstream system. See the Storm Runoff Calculations for Block 136, by KPFF. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 41 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0690 5. Required Storm Water Management Measures. The applicant shall provide sufficient storm water management measures to meet the above storm water runoff requirements. • The applicant shall provide designs of these measures taking into account existing drainage patterns, soil properties (such as erodibility and permeability) and site topography. Response: The proposed storm water management design is shown in the plans and the calculations can be found in the Storm Runoff Calculations for Block 136, by KPFF. Weak Foundation Soils 13.005 13.020 Standards for Approval. The presence of weak foundation soil is not cause for denying development, but may cause density to be reduced, structural modifications to be required, or structures to be relocated. Response: The preapplication notes indicates this site be listed on the City's inventory of weak foundation soils. These typically have high shrink-swell potential and do not percolate water very well. A geotechnical study dated November 23, 1999 has been conducted by Keinefelder, Inc. and included as Attachment C. The highlights of this study indicate the following: Eight test pits were conducted across the site and a general sequence of loose to dense fill soils consisting of silt, sand, gravel, and cobbles mixtures to depths of 2 to 9 feet. Near surface conditions varied from asphalt pavement and base course materials in the paved areas to topsoil on the landscaped areas. The fill unit is underlain by either medium dense course grained catastrophic flood deposits or soft to medium stiff silts and clay of the Waverly Heights Basalt formation. Its estimated that 6 to 8 inches of topsoil shall be striped prior to subgrade preparation. The on site soils encountered below the topsoil are generally suitable for use as structural fill. The near surface soils have a very high proportion of fines and will require proper moisture conditioning to achieve specified compaction levels. Based on the soils encountered, shallow spread foundations can be used for this project providing excavations are prepared in accordance with the recommendations set forth in Section 4.2 of the report. Due to uncontrolled fills, to achieve adequate bearing, footing should be overexcavated to a minimum depth of 2 feet below the proposed footing bottom and backfilled with granular structural fill placed and compacted in accordance with recommendations in Section 4.1.5 of the report. Following these recommendations will result in settlements not to exceed 1 inch with less than 'A inch of differential settlement over 30 feet. An alternative to the shallow spread foundation is the use of short aggregate piers, known as geopiers. No site specific seismic concerns were identified during the seismic hazard analysis. Liquefaction, landslide or lateral spreading does not appear to be a significant hazard at the site. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 42 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 J091 Utility Standard 14.005 14.020 Standards for Approval. 1. Utilities Required. The following utilities, whether on or off site, shall be provided to • all development in the City of Lake Oswego, in accordance with City Standards, Plans and Specifications: a. Sanitary sewer systems b. Water distribution systems c. Sidewalks and any special pedestrian ways and bicycle paths d. Street name signs e. Traffic control signs and devices f Street lights, which shall be served from an underground source of power g. Underground utility and service facilities, as required h. Streets i. Provision for underground T.V. cable The City Manager may require that utility designs be prepared by a registered engineer. Response: All required utilities will be provided to the proposed development, in accordance with City Standards, Plans and Specifications. A registered KPFF engineer will prepare utility designs. Preliminary utility designs are shown on the plans. Response to Standards 2 — 8: 2. The property owner as required will provide easements or right-of-ways for utilities and related facilities. Preliminary easements are shown on the plans. Final easements will be recorded in a final plat. 3. 8-inch sanitary sewer mains will be installed on the project site to serve the development and will connect to an existing 10-inch main in Second Street. The project will also re- route the existing public sanitary sewers that run through the center of the site and through the southeast corner of the site. The sanitary sewer system is shown in the plans. 4. All areas adjacent to the site have been developed. The design takes these areas into account. 5. All sanitary sewers and appurtenant structures will be designed and constructed in conformance with City of Lake Oswego Standard Plans and Specifications. Preliminary design for sanitary sewer pipe size and material,manholes,cleanouts, and service laterals is shown on the plans. 6. The development will be served water by 4-inch service laterals to individual units, 8-inch public water mains looped through the site, and fire hydrants which are connected to City mains in Second and Third Streets. 7. The water improvements are designed as a looped system. This looped system will adequately serve the development and any future development on the site. 8. Each lot in the development will be provided with a water service line. Each lot will be provided with required fire flow. (See LOC chapter 45) S LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 43 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 VtO— 2 Hillside Protection Standard 16.005 16.020 Approval Standards • 1. All developments shall be designed to minimize the disturbance of natural topography, vegetation and soils. Response: The project site has been previously developed. The new development is designed to minimize the disturbance of existing topography, vegetation and soils. Additionally, final construction drawings will include an erosion control plan that will incorporate Best Management Practices to minimize the erosion and sediment transport during construction. ?. Designs shall minimize cuts and fills. Response: The grading design will minimize the cuts and fills. The proposed grades are designed to match as closely to the existing grades as possible. 3. Cuts and fills shall conform to the minimum requirements of LOC Chapter 45. Response: Cuts and fills conform to the minimum requirements of LOC Chapter 45. 4. Developments Prohibited. Response: The proposed redevelopment of Block 136 has not experienced landslides nor does it possess a hazard potential for landslides as documented on the soils investigation report by Kleinfelder, Inc. (Attachment C) 5. Cuts and Fills. Response: a. There are no proposed toes of cuts or fills at any adjacent property. b. No proposed cuts will remove the toe of a slope where a severe potential landslide or erosion hazard exists. c. A registered engineer will design any structural fill, in accordance with standard engineering practice. The engineer will certify that the fill has been constructed as designed in accordance with City requirements. (See LOC Chapter 45) d. Any retaining walls will be constructed in accordance with Section 2308(b) of the Oregon State Structural Specialty Code. A registered structural engineer will design retaining walls. 6. Roads shall be the minimum width necessary to provide safe vehicle access, minimize cut and fill, and provide drainage control, all in accordance with LOC Chapter 44. i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 44 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 � 33 r Response: Proposed on-site roads are designed with a 24-foot width to provide safe, two-way vehicle circulation. Drainage is provided with valley gutters that convey surface runoff to catch • basins. The proposed grades of the roads are designed as close as possible to the existing topography to minimize cut and fill. Access 1 8.005 18.020 Standards for Approval 1. Every lot shall abut a street for a width of at least 25 feet. Exception: The street frontage of a lot create to approval of a row house development may be reduced to 17 feet in the R-0, D-D, R-2, R-3 and R-5 zones. Response: The majority of the tome homes front onto public streets. An exception is requested to permit 17 foot and 20 foot street frontage widths for the townhomes in the EC zoning district. This is consistent with provisions of the development code for the R-0, D-D, R-2, R-3 and R-5 zones when creating row house lots. Townhouse Building # 2 consisting of nine dwellings located in the interior of the block does not abut a public street. Access to these lots is from the interior circulation 24-foot wide private streets. The nine dwellings front onto a large open space located at the interior of the block. An exception is requested to permit the development of nine lots without direct access to a public street. Shared access from these lots to the public street is proposed. No adverse impacts on traffic flow or fire access would result since all garages for all lots have shared access from the private streets rather than from the public street. • 2. Access design shall be based on the following five criteria: a. Topography b. Traffic volume to be generated by the development c. Classification of the public street from which the access is taken (residential, collector or arterial) d. Traffic volume presently carried by such street e. Projected traffic volume Response: The traffic impact study conducted by DKS Associates dated March, 2000 (Attachment C) provides a complete description of traffic volumes presently carried on each street, street classification of surrounding streets and traffic volume to be generated by the development coupled with projected traffic volumes. The report provides traffic impacts generated from Block 136, 137 and 138 buildouts. This discussion is limited to findings for Block 136. a. Access points for the project were limited to Second and Third Streets, at the direction of the City's request not create new access points on "A"Avenue. Topography did not play a role in the access location. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 45 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 i ;J 9 4 b. The trip generation estimated for Block 136 is shown in the report and summarized . below: TABLE 6 TRIP GENERATIONS Land Use Quantity Daily I PM Peak Hour Trips Vehicle In Out Total Trips Townhouses 41 DU 305 j 19 10 129 Shopping Center 8 KSF 1587 26 28 154 I General Office 8 KSF 1 191 3 13 16 IPass-By Trips to New Uses I -9 -10 -18 Block Total Added Trips I I 39 42 81 c. The street classification for Second and Third Streets are "local" streets. d. The traffic volumes for each street are as follows: "A"Avenue carries approximately 1,800 vehicles during the peak hour; Evergreen Road carries approximately 40 to 75 vehicles during the peak hour; Second and Third Streets traffic volumes were not identified, nor were they considered necessary for the analysis, as the critical segments of road from the project access points are Evergreen and"A" Avenue.. e. The projected traffic volumes are identified through intersection performance with factors for"Average Delay Per Vehicle (seconds)," "Overall Intersection Level of • Service," and "Volume to Capacity Ratio." These projections are shown for the short- term and for the year 2017 on pages 18 and 24 of the report. For the short-term the existing traffic plus the proposed Block 136 indicates all intersections will operate at Level of Service(LOS) D or better. The intersection of"A"Avenue at 15t Street will degrade from LOS A to LOS B with the project added traffic. All other intersections will operate at the same Level of Service as they do today with somewhat higher delays on average. The project added traffic does not degrade any of the study intersections below the City's minimum performance standard (LOS E). The traffic added onto Evergreen Road will not change the existing LOS A condition at any of the monitored intersections. On-site Circulation - Driveways and Fire Access Roads 19.005 Response: All town homes have rear loaded garages that front onto an interior private driveway system. The driveway system provides the driveable connection between the individual parking areas on private property and the public street system. For the Building located in the interior of the block, the private streets act as a private easement providing common pedestrian and vehicular access to the otherwise land locked lots. The driveways will be 24-feet wide and paved with patterned and textured concrete and asphaltic concrete for the full width. Driveway slopes, turning radius and driveway approaches to the public street will be designed and built in accordance with the development code. LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 46 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19.2000 0 G 95 ■ Driveways will be designed and constructed to support fire equipment as required by the development code. Correspondence with the Fire Marshall's office indicates the dead end • driveways in excess of 150 feet will be allowed without a turn around provided the buildings are fully sprinkled. The letter qualifies that approvals need to be granted from b,•th planning and engineering divisions for other safety considerations. The letter is contained in Appendix A. The applicant is committed to a water sprinkler system throughout the project. The retail/office building contains drive aisles that are dimensioned in accordance with specified standards in the LODS. Fire protection vehicles can safely serve this building as designed. On-site Circulation -Bikeways, Walkways and Accessways 20.005 Response: All town homes fronting on a public street will have individual dwelling entrances located on the street side with connections to the public sidewalk along the lot frontage. Building#2 located in the interior of the block without direct access to a public street, will have individual entrances connecting to a five-foot wide walkway located within a common open space or easement. This walkway with grades of 5 percent will connect to other on-site pathways that lead to a public street/sidewalk. Walkways located on common space and connecting dwelling entrances to the street will meet the requirements of the ADA. Due to topography, all pathways may not be accessible. (Note: as townhomes, the residential portion of the project is exempt from the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act). In addition to walkways, paving variation on the shoulders of the private driveways will create11 the appearance of pedestrian ways at both sides of the driveways. No physical barrier is proposed as these walks are implied with contrasting colored or patterned paving and are not the primary pedestrian circulation system. The alley positioned in a north-south fashion connecting"A" Avenue to Evergreen Road will be repositioned to serve as a linear park and a connector trail. Starting at the north end, at"A" Avenue, this alley will become a landscaped plaza extending 30 feet south creating access to the retail level. Two staircases with landings and landscaping on either side connect to the continuation of the trail through a linear park fronting the west side of Building #2 townhomes. The path crosses over the east-west driveway and cuts through the townhomes situated on Evergreen Road connecting to the sidewalk on Evergreen Road. The intent of the paved path is to take the place of the former alley, yet provide a much more meaningful experience to the user. The path will contain a public way via the recordation of a pedestrian easement in favor of the City. The retail/office building will have walkways on"A" Avenue and Second Street. The alleyway on the west side will allow for a walkway at "A"Avenue level to access the southwest corner of the building into an elevator. This access meets with ADA requirements. The south side of the building will be accessed by walkways in connection with the drive aisles into the underground parking area. There are ADA marked parking stalls with adjacent walkways leading to the elevator in the underground parking area. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 47 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 r l `J i Downtown Redevelopment District Design Standard 23.005 23.105 Building Siting and Massing Response: 1. Complex massing required: the individual townhomes are offset from two to five feet from one another along the principle facade in addition to projecting elements such as bay windows, porches, iron railed balconies, decks, etc., to provide interest, shadows and variety to the elevation. The roofline is broken up into a series of gables. The ridge between the gables is broken into segments continuing over no more than two or three homes to diminish the overall mass and length of the building. Each of the five buildings has a unique facade, consisting of different combinations of the two basic unit types. Topography adds additional dimension to the facades since the units step down to follow grade. A mix of different siding treatments above a strong masonry (brick or stone) ground level base decreases the apparent height and overall mass of the building. Siding varies between horizontal lap siding and shingle siding. The masonry base extends up to the window sill height of the second level windows on street facades. End units facades are broken up with bay windows and windows. The retail/office portion of the project uses asymmetrical bay sizes, articulated cornices, varied pitched roof forms and canopies both at the lower and upper elevations. 2. Pedestrian oriented siting: All townhomes front on a public street or an on-site pedestrian way to the maximum extent possible. The retail/office portion is directly iadjacent to the "A"Avenue and Second Street right-of-ways thus maximizing the pedestrian experience along the two streets. 3. Roof forms: All townhome buildings utilize sloped roofs (12:12 pitch at gables, varied pitches to main ridge lines to minimize ridge height)with hip roofs used at end units to minimize the apparent building height at the end walls. The retail/office component contains a series of sloped roofs visible from each direction. These roof elements provide a more "village" feel that create a connection to the rhythmic roof pattern of the adjacent townhomes. 4. Number of Stories: All townhomes are three stories tall. The retail/office component will be two stories tall from both "A"Avenue and Second Street. From the interior parking lot to the south, looking north, the structure is three stories due to the underground parking level. 5. Height Limit: All townhomes are less that the 51 foot height restriction, measured pursuant to the Lake Oswego Zoning Code. Additionally, those townhomes in Building #4 adjacent to Evergreen Road and Third Street are at 35 feet high, conforming to the 35-foot height limit. The retail/office structure measures approximately 43 feet from finished grade to the roof peak, which conforms to the height limit. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 48 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 ;r1 9'7 6. Entrances: All townhome entrances face onto a public street/sidewalk or on-site pedestrian way located within an interior private park that connects to a public way. The retail portion of the mixed use building will have entrances on "A" Avenue. The corner • entrance at "A"Avenue and Second Street has been recessed with a continuous metal canopy above to protect pedestrians. The upper level office component will be accessed via the internal elevator which is accessible from "A" Avenue and from Second Street and in the underground parking level. 7. Street Corners: The buildings are setback from the sidewalk to provide landscape buffering and transitional space between the public sidewalk and the individual dwelling entries. Setbacks are minimal and vary as the facade steps in and out. Street corners of the building step back from the intersection to soften the edge and increase the opportunity for pedestrian amenity and landscaping at the street corners. The retail/office building is designed with a pitched roof with a clock facing "A" Avenue. The store front at street level is recessed in to match recessed frontages across the street. These design features combined produce a strong identifiable street corner. 23.110 Building Design Response: 1. Lake Oswego Style Required The facades are created using design elements from the Lake Oswego Style combined to create a distinctive building elevation which is well detailed and visually interesting. The combing of elements from the principle styles, Oregon Rustic, Tudor and Arts and Craft, result in an eclectic facade, incorporating the strongest aspects of each style • without copying a historic style. The asymmetrical composition, which results, is richly textured and visually engaging. All of the styles utilize steeply pitched roofs, either gabled or hipped. They use segmented, round and arched openings for accent. Windows are typically multi-paned above single paned sashes and are combined or grouped into mulled larger units. They combine a number of siding materials, often combining shingles, horizontal siding and masonry (brick and/or stone). Principally rectangular in massing, vertical projections and bays are used to add interest to the facade. The heavy masonry base with siding on the upper levels is common in the Tudor style and provide a strong tie to the ground visually and a sense of permanence. Tudor entries are generally small are often recessed into an arched opening through the masonry base. Bracketed porch roofs above the entries contain elements from the Tudor and Craftsman styles. The Commercial portion of the project provides gabled dormers and pitched roofs emulating "Oregon Rustic" style. Solid masonry detailing begins at the base and carries up to the roof peaks. The masonry is detailed with a different color and texture on at the bases and moves in to rich brick color with solder courses separating and accenting the two levels. The "A" Avenue elevation contains arched detailing above the office. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 49 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 �� 39 3 2. Storefront Appearance Required The townhomes are strictly residential with no commercial at the main level. With 1111 garages loaded from the rear, however, the ground level of each unit will have windows and entries to enliven the pedestrian way. The retail/office portion provides storefront up to the property lines on "A" Avenue and Second Street and a portion of the alley to the west. The storefront is designed with a low masonry base with glass extending above the door heights. The panes of glass switch from full panes at door height to smaller gridded panes above the doors. This storefront area is fully covered with canopies to enhance the pedestrian experience and accent the structure. Access into the store fronts from Second Street are limited due to the 8 percent grade of Second Street. Sign bands are placed above the canopies. a. Minimum of 80% of exterior ground floor abutting pedestrian ways shall be designed as storefront with display windows and entry features. This standard is not applicable to residential structures. The retail/office component contains slightly more than 85 percent of the lineal ground floor frontage as store fronts or entries. b. The bottom edge of windows along pedestrian ways shall be constructed no more than 30 inches above the adjacent walkway surface and shall be no closer than 12 inches above the walkway surface. This requirement is not applicable to residential ground floors where privacy needs to be maintained. Due to topography, the ground level floor for the • townhomes will be raised above the sidewalk by several feet in most cases. This, combined with a small setback for landscaping, affords privacy for the dwelling owner yet still provides surveillance of the street. The retail/office building contains windows that are positioned between 12 inches and 30 inches above the walkway surface. The exception to this is along Second Street. The difference in elevation on Second Street along the east elevation of the commercial structure provides an 8 percent grade. This topgraphic situation does not permit 30-inch window bases. An exception to this requirement is requested in ensuing sections. c. Sufficient interior or soffit lighting to allow night-time window shopping shall he provided. Having no ground level commercial uses, this requirement is not applicable for the townhomes. Each townhouse dwelling will have recessed lighting above the porch/ entry in addition to wall mounted exterior lights to illuminate the front of the home. The retail portion of the project will require tenants to provide sufficient interior lighting to allow night-time window shopping. The exterior of the building will have wall sconces on all pilaster locations to accent the structure. i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 50 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 99 • 3. Materials. • a. Ground floor. New or substantially remodeled buildings shall use masonry as the predominant building material for walls on the ground floor. The design of these materials shall create an historic or vernacular Lake Oswego Style appearance. The townhomes of ground level will be masonry on street facing and private drive elevations, consisting of brick. The masonry will be well detailed to accentuate architectural features, window openings and entries to dwellings. Milgard vinyl windows are proposed. The use of vinyl single hung windows allows the replication of the tradition look of wood windows without the maintenance problems associated with wood windows (dry-rot, warping painting etc.). The Classic Series by Milgard is designed as an alternative to wood windows with a substantial detailed frame. These windows feature equal sight lines (the upper and lower sash line up) and provide a painted woodwork look. The interna. :_ulpted muntin is 1 1/16 inch wide and is detailed as molding. Although paced between the glass, the width of the muntin makes it read form the exterior, visually replicating the many paned windows typical of the Lake Oswego Style. The windows will be surrounded with a substantial amount of wood trim. The trim is designed in dimension and character reflecting the Lake Oswego Style. The ground level walls of the retail/office are a masonry. This masonry contains , a lighter color and texture at the ground level and changes to traditional brick at mid-way to above the doors depending upon the location. b. Upper stories. New or substantially remodeled buildings shall use wood and glass as the predominant building materials for upper stories. These materials are intended to soften the appearance of a building that sits on a heavier appearing masonry/glass base and thereby effectively creating a mixed-use village appearance. Wood siding or cedar shingles may be used. The upper levels of the townhomes will be sided with horizontal bevel siding and/ or shingle siding. The facade is accentuated with large glazed bay windows and other window openings. The upper level retail/office will exhibit a series of window, however, the materials will be masonry brick. The applicant believes masonry at the upper levels meets the high quality standards requested by the City of Lake Oswego. This top to bottom masonry provides a very strong corner presence. c. Roof New buildings or substantial remodeling that involve modification to the roof shall use the following materials: • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 51 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 :- 10 0 d. Slate, tile, shakes or wood shingles, or synthetic materials. The townhome roofing will be an architectural heavy laminated composition • roof product with high edge definition and varied tones. The roofing will be a dark gray color so as to blend in and not become a predominate element of the façade. The life expectancy warrantee provides a Class-A fire rating meeting the building code requirements. This material is designed to appear as a wooden shingle and therefore complies with 23.110.3. The code as written allows "other materials" which are designed to and appear to be slate, tile, shake or wooden shingles. The retail/office roof materials will consist of a synthetic material resembling tile, or a concrete tile resembling slate. ii. Copper or zinc roofing materials in styles representative of period architecture in the Lake Oswego Style. Metal roofing will not be used on the townhomes. Some of the awnings for the retail/office building will be metal. iii. If new or remodeled building utilizes a flat roof materials that will not cause roof repairs (patching) to be readily visible. Flat roofs will not be utilized on the townhomes. A small portion of the office/retail structure will be flat roofed. These portions are viewed from "A"Avenue and on the west side, from the alley way. The actual flat roofed portions will not reveal the materials from ground view due to the • slightly extended fascia and cornice, that conceal the roof surface. 4. Ground Floor Design. The townhome ground level base will be masonry, extending generally to the windowsill of the second level of the dwelling. A brick sill detail or a cast concrete wash will be used to cap the brick at the transition from masonry to siding on the upper levels. The retail/office utilizes articulated masonry cornice and sign area to visually separate the ground level retail uses from the upper level office use. 5. Molding Design. Significant window and door trim for the townhomes will be used will be compatible with the stylistic goals and criteria Detailing has been incorporated to add visual interest to the exterior elevations. Masonry coursing details such as reveals, and relief are in scale with character of the commercial mixed use building. 6. Enclosure or Screening of Mechanical Equipment. The townhome units will have HVAC units located within the individual garages. Air conditioning/heating compressors will be located within each garage screened from LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 52 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0101 public view. The only visible evidence of this unit will be the air intake and exhaust grill sized 10 inches by 20 inches and colored to match the exterior. The typical • locations ,f these grills are shown on the rear elevations of the buildings (Sheet AR-2). Mechanical equipment on the office/retail building will be screened by parapet walls and cornices such that pedestrians will view building elements only. Sheet AC-1 shows the locations of the mechanical equipment on the roof plan. 7. Awnings. The townhomes will not contain awnings. The retail/office building utilizes a mix of shed type awnings and sloped metal canopies. The upper level office contains awnings over the arched windows. Each of these awnings will be dimensioned to be 6 feet from the window walls. 8. Outdoor Relationships. Dwellings will have access to outdoor living on the front of the dwelling on small balconies, enlivening the street and street facades. Primary outdoor living areas will be located on the rear of the homes on second level decks. The retail/office building has an open relationship at the retail ground level to the adjacent sidewalk. Tenants will have direct access to the sidewalk area for potential outdoor seating on the"A" Avenue side. The western side of the building in the alley contains a unique location for outdoor seating extending approximately 30 feet south from the face of the building. , 9. Mixed Use Residential. The townhome buildings are not mixed use and are distinctly residential in appearance. The overall site does contain a mix of uses. "A"Avenue, the principle commercial street adjacent to the site will be developed with a mixed-use retail/ office building. Evergreen Road, Second and Third Streets are less traveled and have an urban- residential feel to them. The townhomes act as a transition from the very commercial north end of the site to the lower density residential neighborhood to the southwest. The residential component includes balconies, decks, chimneys, dormers and gabled roofs, all elements specified in this design guideline. 10. Corner Buildings. The townhome corner dwelling units have building setbacks with greater benefit and more interest than to other multi-family structures adjacent to the site. The corners are enhanced with varied paving, special landscaping and building end facade treatment to create an attractive pedestrian experience. 11011 LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 53 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0 t ; � The retail/office building, situated on the corner of"A"Avenue and Second Street creates a focal point due to the pitched roof tower, clock and inset retail ground floor. Storefront windows wrap around the entire corner. These design elements create a strong statement and sense of place. 11. Alley Space. The alley is being transformed in to a functioning pedestrian plaza on the north end adjacent to the west side of the building. The alley continues south all the way to Evergreen Road. This alley will contain a series of steps from the pedestrian plaza on the north end down to a meandering landscaped path along the west side of the interior townhomes and through a break in the townhomes along Evergreen Road to the sidewalk. To allow more of a flexible design, the alley boundaries in the north portion of the project will remain. Immediately south of the retail/office building, the alley will be vacated to allow for the construction of a linear park area adjacent to the pathway. A pedestrian easement will be in recorded along the vacated portions of the pathway to ensure pedestrian access to Evergreen Road. 23.115 View Protection New development shall preserve and enhance any available views of Mount Hood and Lakewood Bay by compliance with the following requirements. These regulations are not intended as a guarantee that a view will be preserved or created, only to require special and significant efforts to maintain and provide views. • 1. Street trees on A Avenue shall be selected and located to preserve views of Mt. Hood. Response: Not Applicable to the townhomes. The retail/office component will locate street trees in conformance with the East End Demonstration Project. Trees used will be located and selected to preserve the Mt. Hood views. 2. New structures shall be designed and located to preserve and enhance views of Lakewood Bay from the south end of Block 138 and from Lakewood Bay bluff. Response: Not Applicable to the townhomes or the retail/office building 3. Restaurants, outdoor cafes, housing and hotels shall be oriented to available views, especially views of Lakewood Bay, where feasible. Public gathering places shall be designed to maximize any available toward Lakewood Bay. Response: The townhomes are oriented towards the street. Existing development and topography block views to the east and south. The retail/office building is oriented towards the north away from Lakewood Bay. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 54 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 1u3 4. Staff may require site sections,photographs, view diagrams, survey spot elevations. view easements and other similar tools in order to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section. • Response: The applicant will provide these items at the request of staff at the appropriate time in the application review process. 23.205 Signs Response: Townhome signage will be limited to wall mounted address numbers. Additional signage mounted on masonry piers is used to mark entries to private driveways and walks. The retail/office signs will include a sign band above the store fronts serving the retail businesses. Actual tenant signs will be individually surfaced mounted letters and will be illuminated by means of an indirect light source, i.e. gooseneck lamps. Tenant signs will be no taller than 14 inches and will have an area no greater than thirty-two (32) square feet. Actual tenants are undetermined at this time and each tenant will submit sign plans to the applicant and to the City for review and approval through the appropriate procedures. A complete sign package is contained in Appendix D, identifying sign locations, sizes and acceptable materials. No specific color limitations have been imposed at this time to provide flexibility in tenant selection. 23.305 Landscaping and Site Design Reauirefnents 1. Street Furniture and Lighting. , Response: As shown on the site plan, street furniture and lighting comply with approved designs by the City of Lake Oswego, Appendix C, Figure 8. 2. Street Trees. Response: As shown on the landscape plan, street trees comply with the approved street trees and spacing of the Downtown Street Tree Plan. 3. Brick Paving. Response: As shown on the landscape plan, brick paving is used for sidewalk surface detail panels on Second and Third Streets and at the building entries on "A" Avenue. The courtyard in the easement west of the commercial building on "A" Avenue also incorporates the use of approved paving. The pedestrian walk running between Evergreen Road and "A" Avenue also incorporates the use of approved paving in selected locations. LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 55 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0104 1 4. Walls. • Response: Walls are located at the intersection of Third Street and Evergreen Road, the pedestrian walk entry on Evergreen Road and the courtyard in the easement on "A"Avenue. The walls comply with Appendix C,Figure 10 of the LODO,using concrete or a combination of a basalt veneer with concrete cap. S. Gates and Hangers. Response: Decorative iron gates and hangers for flower baskets will be incorporated as part of the street lighting. 6. Hanging Baskets. Response: Hanging baskets will be incorporated with decorative hangers as part of the street lighting. 7. Art. Response: The courtyard in the easement, west of the commercial building on "A" Avenue f will incorporate a display area for art. The applicant does not propose any specific art as part of this application. It is anticipated to work with the City in determining the appropriate art features prior to building occupancy. 8. Protecting Pedestrians. Response: At intersections, the sidewalk layout is designed with landscape areas to funnel pedestrians to crosswalks thereby protecting them in areas of potential vehicle/pedestrian conflict. 9. Landscape Design. a. Where new or substantially remodeled buildings are set back from property lines and sidewalks, intervening landscaping shall be designed to invite the public in, not to provide separation. Response: As shown on the landscape plans, landscaping is scaled for the pedestrian and is layered back to the buildings to achieve a hierarchy of planting that will be inviting. i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 56 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0 1 U 5 b. Where non pedestrian space is placed between a building and a sidewalk, benches, low sitting walls or other street furniture shall be placed in order to enliven the sidewalk. Respi.-:se: Low sitting walls, benches and other site amenities are incorporated as part of the landscape to enliven the pedestrian experience. c. Small areas of landscaping and paving in courtyards, entryways, building nooks and other areas shall use materials and designs similar to adjacent public spaces where such use will make the area appear larger or more inviting. This requirement is intended to minimize the transition from public to private space. but is not intended to restrict changes in material where it is functionally necessary or where it will avoid visual monotony. Response: The courtyard in the easement west of the commercial building on"A" Avenue, the pedestrian walk running between "A" Avenue and Evergreen Road, the entry to the pedestrian walk on Evergreen and the intersection of Evergreen and Third Street use the same palette of materials and designs as the "A" Avenue demonstration improvements. d. Drinking fountains, display windows or other street furniture shall be located in stopping areas created outside of pedestrian circulation areas. Stopping areas may be created by an enclosure, a change in grade or a change in paving materials. • Response: Benches will be located in the courtyard in the easement west of the commercial building on "A" Avenue, the entry to the pedestrian walk on Evergreen and in selected locations along the pedestrian walk running between Evergreen and "A" Avenue. 10. Undergrounding of Utilities. Response: The development proposal provides for installation of utilities underground. i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK l36 REDEVELOPMENT Page 57 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 23.405 Parkjig Requirements. The following table summarizes the City of Lake Oswego's parking requirements for the EC • zoning district relative to the proposed development plan. TABLE 7 NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ' Type of Use Standard Proposed Minimum Proposed Minimum Number of Spaces Number of Spaces Units/or G.F.A. Required Spaces Required (with reductions) Residential - 1.5 per unit 41 62 (39) 70 spaces within Multifamily 2 or garages, 4 guest more bedrooms spaces Commercial - Office 3.33 per 1,000 8,612 29 (18) 19* GFA Commercial — 13.3 per 1,000 2,744 37 (23) 7* l Restaurant GFA I Commercial -Retail 3.3 per 1,000 5,448 18 (12) 12* I GFA I Totals: 146 (92) 112 Notes: 11 III1. Twenty-five(25%)of the required parking for multi family use shall be located to provide for common or visitor use. 5. (*)Existing on-street parking along the property frontage shall be used to calculate parking requirements. Using 24-foot lengths, there are 23 spaces at the curb on ":A"Avenue and three streets (Evergreen, Second and Third). 6. Except for residential parking requirements, the maximum number of parking spaces shall not exceed 123 percent of the minimum number of required spaces. 7. Modifiers to the parking requirements are used: TA of 0.95, PA of 0.90 and 0.75 pursuant to LODS 23.405 Response: Based on the requirements, the development proposal complies with the required range of standards. Thirty-nine(39) spaces are required (using parking modifiers) and 74 spaces are provided. The townhomes provide parking in each of the two car garages. Residential guest parking spaces (25% of the 39 required spaces or 10 spaces) are provided on and off site. Handicapped parking and ramps are shown on the plans and conform to the provisions in the Uniform Building Code. Four on-site guest-parking spaces are included; one of which is van accessible. The commercial structure assumes office use on the entire top floor. The retail uses are assumed to be split, 66 percent retail and 33 percent restaurant uses. The restaurant use requires a much higher parking standard and was used to determine a worse case scenario. The proposed application provides for 38 parking spaces on-site and another 17 spaces on-street to meet the requirements. S LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 58 '' LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 01u7 Employee Parking. 411 Response: Employees of the 8,612 square feet of office space will have dedicated and signed parking stalls on-site under the commercial building. Employees of the 8,232 square feet of retail space will park on-site or along the street frontage. 23.410 Parking Lot Design Response: The townhome component provides a small parking lot at mid-block count, adjacent to the interior building and open space, consisting of 4 guest-parking spaces. The parking area that is provided for guests visiting the interior building residents where on street parking in front of the homes is not available. Traffic impacts have been considered by the traffic engineer's analysis. Driveway connections to the public street have been limited to minimize any break in the streetscape/ facade. The parking lot is landscaped so as to minimize any adverse noise or lighting impacts. The retail/office portion contains a surface parking lot dimensioned in conformance with the City's LODO. This parking area connects to Second Street and is fully accessible to service and emergency vehicles. Landscaping is provided around the perimeter and within certain planter islands. The parking lot continues under the office/retail structure as a way to provide covered and assigned spaces for the office tenants. 23.415 Parking Structures • Response: Not Applicable to the townhomes. The retail/office portion of the project uses the basement of the structure as a parking area. This type of design allows for the retail portion to be at-grade with "A" Avenue, a portion of the alley to the west, and part of Second Street. The access into the lower level parking is from the south side via a one-way circulation pattern allowing vehicles to enter in one side and exit the other. This lower level, on the south side, will incorporate reveals and scoring in the masonry work. 23.510 Street. Alley and Sidewalk Design. 1. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan. Development shall comply with the Major Street System Policies contained in the Goal 12, Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Pursuant to this element, "A"Avenue and State Street are classified as major arterials, "B"Avenue from State Street to Fifth Street and First through Fifth Streets from "A"to "B"Avenues are classified as major collectors. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 59 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19.2000 010. 1 Response: This project is flanked by "A"Avenue to the north, Second Street to the west, Evergreen Road to the south and Third Street to the west. "A"Avenue is not directly accessed • in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan policies. The adjacent local streets, Second and Third, are providing the project access. 2. "A"Avenue. Any improvements to "A"Avenue shall be designed and constructed in • conformance with the 1994 Concept Plan as it exists now or may in the future be amended by LORA. Response: Planned improvements to "A"Avenue frontage include similar sidewalk and street scape design as done on the City's demonstration street project and shown on the plans. 3. Intersection Design. a. Intersections on "A"and "B"Avenues shall create crosswalks in a different material and texture than the street paving to bridge the intervening streets. Response: The proposed project does not include new intersections on "A" or "B" Avenues. A new traffic signal will be installed on"A" Avenue and Second Street, that will include pedestrian crossings. The crosswalks will include different materials and textures compared to the street paving identical to the demonstration project. b. Curb extensions shall be created at all intersections where feasible from a traffic management standpoint and unless such extensions would interfere with the turning and stopping requirements of Emergency Service Vehicles (e.g. Fire Trucks, ambulances), buses or delivery vehicles. Such extensions will be designed to accommodate the turning and stopping requirements of such vehicles. Response: Curb extensions provided at Evergreen Road and Second and Third Streets. Extended along Evergreen Road to the facade break between the two buildings and the pedestrian connection to the interior of the block. Fully landscaped, Unique paving, etc. provides connectivity to Millenium Park and the commercial areas to the east. 4. Sidewalks. Sidewalk design shall consider and encourage opportunities for outdoor cafes, pushcart vendors, seasonal sidewalk sales,festivals and similar uses and activities that enliven pedestrian walkways. Response: The sidewalk on the north side of the retail/office building is 12 feet wide with a 4- foot planter. This 12-foot width is sufficient to encourage seasonal sidewalk use. Immediately to the west of the retail/office building the applicant proposes to enhance the alley with a 20- foot wide 30-foot deep plaza area which will enliven the pedestrian experience and encourage outdoor seasonal use. The sidewalk areas around the west, east and south sides will be 7—feet • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 60 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0109 wide with the exception two places at 5-feet to accommodate existing trees. The southwestern and eastern corners will contain wider sidewalk areas with special pavers and landscaping heading adjacent to Evergreen Road. This will provide a unique street side street scape on the • north side of Evergreen Road linking to the north-south pedestrian path inside the project and to Millennium Park. 5. Alleys. Alleys shall be incorporated into design plans as pedestrian and vehicular accessways. Response: A continuous pedestrian connection will be provided between Evergreen Road and "A" Avenue. This will be through the abandonment of the official 20-foot alley corridor except for the extreme north portion. The alley will be transformed into a private park along with a landscaped pedestrian path. The northern portion of the alley will remain in City ownership, yet the applicant proposes to create a 30-foot deep plaza area to enhance the pedestrian experience and enliven the use of the western portion of the retail use. 6. Undergrounding of Utilities. Utilities shall be placed underground where feasible. Response: All utilities will be placed underground. 23.605 Excentions to Standard. e. Any additional statutory or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be applicable to • the specific Major development application, such as the variance provisions, the Streets and Sidewalks Ordinance (LOC Chapter 42), the Tree Cutting Ordinance (LOC Chapter 55), the Solar Access Ordinance(LOC Chapter 57), the Historic Ordinance (LOC Chapter 58; and Exceptions: The exceptions to standards must meet the following criteria according to Title 23.606: b. New buildings or substantial remodels may vary from the design requirements in LODS 23.105 to 23.115 if i. The applicant demonstrates that the design should vary in order to create a complementary relationship with an abutting viable existing structure that is not designed to Lake Oswego Style; ii. The applicant demonstrates that the alternative design is exceptional in the quality of detailing, appearance or materials and/or creates a positive unique relationship to other structures, views or open space in a manner that accomplishes the purpose and goals of the Downtown Redevelopment District Design Standards. i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 61 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0110 c. The applicant demonstrates that the alternative design accomplishes the purpose of the Urban Design Plan and Comprehensive Plan in a manner that is equal or superior to a project designed pursuant to this standard. Each of the exception requests are discussed in the ensuing sections relative.to the criterion above or other criteria within the LODS and zoning code. Title 23.015 defines the relationship of Title 23 to other provisions in the LODS and zoning code, permitting authority to deviate from many of the requirements in other sections. Composition Roqfirtg: The applicant proposes composition roofing material on all the townhomes. Synthetic materials are permitted but composition roofing is not specifically mentioned in Title 23.105.3.c. However, composition roofing is permitted elsewhere in the code(in the "Old Town Building Design Standard", Title 24.005.) The applicant proposes high edge definition,varied tone composition roof. This material will resemble a shake type roof. The thick edge and non-uniform coursing offers shadow variation. The varied tone further decreases the overall visual impact of the roof and offers additional visual interest. Thick composition material offers superior fire protection and life expectancy. Due to the townhome height of three stories, the composition roof material will not be close enough from the street level to determine the change in roofing material. The sample material provided in the materials board is the most conclusive evidence that from a distance the product resembles a dark shake. This product is dimensionally thick and will retain color and shape for years. The applicant believes this product is of exceptional quality, detailing and appearance and creates a positive relationship to other structures. It is believed this product is superior • to the required roofing products. Internal Units with no streetfrontage: Due to site frontage limitations and a desire to maximize density without stacking units above one another, site constraints require some of the townhomes to be built without public street frontage. Building# 2 containing nine(9) townhomes will have the amenity of an adjacent open space in front of them. Their front doors will be connected to the public street via a pedestrian walkway in the open space that connects Evergreen Road to "A" Avenue via the alley. The back doors, essentially the garages, are accessed by private twenty-four(24) foot wide private streets. An access easement on the private street system to the public street will be recorded to ensure access to these centrally located units. The applicant has considered dedication of the private street systems as a public facility, however, not all street design standards can be met, such as sidewalks on either side, wider shoulders, and the inclusion of cul-de-sacs. The applicant has also contemplated creation of a "flag lot" from the public street, however, this will not permit the multiple lots required for each of the nine units. The streets as designed function safely for pedestrians, bicyclists,vehicles and emergency service vehicles,providing safe and efficient access to lots that do not front a public street. The result is to enliven the interior of the project, providing surveillance, increasing the pedestrian functions of the "alley" space, minimize pavement widths,increase density and quality of life. The design as proposed appears to be superior compared to a conventional lot layout and should therefore be given merit under the exception provisions. • Page 62 LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT B LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0111 Lot width dimensions: Several of the lots across the entire site are narrower than • twenty-five (2 5) feet. Title 18.015.1 requires every lot shall abut a street for a width of at least 25 feet. An exception may be permitted pu: cant to a rowhome development in R-0, D-D, R-2, R-3 and R-5 zones. The development in the EC zone is essentially a "row house" development and should be considered for an exception to as narrow as seventeen (17) feet in width. Granting this exception will permit the creative, varied array of units and the unit density across the site. Requirement of a standard 25-foot lot width would dictate a uniform and lower density development resulting in only 34 units. This lower density with a minimum 25-foot lot width does not meet the intent of the Title 23 by providing a"village character." The applicant believes the narrower lot widths on safe efficient private streets are superior, compared to the design imposed by following this regulation. The narrower lot widths allows variation in the street frontages at the pedestrian scale. Examination of the site plan indicates that the 17 foot wide units are scattered throughout the project creating variation. These characteristics are what the City and surrounding neighbors desire. Relaxation of corner setback at Third Street and Evergreen Road where adjacent to the R-7.5 Zone: The R-7.5 zone is located diagonally across the street from the project. An R-0 zoning district is directly west of the project site. This zoning would permit high density residential across the street to the west of the project. Section 48.10.310(1) of the zoning code requires a twenty-five (25) foot required yard to a residential zone from a structure within the EC zone. The required 25-foot setback applies only at the southeast corner, consisting of a triangle with 25-foot long legs extending into the project site. This setback is the only setback required for the site, all other setbacks are • zero. The applicant proposes a thirteen (13)-foot setback from the southwest .turner of the property line to the closest townhome. To ameliorate this situation the appineant has provided unique curb extensions, sidewalk paving, designs and landscaping that provide a twenty-five foot setback from the nearest townhome to the edge of the curb. By reducing the 25-foot setback to 13 feet from the property line, the Evergreen Road facade can be broken near mid-block, providing a pedestrian connection through the project. This shifting of the building foot prints will still maintain the 41 unit density across the site, yet permit access through the interior open space/park, connecting to "A" Avenue via an amenity filled path. With the enhanced sidewalk design the Evergreen Road curb extension treatment will be expanded on the southwest corner, at mid block at the path terminus and at the southeast corner. This design is complimentary to the neighborhood scale and desire by Evergreen residents to create a varied street scape that will slow traffic patterns. This type of design also provides a unique entrance way along the street towards the City's Millenium Park. The applicant believes relaxation of this requirement is fully justified. The elegant landscaping along this corner of the project provides 8— 10 foot tall Cypress trees, Chanticleer Pear Trees, Flowering Dogwoods and low stone sitting walls along with sod and other ground cover. This design is repeated on at the southeastern corner of the property as well. This superior design should be accepted as mitigation for allowing a reduction in the setback. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 63 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19.2000 Private Streets. The applicant requests an exception to the street standards in 42.03.050 1, to allow the inclusion of private drives. The proposed plan provides three(3) internal • private drives each 24-feet wide allowing two (2) 10-foot wide vehicular lanes and an additional four-foot dimension that could allow pedestrian circulation, all at the same grade with no separation. Vehicle speeds will be approximately 5 mph and the pavement will be designed to show different patterns between the vehicle drive surface and the pedestrian surface. Decorative cement bands will accent the asphalt drive lanes. The inclusion of a north-south pedestrian trail from "A" Avenue to Evergreen Road dimensioned 5 to 8 feet wide will augment the narrower pedestrian areas on the 24-foot private drives. In addition the streets are dead-end streets dimensioned no longer than 200 linear feet. The Lake Oswego Fire Marshall has provided approval of the use of sprinkler systems within the structures, in lieu of providing through connections, cul-de- sacs and hammerheads (refer to Appendix A). The applicant will provide fire sprinklers throughout the structures. The driveway aprons connecting to the 24-foot private street vary in depth from six (6) to eleven(11) feet, thus increasing the overall maneuvering width between the townhomes from thirty six (36) to forty six (46) feet. This is sufficient space for emergency vehicles and large sport utility vehicles. The streets will include the appropriate easements for water, sewer, drainage and utilities as required by the City. The street design is in keeping with an aesthetically pleasing, yet fully safe and functional for residents and emergency services. Adherence to the street standards increases the use of land area for street purposes and decreases the land area available for residential density. This would cause the density to decrease across the site defeating the intent to provide an urban residential look with 41 units and not stack the units one above the other in the form of apartments. The inclusion of private drives provides a high quality development that utilizes the land areas efficiently and safely. According to 42.03.050 4 the local streets will be designed with aesthetics of primary concern, subject only to considerations of function and public safety. The applicant believes this test is satisfied through the alternative design and therefore a design exception should be made to allow the private streets as shown on the plans. Storefront Access. Due to an 8 percent grade difference from "A" Avenue down along Second Street the commercial building is not capable to design continuous access along the eastern elevation. Storefront windows are provided, yet the typical 30-inch window sill base from the edge of the sidewalk increases in height to nearly 4-feet. This condition is because of the existing street grade on Second Street. Based on the existing topographic condition an exception is requested to this particular design requirement. Upper Stories. The upper story of the commercial building is proposed to be all masonry instead of wood and shingles as called for in the design requirements. The City has requested this type of appearance and the applicant agrees. It is believed that inclusion of all brick at the upper levels is appropriate and fitting for this structure, as the entire base is using masonry materials somewhat darker in color. The brick upper story provides an elegant appearance, that does not appear "heavy." The building also anchors the street corner of"A" Avenue and Second Street creating a strong visual appearance for the redevelopment block. When looking at the building there is an obvious storefront appearance at street level with the inclusion of multiple windows. LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 64 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 : 1. 13 • The upper story is used for office and the architectural features include: separated windows with smaller glass area, some awnings and detailed brick designs. This appearance is typical of neo-traditional structures with a mix of uses. For this reason the design is superior and should be favored for an exception. ,Landscaping. The commercial landscape coverage of 8.87 percent is less than the required 15 percent standard specified in Section 8.005 of the Development Standards. This means an additional 1,017 square feet of landscaping should be included within the commercial component of the project. This request explains reasons for allowing an exception to the commercial 15 percent landscape standard. The primary reason for this deficiency is due to the building design that positions the structure on the property line along"A" Avenue and along Second Street. This design is to provide continuous storefront at the pedestrian level at the property line maximizing the pedestrian experience. This precludes the opportunity to provide additional landscaping on two sides of the structure. The building is comprised largely of rich colored brick with solder courses, a series of pitched roof elements, anchored with a recessed entrance on "A" and Second accented with a clock on the second level. It is believed that this design, as described, and shown on the plans is compatible to the existing structures along "A" Avenue. Furthermore this design is exceptional in details and appearance. The landscape design that is provided around the commercial structure is densely planted with materials that are suitable for each location. The landscape coverage can be increased should the calculation include the pedestrian and • landscaping within the alley immediately to the west of the commercial structure. The applicant plans to pay for and construct landscaping and pedestrian features equating to another 2,146 square feet of area. These improvements are shown on the plans and are part of this application. Inclusion of this improvement into the commercial landscape coverage calculation provides for 19.18 percent. The applicant believes this additional landscaping provides a pedestrian friendly environment that today is a blank, unusable area. The design is superior in that it provides a level plaza area extending 30 feet south from "A" Avenue, with benches, planters, screening of the existing west wall and a series of steps down leading to the linear path that connects to Evergreen Road. Finally, this landscape deficiency of the commercial component should be placed in the context of the redevelopment of Blocks 136, 137 and 138. Millennium Park serves as a park and open space element for all three redevelopment blocks. This park is situated 320 feet to the southeast of Block 136. The path system within Block 136 allows a direct access to Millennium Park as do the adjacent sidewalks along Second Street, Third Street and Evergreen Road. Because this is such a short distance from the site and because the project provides for direct access to the park, the commercial deficiency should be accepted. i LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 65 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 d. Any additional statutory or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be applicable to the specific Major development application, such as the • variance provisions, the Streets and Sidewalks Ordinance (LOC Chapter 42), the Tree Cutting Ordinance (LOC Chapter 55), the Solar Access Ordinance (LOC Chapter 57), the Historic Ordinance (LOC Chapter 58); and Utilities (Chapter 38) Response: Chapter 38 provides the procedures and regulations for water, sewer and surface drainage requirements. As the project is designed and constructed, the applicant will adhere to applicable sections of this Chapter. System Development Charges (Chapter 39) Response: The applicant intends to comply with applicable sections of Chapter 39. Specifically, Section 39.06.111 Credits allows for previous uses and structures to be credited towards the proposed new uses and structures. Credit shall also be granted for the cost of a qualified public improvement, meaning an improvement required as a condition of approval . Through the pre-application process the applicant was informed of expected charges based upon credits from the existing uses and buildings. • Streets and Sidewalks (Chapter 42) Local Residential Streets—General Standards 42.03.050 Response: This section provides standards for local street design. The applicant is proposing private drives with no public right-of-way within the project to serve the residential townhomes. These drives will be designed 24 feet wide allowing two-way vehicle circulation, shared pedestrian and bicycle travel, surface water drainage and utilities. The entire 24-foot paved width will be at the same grade, thereby eliminating elevated walkways. The walkway areas on the drives will be defined by pavement patterns differentiating the drive surface. These streets are designed with a minimum paved roadway width and other structural elements necessary to provide proper functioning of the street as a transportation element. It is believed that this departure from existing "local" street patterns provides a safe, functional, aesthetically pleasing design. A public access easement will be recorded on the subdivision plat to ensure access for all utilities and for those residential units not connected to the public street. The responses to the design standards are provided to understand the differences of the private street design to the public street design. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 66 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19.2000 0115 _ Y A parking area is provided on the north portion of the site to serve the commercial structure. The 25 foot access connects to Second Street and is dimensioned to permit two-way vehicle • circulation sufficient for emergency vehicles. 42.03.055 Local Residential Streets -Specific Standards 1. The starting point for the design of local residential streets shall be two vehicular travel lanes, each 3 meters (10 feet) in width with a graveled shoulder 1 meter(3 feet) in width on each side. Increases in pavement width may be recommended by the City Engineer where justified. Response: The applicant is proposing private drives not "local residential streets." The proposed travel lanes measure 10 feet, however, no graveled 3-foot shoulder are provided on each side. Instead, the shoulder is landscaped areas and paved entries into the garages or front yards. 2. In residential use districts, each lot or parcel shall provide for two parking spaces for automobiles in addition to the space available in the garage and carport. These spaces may be on the right-of-way or on the lot. Response: The subject zoning of the property is EC, which is a commercial district permitting residential uses. Therefore this standard is not applicable. The project design allows for two parking spaces within each garage. Additional parking will be provided for on the street and from the five spaces within the central area. • 3. A design maximum speed of 40km/h (25 mph) shall be utilized in commuting vertical and horizontal curvatures of the paved surface. Response: The design speed for the private drives will be for a maximum of 5 mph, well below the 25 mph maximum for a local public street. 4. To permit evaluation of the proposed residential street designs, the City Engineer may require developers to furnish information on soil conditions, topography, soil permeability, characteristics of natural drainage courses,property ownerships, location and characteristics of adjoining streets, grading plans, and landscaping plans. Response: The applicant will provide the above mentioned information at the direction of the City Engineer. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 67 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 r • e �.J ..1. 1 �) 5. Rights-of-way required for local residential streets may vary and shall be recommended by the City Engineer taking into account the following criteria: a) the number and width • of proposed travel lanes; b) the number and width of on-street parking lanes; c) provision for sidewalks and bikeways; d) requirements for utility placement: e)street lighting;j) drainage and slope management; g) street trees. Response: The proposed drives will not be a public right-of-way, yet will meet all the above provisions with the exception of on-street parking. 6. In determining the necessity of using the street for drainage of surface waters, a storm of 10 year frequency shall be utilized to calculate the storm water runoff to be dealt with by the drainage system. To the maximum extent feasible, such surface water shall be retained and disposed of on the property on which it originates. Response: The appropriate storm water runoff calculations will be submitted for a 10-year frequency should there be a need to use the street for drainage of surface waters. 42.03.058 Location of Utilities in Right-of-way Response: The utilities will be placed underground within the paved travel surfaces. The code calls for the utilities to be placed outside the paved roadway. This will not be feasible, as disturbance of landscaped and accessways to the residential and commercial areas is not • practical. 42.03.060 Grades Response: The maximum grade of the private drives will be 15 percent or less. 42.03.070 Intersections Response: The proposed intersection of the private drives within the project intersect at right angles as called for in the code. 42.03.085 Cul-de-Sacs and Dead End Streets 1. Cul-de-sacs shall not be permitted where they would preclude current or future through connections. If all connections required by a neighborhood circulation plan are made, or if natural constraints restrict connection, cul-de-sacs may be permitted with appropriate accessways required for pedestrian and bicycle circulation. 2. Cul-de-sacs shall generally be designed with a circular closed end with sufficient radius and right-of-way to allow for utilities, street lights, sidewalks, bikeways, etc. Use of a "fish tail"or "hammerhead" configuration must be approved by the City Engineer. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 68 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0 17 Sidewalks shall be provided on at least one side of all cul-de-sacs and with five or more lots. • 3. As cul-de-sac or dead end street shall be as short as practical, but in no event more than 1,000 feet in length. A cul-de-sac shall provide a turnaround without the use of a driveway. Dead end streets shall not be permitted against an Urban Growth Boundary unless a foreseeable continuation shall be demonstrated. Response to 1 —3: The applicant is proposing private dead end street lengths of no more than 220 feet. The driveway designs have been reviewed with the City Fire Marshall. The applicant has decided to install automatic fire sprinklers within the structures to eliminate the need for the typical cul-de-sac or hammerhead design. Appendix A provides the Fire Marshall's statement regarding the inclusion of water sprinkler systems in lieu of turn grounds. The dead end private streets do not correlate to an approved street plan and future connections for a neighborhood circulation plan. Pedestrians will be able to safely walk along the private drives and on the north-south pedestrian path that connects "A"Avenue to Evergreen Road. 42.08.400 Sidewalks Response: The applicant will provide improvements to the existing sidewalks along the project frontages of"A"Avenue, Second, and Third Streets and Evergreen Road meeting the Standard Specifications and Details of the City of Lake Oswego and the specified widths for a seven-foot minimum. In certain areas as shown on the plans, deviations from the standards will occur to allow wider and specially paved surfaces along with landscaping. • Signs (Chapter 47) Signs will be applied for as a separate application following procedures in Section 47.10.400 and adhering to restrictions set forth in Section 47.10.410 (Permanent Signage Requiring Permit Allowed in Commercial Zones (GC, EC and NC). The elevations indicate the locations of potential wall signs, however, actual tenants are undetermined at this point in time. Appendix D contains detailed descriptions of the proposed sign dimensions, materials and locations. Tree Cutting(Chapter 55) The project site was surveyed by KPFF Consulting Engineers. This survey is dated 5/27/99 and included as part of the plans attached to this application. Trees sized 4 inches and greater are identified by location and by species. Halstead's Arborculture Consultants, Inc. conducted a tree assessment on the subject property dated November 30, 1999 attached to this application (Attachment D). The assessment documents tree inspections for those trees 10 inches in diameter at 4.5 feet above the ground for the purpose of determining health and structural stability. The report includes recommendations for removal, preservation and therapeutic care. The trees have been tagged in the field with aluminum numbers sequenced from 101 to 124 • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 69 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 0118 corresponding to the map contained within the report. Each tree condition is documented using the "Tree Hazard Evaluation Form, Second Edition." • Halstead's report recommends reservation of tree # 104 and #122. Tree #104 (Washington ( ashington Thorn, Crataegus-phaenopyrum) is situated along Second Street in the ROW and it appears that it can be preserved by adjusting the sidewalk further away from the base. Tree#122 (Siberian Elm, Ulmus -pumila) located along Third Street in the ROW appears it can be preserved by adjusting the sidewalk and following the preservation measures in the report. It should be noted that both these tree species are identified in the LODC Development Standards, Title 9.005 entitled "Landscaping, Screening and Buffering"as prohibited plant material. The applicant will work with the City in preserving these specimens, if desired, as they are in the public ROW. Tree #121 (Oregon Big Leaf Maple, Acer-macrophyllum) is on the subject property close to Third Street and adjacent to tree#122. This tree could be preserved under extreme measures as identified in the report (page 6), yet above all, the tree is indicated to be extremely dangerous. This tree is leaning on tree #124 (WeepingWillow, Salix-babyloina) situated along Third Street in the public ROW. Tree #124 is also identified as being very dangerous and could only be preserved under extreme measures(page 7 and 8). The aborist recommends placement of a permanent heavy duty chain link fence large enough and far enough out to protect person and property from trunk and limb breakage. Both these trees are listed as "prohibited" within the LODC Development Standards, Title 9.005 entitled"Landscaping, Screening and Buffering." The applicant desires to cut both trees due to the dangerous conditions indicated by the arborist and the unfeasible preservation recommendations. This application represents a Major Development Permit and tree removal is part of the application. Under Chapter 55.02.035 compliance with criterion of approval shall be followed prior to issuance of a permit. Under Chapter 55.02.41 the Emergency Tree Ordinance shall be considered in addition to the other sections of this Chapter. 55.02.41 Emergency Tree Ordinance Notwithstanding LOC 55.02.035(1), 55.02.042(1) and LOC 55.02.080(3), no tree greater than 12 inch caliper at DBH shall be removed, except the City Manager may grant an exception to this prohibition when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternatives to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake Oswego Code. The City may impose such alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs as a condition of approval of the permit, in addition to any other conditions or provisions provided under LOC 55.02.042(1) and LOC 55.02.080(3). Response: This response identifies the existing zoning, site limitations, LORA mandates and the applicant's objectives. Following this is an identification of each tree over 12-inches in • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 70 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 3 diameter and a discussion of designs contemplated for the site along with specific modifications that have been considered and descriptions of proposed plantings as a mitigation measure for removal. • Permitted Zoning East End Commercial allows residential, office and retail uses with a residential. Site Development Limitations FAR maximum of 3.0. Lot Coverage—none Height—35 feet with 120' of an R-7.5 zone 45 feet between 120—240' of an R-7.5 zone Approvals by L ORA September 28, 1999 residential density was approved as 40—45 units. Annlicant's Reauirements • Residential units to be marketable as a single family attached unit. • Create an economically viable project. • Provide a quality project that is aesthetically pleasing on the exterior and interior. Alternative site plans contemplated for this site included: • 180 senior living units with retail and office uses. • 88 condominium units and a commercial structure. • 55 rowhome units with retail at the ground elevation for those units along 2"d 3rd and 111 Evergreen; 7,200 square feet of retail space on the corner of Second and "A" Avenue. • Current Plan—41 townhomes, 8,232 square feet of retail and 8,612 square feet of office Site Plan Changes Needed to Accommodate 13 Trees Larger Than 12 Inches in Diameter Two (2) of the trees (#104 and #122) are within the existing ROW and are planned to be retained and shown on the plan. The sidewalk has been shifted to maneuver around the base of each tree. Three (3) of the trees (#101, #102, #124) are within the ROW. Tree #101 and #102 are situated in front of the proposed commercial building on"A" Avenue. Redesign of the project would require curb extensions or "bumpouts" thereby eliminating any parallel street side parking. The curb extension would be needed to accommodate the uplifting root systems that are currently cracking the existing sidewalk. This portion of the property is intended to be used for pedestrian use and on-street parking. Retention of the two trees will likely reduce if not eliminate the on- street parking usage. The applicant proposes an exception to this ordinance provision. The proposed landscape mitigation is for three (3), 3-inch caliper, Halka Zelcova trees and two (2), 2-inch Chanticleer Pear trees and a ground cover of David Viburnum and Crimson Pygmy Barberry. This planting • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 71 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19.2000 � n 'J s_ . plan is in keeping with the street scape theme for the "A" Avenue demonstration project and will provide continuity along the street frontage. • Tree#124 is located along Third Street ROW. Relocation of the sidewalk to the west and reorientation of the building entrance would be required to retain this tree. Tree removal of this specimen is discussed under"Hazard Trees" section of the tree code. Should the tree remain, the arborist recommends installation of a permanent chain link fence under the tree crown which is totally unreasonable. The applicant requests an exception to allow this tree to be removed. Actual plantings are discussed in the ensuing paragraphs. Eight (8) of the trees (#105, #107, #111, #114. #117, #119, #120, #121) are situated within a townhome building pad along Third Street impacting six(6)residential units. Elimination of the six (6)units does not meet the density mandate by LORA or the applicant's objectives. Loss of even one (1) unit impairs the economic viability of the project. From a visual perspective elimination would create openings between the nine (9) unit cluster of townhomes on 3rd Street. These openings would cause a fractured building appearance along the street frontage. Additionally, these openings would be 3 to 4 feet lower in elevation from the adjacent building pads due to the grades needed for proper access and drainage. Relocating the units to another location on the site forces a design change that creates a condominium type project, with smaller units and greater heights. This design is not economically viable at this location. The proposed landscape plan along Third Street provides for eight (8) Halca Zelcovas sized with 3-inch calipers. The curb extension at the south end of Third Street provides four(4) Chanticleer Pear trees 2-inches in caliper. In addition four(4) Leyland Cyprus trees (8— 10 feet tall) are flanking the east side of the sidewalk at this southern location. The smaller plantings in this area include Flowering Dogwood, Butterfly Bush, Rhododendron,Blue Oat Grass and Dwarf Winged Euonymous. The sidewalk is flared out with scored concrete pavers to make a wide approach at the corner of Evergreen and Third Street. This landscaping plan appears to adequately replace the eight trees over 12-inches in diameter that would be removed. The tree inventory documents 23 trees on and off-site. Of this number, 21 trees will be removed. The planting plan provides for 202 new trees for on and off-site. Thirty-nine of the trees will be street trees sized with 3-inch and 2-inch calipers. Another 163 trees will be planted on site. The mitigation ratio is 7:1 not including the required street trees. Chapter 55.02.080 identifies the applicable criteria for tree cutting permits for a Type II action. Subsection 3 provides the following criteria: ?. Hazard Trees: (a) The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning. • LAKE OSWEOO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 72 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 121 (b) The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal by requiring the planting of new trees or other vegetation. The mitigation planting may be required on the property or elsewhere in the City. The City may impose such 41111 mitigation requirements as a condition of approval of the permit. Response: Trees#121 (Oregon Big Leaf Maple) and#124 (Weeping Willow) are both identified in the arborist report as "very dangerous." Tree #121 is supported in large part by tree #124 both located on the far western boundary of the project site along Third Street. The arborist describes the conditions of these trees on page 6 through 8 of the report. Both trees contain various levels of decay external and internal to the trunks and limbs. The Willow's crown extends over the sidewalk and into the travel lane of Third Street. The arborist recommends Class III pruning and installation of a permanent chain link fence far enough to protect person and property from trunk and limb breakage. Given these measures the applicant is proposing to eliminate these trees. Placement of a permanent chain link fence around the base of these trees extending into the public street and sidewalk along with extreme pruning does not appear reasonable or practical. The applicant prefers to mitigate the loss of these trees with and proposed planting scheme contained in the development proposal. 3. Trees that are Not Dead, Dying or Hazardous: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not dead, dying or dangerous if the applicant demonstrates: (a) The tree is proposed for removal for landscaping purposes or in order to construct development approved or allowed pursuant to the Lake Oswego code i or other applicable development regulations; (b) Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability,flow of surface waters,protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and (c) Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the character, aesthetics,property values or property uses of the neighborhood. In making this determination, the City may consider any proposal by the applicant to mitigate for the loss of the tree by planting new trees or other vegetation. The City may impose such mitigation requirements as a condition of approval of the permit. The mitigation planting may be required on the property or elsewhere in the City. Response': The applicant proposes to remove all the trees with the exception of possibly retaining tree # 104 and #122, both located within the public ROW and subject to final design plans along with the City's approval. The removal of the trees are for the purposes of landscaping and development as part of the Major Development application approved and allowed pursuant to the Lake Oswego code. The removal of the trees will not have a negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. The soil stability is documented in the geotechnical investigative report by This response is applicable to the proposed Ordinance No. 2221,amending Lake Oswego Code,Chapter 55. The criterion are similar and the applicant's response is valid for the existing code and the proposed ordinance. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 73 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 ({i 2 2 Kleinfelder Inc. (Attachment A). The report does not indicate soil instability as a result of site redevelopment provided the proper soil compaction and foundation designs are followed. The • flow of surface waters will be contained on-site and disposed of in accordance with rules and regulations regarding storm water detention and disposal. Tree cutting will not negatively impact adjacent trees because the trees are isolated from surrounding blocks by the existing street system. The cluster of trees on-site numbered 106 through 120 are Siberian Elms (Ulmus-pumila) are recommended for removal. Should only some of the small trees in this cluster be removed, severe root decay problems will occur to the remaining trees. Finally, the trees to be cut do not serve as a wind break and removal will not negatively impact the surrounding areas. The removal of the trees will not have a significant negative impact on the character, aesthetics, property values or property uses of the neighborhood. The neighborhood area is identified as with in the Evergreen Neighborhood Association and also the East End Development area. all part of the City's urban renewal district. The city blocks around Block 136 constitute the neighborhood in this assessment. To the north lies Blocks 46, 47 and 48, all commercial oriented parcels with an urban streetscape and buildings up to the property lines. To the east is Block 137, another commercial parcel consumed by Wizer's Shopping Center and surrounding paved parking areas. To the south east is the new Millenium Park and directly south and southwest are residential uses with apartments and single family dwellings. To the west is Block 135 with City Hall and commercial uses fronting "A" Avenue. Parking areas consume the majority of the south portion of this block with trees and shrubs. The extreme south east corner is undeveloped. This description provides a surrounding area largely commercial in nature with the exception of the residential portions to the south and southwest. Removal of • the trees within Block 136 will create a visual change for those using Third Street. The change is not deemed to cause a"significant"negative impact to the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood area as described above. The tree cutting will similarly not negatively impact the property value or property uses. The removal of such trees will have a positive impact by increasing the aesthetics, character and property values of the neighborhood. New trees, shrubs and groundcover will take the place of those plant specimens that area removed. The quality and arrangement of these plants are shown on the attached landscape plans. The planting plans conform to the City's approved planting list. If left in place the trees will negatively affect the property values and land uses by not permitting sufficient building coverage and thereby precluding an acceptable economic return. The proposed landscape design for Block 136 will provide a significant aesthetic contribution to downtown Lake Oswego. The design intent is to provide an immediate landscape image and character that will provide a quick and compatible blend with the fabric of downtown Lake Oswego. The commercial component landscape will provide a continuation of the "A" Avenue improvements adding one more block. In addition to the "A" Avenue improvements, a pocket park adjoins "A" Avenue acting as an entry to a major pedestrian linkage on Evergreen Street and to Millennium Park at the south east. Extensive plantings throughout the residential portion of the project utilize residential quality plant materials to help integrate this project with adjacent properties. Close attention has been given to color, composition, texture, fragrance • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 74 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 01 ' 3 and arrangement that will provide the project with year round interest. Evergreen Street has three (3) major pedestrian focal points: 1) at the intersection of Third and Evergreen; 2) mid- block along Evergreen; and 3) at the intersection Second and Evergreen. These three focal • points provide wider pavement with texture and scoring, low granite seating walls and an array of plant materials. Overall, the landscape plan provides plant material that meets or exceeds the City standards. As mitigation for the loss of on-site trees, the primary street trees (Halca Zelcovas)will have 3-inch calipers, the internal north-south path will be flanked by 3-inch caliper Kwanzan Cherry trees with two clusters of large evergreens sized 12 — 14 feet high at either end. These upsized plantings will provide a positive influence to the project and all those viewing and living in the project. e. Any conditions of approval imposed as part of an approved ODPS or prior development permit affecting the subject property. Response: The applicant will comply with conditions of approval at the appropriate time. Planned Development Overlay Article 48.18 Planned Development Overlay Article 48.18.470 Purpose, Applicability 2. Use of the Planned Development Overlay(PD) is allowed in any zone for proposals classified as major development pursuant to LOC 49.20.115. Use of the PD Overlay is required in any zone for a residential development proposal of 20 or more units or four or more acres that is classified as a major development pursuant to the terms of LOC 49.20.115. Response: The proposed development contains more than 20 residential units and is classified as a major development therefore the Planned Development Overlay is applicable to this application. Article 48.18.475 Procedures. ?. A request for a PD overlay for a project that will contain only one phase may be considered by the Development Review Commission. No ODPS shall be required, but the requirements of subsection (1) of this section for adoption of zone requirements in the Final Order shall be complied with. Response: The proposed development will be built in one phase, in that all sitework will be constructed. The office/retail structure along with 20 townhome units will be constructed first, followed by the construction of the balance of the townhomes, shortly thereafter. • LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 75 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 01 2 4 • Article 48.18.476 Authorization and Criteria 1. In considering an application for an PD Overlay, the hearing body shall apply the height, Floor Area Ratio (FAR), lot coverage, use, open space and density requirements of the underlying zone and, if applicable, the setback requirements of LOC 48.04.150(5). The FAR and lot coverage requirements may be applied with reference to the total area of the project as a whole and not on a lot by lot basis. 2. Except for the special setback requirements of LOC 40.04.150(5), the hearing body may grant exceptions to the lot size, lot dimension and front and rear setback requirements of the underlying zone if the applicant demonstrates that the proposed PD designed in compliance with the standard or standards to which an exception is sought. In making this determination, the hearing body may consider: a. Whether the applicant has reserved or dedicated more than the minimum amount of open space required by the Park and Open Space Development Standard. b. Whether the requested exception allows the lots to be designed in a manner that provides a better access to common open space areas from within and/or outside the PD, better protects views, allows better solar access, structures, maintains or improves privacy and/or improves pedestrian or bicycle access to surrounding neighborhoods. • c. Whether the requested exception will allow a more attractive streetscape through use of meandering streets, access through alleys or shared driveways, provision of median plantings, or other pedestrian amenities. d. Whether the requested exception will enhance or better protect a significant natural feature on the site, such as a wetland, a tree or tree grove, or a stream corridor. e. Whether the requested exception will provide better linkage with adjacent neighborhoods,parks and open space areas,pathways, and natural features. f. Whether the requested exception will allow the development to be designed more compatibly with the topography and or/physical limitations on the site. 3. If the proposed PD is part of an approved ODPS as described in LOC Article 49.26, requirements of the ODPS approval regarding arrangement of uses, open space and resource conservation and provision of public services, will be considered when reviewing the considerations in subsection (1)for the PD. 1111 LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 76 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,MOO 0f 0 S 4. Except as required by LOC 48.04.150(5), the hearing body may grant exceptions to the minimum side yard setbacks of the underlying zone, without the necessity of meeting the requirements of LOC 48.24.650 to 48.24.690 (variances) if the requirements of ID 48.18.476 are met, and: a. Proposed lot sizes are less than the minimum size required by the underlying zone, or b. Lesser setbacks are necessary to provide additional tree preservation or protection of abutting natural areas. Response 1 —4: The PD Overlay is addressed and required for this application because 20 or more units are proposed and the project is classified as a"major development." The applicant does not request any deviations from the standards allowed through the Planned Unit Development. LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 136 REDEVELOPMENT Page 77 LAND USE APPLICATION NARRATIVE April 19,2000 Lake Oswego Block 136 Comprehensive Sign Criteria • These criteria have been established for the purpose of assuring an outstanding building, and for the mutual benefit of all tenants. Conformance will be strictly enforced and any installed nonconforming or unapproved signs must be removed or brought into conformance at the expense of Tenant. A. General Requirements 1. Tenant shall submit or cause to be submitted to Landlord for approval before -abrication two '2) prints of its preiiminarl sign design, incuding colors and dimensions, and after preliminary approval two (2) prints of detailed shop drawings indicating the location, size, layout, design and color of the proposed signs, awnings and banners, including all lettering and graphics. If requested by Landlord, Tenant shall submit samples of materials proposed for use in the sign. 2. The Tenant or its representative, at Tenant's expense,shall obtain ail permits for signs and their installation. Signs shall conform to local codes and ordinances and bear the U.L. label. 3. All signs shall be constructed and installed at Tenant's expense. B. General Specifications 1. Tenant shall obtain approval of its sign design drawings by the landlord prior to installation. Signs built without such approval or contrary to the approved design will be altered to conform to requirements at Tenant's expense. • 2. Above storefront signs shall be located in designated sign areas shown on the attached elevation drawings—sheets 1.1 and 1.2. 3. Above storefront signs shall be placed within the designated sign area(s) corresponding with the Tenant's street frontage. Unless otherwise specifically agreed, signs shall be centered in the individual designated sign areas shown on the attached elevations drawings. 4. Above storefront signs may be no larger than 32 square feet in size, and shall only be erected in the zones shown on the attached elevation drawings—sheets 1.1 and 1.2. Signs may be unlit, indirectly lit, or backlit. Lettering shall be no larger than 14 inches high, as shown in the diagram on sheet 1.1. 5. Above storefront signs may be unlit, indirectly lit, or backlit. Backlighting includes cabinet signs with an opaque background, "channelume" (plastic lighted letters), and neon lighted letters. 5. One sign may be located above the first floor cornice in the designated area shown on the attached elevation drawings—sheet 1.1 and 1.2. The sign shall be composed of individual letters affixed to, molded, or carved into the surface material of the building. The lettering shall be no larger than 14 inches high, and shall not exceed 24 square feet in area. 7. No awnings or canopy signs shall be allowed unless otherwise approved in writing by landlord. 8. ill bailast(s)shall be concealed and no exposed electrical conduit will be permitted. Raceway dimensions shall not exceed 8" in height, 8" in depth or the length of the "channelhume" lettering stack without the written approval of Landlord. Visible fasteners will not be permitted. Raceway shall be exposed or unexposed and located behind the signage it is servicing. The raceway color shall match the color of the • adjacent wall surface. EXHIBIT 46 LU 00-0007 0i r 9. Where two lines of copy are proposed within the designated sign area, two exposed raceways will be provided: A primary raceway located in the designated raceway • area; and a secondary raceway for the second line of copy. Secondary raceway to be seven inches (7") deep, suspended on 1" diameter tubes connected to the primary raceway. Raceway and support tubes to match adjacent wall color. 10. The electrical service to the Tenant's sign will be provided by the tenant and will be connected to the tenant's electrical panel. 11. Painted lettering will not be permitted in the designated sign areas. 12. No flashing or animated signs shall be permitted. C. Design Requirements ill tenant storefront entrance identification designs shall be in accordance with the tenant package and shall be subject to the written approval of Landlord. 2. Wording of Tenant's signs shall not include the name or type of product sold unless such is part of Tenant's trade name or insignia. D. Construction Requirements 1. All exterior signs, bolts, fastenings and clips shall be of stainless steel, aluminum, brass, bronze, or black iron. 2. Location of all openings for conduit and sleeves in sign panels of building walls shall be indicated by the sign contractor on drawings submitted to the Landlord's architect. 3. All penetrations of the building structure required for sign installation shall be neatly sealed in a watertight manner. 4. No labels will be permitted on the exposed surface of signs except those required by local ordinances, which shall be applied in an inconspicuous location. S. Tenant's sign contractor shall repair any damage caused by Tenant's sign contractor. Tenant shall be fully responsible for the operations of Tenant's sign contractor. • 01 ` . 0 . 0 • - --- 0 Z •---- ; •vilisi! 1.,0 ,t.., r - SIGNAGE . . -. 0 - 0CI_ 1i2t, 0 ° SIGNS MAY BE NI) LARGER THAN 32 SF IN SIZE, AND SHALL LLI ONLY BE ERECTED IN THE ZONES SHOWN ON THE ELEvA HUNT.. 0 W SIGNS MAY BE UNLIT. INDIRECTLY Lir, OR BACKLIT_ LETTERING SHALL BE NO LARGER THAN 14 INCHES HIGH, AS SHOWN IN w DIAGRAM ABOVE PLEASE SEE ATTACHED SIGN CRITERIA. CO < a SIGNAGE PARAMETERS _1 w1/2"=1.-0" CC DESIGNATED SIGN curl i/ trEco7o:,Ncloil. AREA ''..: \ - 9693 sr.SUNNY9C1 ROAD.C.Tf P CLACKAMAS.OR 9:013 pojeol ne 96304 / \ . :., -- 0,. --„, 0 ' - •,. ___ , . 10-71------mi, I-- ',.-7.2 ..vAllirx .-.117-1 •=t-11112 rili "." ' llibril—"' 7.-----nil An am low MOS 1 ill ilia al • Min tgai 11 10111 p -II 112. 11111111.-, ow .1 Atm gam 1.1 . MI MIN Mt 'WM ril - - . , :1 --s4614-"-- ill E--siusps--3 IMMEIMmildig ----.s-Ro-ps-- 1 ' r- (sienna .... , , , Eldill4 . ' 1 ,. III iff,.„,. . •_____,4--10 .._ -.... . •,_ . • iv • I . . . MEM "Incliiii . ..,....1 1.ran.inatmr1M.1,2•1 1 ri : ,.... ;, 1,15.91911111111.111111 • fil I I II TM. (,,....,., I I .'' .... ,....M1111.1.1111.1.1 , .11.!'WI. ..._11.. !MIN.. II tniLt .. ''.' "....1.—...11M.W .L ...j . i 1, !..._.1:R. • ...a ...... -- .-. I ___J I _ --•I— , date 0327.0( I 1 I I drown by I - j •a ohern kite NORTH ELEVATION SIQN PACKAGE , ---.— I, I!:. - I (.1 Tolerance choet ahool no _ _____ ___ ___ _ ___ — — - -- — _ 11 ____CIZ k _ _ . . . . . . .. . _______ ________ ___ _ _ • 1 a , a a . 1 1 ki: i ' I±i4 -1---„..- „Hl---1 W_.i. !, I. • I! 11 !I 1 ' 44 411 .1 I •-...- Va.... kt i ili _ __,...... >.-- 1 I Iiil ,1 . 1 Il , o g -C q _ . 111 - - I� J - _ 11 it I i V- 1�-d v -' 'I—-_.... 11..1 I P-7 ---'H ..... .. • ----1-7 ,10(-— ri t----- 1.1.1 > m SOUTH ELEVATION Q 00 0 • 1/16 =1'_f,,' W • LAKE OSWEGO,OR AMSE SLRNO ROAD Se.P I CLACK.WAS,Oil ota ,--DESIGNATED SIGNaREA promanQypot �\ / SMALL HAVE INDIVIDUAL 7 DARESEIGNATEDA SIGN LETTERS AFFIXED TO OR i —.—. / fJ r MOLDED OR CARVED INTO - rift%Ie[f J THE SURFACE MATERIAL _Zit _ A-uraaeu�i OF THE BUILDING. NOT _ ormaxiwa. ' r LARGER THAN 24 SQUARE — --� �� - �' _ ��, �� • FEET. AND LETTERING IT _I�_ �� (i- N- 1:.-..�>rll�-.I� 'r NOT TALLER THAN 14 b' W>a i� r� .� ."'--c siennal ■ aI �J 1 INCHES. 1 Iig 1i ii Ilia 1 A 1,Ir . ,I`T ?`ram _."..�� d,... i 1 I J _IllineDESNA _ �, �TED SIGN � •.- fl-II�I■;��I r l o:R !:li3: WI l'!iI;ikilFSA:Jfii t � Grown by Aji re J 1 wl -E - — - - SRlel I,IIe - - - - - SIGN PACKAGE EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION reference Sheet • 1/16' - ' -U'• i Sheet np. CD 41111 • . _ • Lake Oswego Block 136 Redevelopment Land Area/Landscape/Building Calculations Commercial Percent Percent OLand Area Elements Structure (sf) of Total Townhomes (sf) of Total Total Lot Area (sf) 16,581 75,200 (1) Building Area (sf) 8,287 (2) 49.98% 35,300 (2) 46.94% Pedestrian Paving (sf) 91 (3) 0.55% 3,960 (3) 5.27% Traffic Paving (sf) 6,650 (4) 40.11% 23,243 (4) 30.91% Landscape area (sf) 1,379 (5) 8.32% 12,697 (5) 16.88% Landscape+ Ped Paving 1,470 8.87% 16,657 22.15% Required Landscape Standard 2,487 15% 15,040 20% West Alley Area Elements Total Alley Area (sf) 2,273 Pedestrian Paving (sf) 1,435 63.13% Traffic Paving (sf) 127 5.59% Landscape Area (sf) 711 31.28% Landscape + Ped Paving (sf) 2,146 94.41% West Alley + Commercial Structure Elements Total Lot Area (sf) 18,854 Pedestrian Paving (sf) 1,526 8.09% Traffic Paving (sf) 6,777 35.94% andscape Area (sf) 2,090 11.09% andscape + Ped Paving (sf) 3,616 19.18% Required Landscape Standard 2,828 15.00% Landscape Area as Percent of Entire Site (Unified Site Plan) Total Site Area 91,781 sf Total Landscape Area 14,076 sf Total Pedestrian Paving 4,051 sf Total Landscape + Ped Paving( 18,127 sf Proposed Landscape 18,127 sf 19.75% Building Statistics Commercial Townhomes Total Building Area GSF 16,844 sf 81,481 sf Lot Coverage 0.50 0.47 FAR 1.02 1.58 Notes: (1) townhome lot area assumes 220 linear feet of alley is vacated and part of the residential component o (2) building areas represent footprints of structures m o 1110)pedestrian paving represents walkways within the site with scoring and special paving =. o (4) traffic paving represents the parking and maneuvering areas within the commercial;private streets w „tea within the residential area. (5) actual area of soil and plantings 4/19/00 landscapeai �E— • • • 0132 • Lake sewego Redevelopment Block 136-Parking Requirements Min. Spaces Proposed Min.Spaces Min. Spaces Required with Number Min. Required with Required with TA 0.95 and PA Proposed Standard Minimum Units/ Spaces TA 0.95 TA 0.95 and PA 0.90 and DTLO Number of Type of Use Spaces Required or GFA Required reduction 0.90 reduction 0.75 reductions Spaces ON-SITE Residential Multifamily 2 or more bedrooms 1.5 Unit 41 61.5 58.43 52.58 39.44 74 Commercial-Office 3.33 per 1,000 GFA 8,612 28.68 27.24 24.52 18.39 19 Commercial- Retail 3.3 per 1,000 GFA 5,488 18.11 17.20 15.48 11.61 12 Commercial-Restaurant (eating or drinking establish) 13.3 per 1,000 GFA 2,744 36.50 34.67 31.20 23,40 7 Total: 144.78 137.54 123.79 92.84 112 Proposed No. Existing No.of of Parking Change from Spaces ON-STREET Parking Spaces Spaces Existing Available l A Avenue 3 4 1 4 Second Street 5 7 2 7 Third Street 11 7 -4 7 Evergreen Rd. 7 5 -2 5 Totals: 26 23 -3 23 On-Street Allocation Spaces Townhomes 6 Commercial 17 Total: 23 Required Parking Proposed Proposed • SUMMARY Spaces w/Modifiers On-Site On-Street Townhomes 39 64 6 Commercial 53 38 17 r' m = Notes: o W 1)Transit Access(TA)reduction of 0.95 used because project site is within 300 feet of a bus transit shelter. The Transit Center is located at Fourth and"A"Ave. 0o --I 2)Pedestrian and Bicycle Access(PA)reduction of 0.90 is used because project will provide hard surfaced pedestrian and bicycle access c-_ o ono to 100 or more residential units within 1000 feet of the site. The residential units are immediately south and southeast of Block 136. k 4 3)Downtown Lake Oswego (DTLO)reduction of 0.75 is used pursuant to LODS 23.405. :.� 4)25%of the required Multi-family parking spaces shall be located to provide common or visitor use. Four are on-site and Cv six(6)are on-street(Evergreen and either Third or Second Street). parkingcalwithrestaurant.xls 3/28/00 I . • 0134 1 ,>;.., ,,,.,..,. ,c. .00,,....5„,,Al • ..„,-,„____ Q GON ., DEPARTMENT OF FIRE, RESCUE & LIFE SAFETY . "Serving Our Citizens with Dedication and Pride Since 1910" ' March 20. 2000 Mr. Jim Crawford Argo Architect Suite 321 Roosevelt Bldg. 9370 SW Greenburg Road Portland, Oregon 97223 Faxed: March 20,2000 Dear Mr. Crawford: eThanks for your memorandum of March 13, 2000 regarding Block 136. Turnarounds for driveways are covered in the Lake Oswego Development Code and the Uniform Fire Code. The fire department approves your request to provide an NFPA approved automatic fire sprinkler system in all residential units on Block 136 as an alternate method in lieu of providing emergency vehicle turnarounds on the dead-end streets that exceed 150'. Lake Oswego Building and Fire Departments have agreed to approve either the NFPA 13 R or NFPA 13 ID system. The 13 D system however will be approved only if all garage spaces are included in the sprinkler head coverage. Be advised that the City Planning and Engineering Departments also need to approve this alternate with consideration to issues outside of emergency vehicles such as automobiles, garbage trucks, service vehicles, etc. Please call if we may assist in any other way. Sincerely, ' � P it Sample, Fire Mars a. CC: City Staff: Haniid Pishvaie, Russ Chevrette, Alan Langendorf, Jim Bye ' 1111 EXHIBIT 49 LU 00-0007 1 'del"B"Avenue • Post Office Box 3E • Lake Oswego,Oregon 47034 • (503)635-0273 • FA: 0 1 3 5 ,q • • • y . r, -i s : r -- • .•:i- S:yLIi:t•} •]s{}.f h 'L M' yih F:;i} %fit... .4 .k r v ... r.:,:;z::vv .•t• a-:::.'vtS:3* :iia..,ich��.� v✓x,:,s.{,}:':...,;�;; .r. ..-:...a.`{'w?{.'� k�S' :'�. ;.:n -..] ...: a5:t4.�c'„t!r;:;. %E ;;sr_ ;r_ { .c: :y?'..,. .y;s.•.+S L{ a .,;, .,{fir{;, : }v�.::a.�. ' µ::+�: .:p� i'�%'.:''?r .l.a�\' :r.Y:v.^7':i•a.�'. �x it :.:v: .�,•✓:+v t;� ;;�:i::zh 'tri!'�:oli:-L. :w.. � .r1�.... "`t�":' ..?r, ::i .<t,ti ,c•r '2<.'2?:..: �;.. - _ :�.�.-:, '.+��.. .:.a:.�.'-i.�: j: ...,:. .i%;S.as..:YG;�''t•..✓ . `+•::^r'';%.,v� `•F.>•F,''r;•'�`�, ' Y, �? �..•:.-..:.,a .fir_:,, ..a...oi; ..r::=:::.:"Es� �C, s-. .:.�.r,�.,�•'{; �{„S,V'`�;.in:.y,.•?w s r 0 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Blocks 136 and 138 Transportation Impact Analysis ,. „..• :,-,,,,,...:.,:,:„,„:„.,,,,,,:,:,,..„Iiiiiiiiiii,:„...„....,..,......;„.,,.:.:::....„....„....:::„....„..,::::.,,,.,:,.„...„.....„.....„:„,:,..,...,.......„.....,...,.... .. .:::.::: ... .. •....,.....:::::,::::„.„„:„:„:„..::::::.:,:::,:,:„,„:,:::::,:::.:,..,:.:::::::,:::::::::::,„::::::::::::„.„.....:::::::::„.:::::,..,...,...::::::::•,„,„:„:„:„:„:„.•. i ..., •:•,:.•,,,...„„•,„„:.„,..,•:::„:„........„...,:::„.„.•,......,...:.„,„•:„.........:,:.::::.:•:•,„•„:.::...„,.....„:„,,..„:„.,::,.„„,..„,:,,,:„.„„,„:„:„.„,,„„,„,„,,„,„,,,„,.,,„„„,,„„.„,„,„,:,,,„,„„:.„,„:„,:„.::,,,,„,„„,,„,,,.....,..„,:„,„„„,„„„„:„.,„,,,„„.„„„„„„„„,,•,.... „...,,,,,,„.:,:„:„.„::,:::.:.:„:.:•:„„:...„„:„:„...„.„,„:„.„„„..,„...:,,,:,„„,,,:,..:„.•,:.:„,:.,..,..::,...:„.,:„,„,„.„„„„„,,,,„„:„....,:,.:.,:,„„,..,„,,„„...,:„,„:„f„.:„,„„,,,,.„,„,„„„,„..,,,,,:„.„„,„:„.„,..,,,,,,,,,:::::„,,:„:„.i„„,::::,:,:,:„..„,„„„„„„„:„..„,.::„.„,,,„:„,,,,„,„,:„.......... ,,, ...„..,:„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„:„,•,:,:„:„..,,„„,,,,,,,,,:„:„:„.::,;.::::::,:,,,:,:„:„.„:,:,:„.,:,:,,„,:::„:„,,,,,,,,,..„,.:„,„„,„,...„„,„„:„,„,„,„„,„,,,,,:„„„,,,,,,,,,„,,„,,„:„,„„„„:„,,,,,„-„„„,,,,„„„,.:„,,,,,,..,,.,,,:,,,,,„,„,..,,,,„„„„„:„,:,,,:„,„„,,„.:„,,,,,.„,„„,,„„„,„„,:,....„„,:,:„,,,.. •,„,„•:::,:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.:.,..::,:„.,,,...„3„:„::::::::::::::::„.,..:.,:.,...„....„:„:„,...::::::..,...„,,.,„;.........,..„.„,.,.,.,.:.„„„„E.,„....:.„,„:::::::::::::,;.:.:„.„,.,.„.„,,,„..,,...,:.:.„.....„:„........:.,..,..,.,:::::::::::::•:::.::•:•:„.::::: n' {..�e cl Pr.. _« . f S Gram o14 re. -o11 . .................: t- E { EGO i' •:v ........} :?]:.::::,•:,;C:{{:{{:::m::99i�:-?f:ti?.?i?ry}�x}±?'4'?}}:^??'.:^jF}h}J:j:i?:f:�{.?.:{':�- t,,:{ . .....}C};{•?]]}•: :..:vy,::rtiYv? ?i::.'{•??}? :- s�?i:?ai:4}:aaivrv?:•C•?:� 'ice?.%^*tivY?.' �. .fir....... m III... P :�S:t:x`di;: :?`f??i�v�rrii%k•?:^'�%:n...i�i''%(f v '-i::Ji:. :?vi: ii:]ii `:!-}.`i}::i::. ..C;U.i vS.- '.sj'r:: '�Y.� ?f t�ylryi}i:::; 'i-:i:-:•::�:..v - :ahi'::]:ii::^]:O<ii:t•?]]i:!ti^:vim};:;{}:i:�iij:?:::::i. ? • ?} !it5} �r� are d b�� ;{:aRi':{� %i::%; : ; 2:�: i%';:_:_ :2 `.i i":. xxa:`:x ...................:...:....:... N!;..... DK Assoc 1 ales.:::....!::::"..::::::Ei„s:,::::,!:5,4:::.§,,,,,,,mg,..:,:i,1:::,,:i::,i.:,:,,,::::,.,,..: ....................................,................,..................... • • .... ......„:„.,:::::::::.:•....:„:„:„:„...,::•,:::.:•,:,:,•:„.:.:,•::::::•::,:„..,::,:,:„...:,....• .•......,...............".„.....:.„:.: :. ,,, •.: • "., :::::... ..•• ...:.• •:• ••••••.........:..,..:::,:••••••:......::......•:.............••::•...:::............„,„,,,,,,„:,„„„,„,„,:„,„„„::::„,,,,,,,„:„„„„„„,„„,„.::::,..:::::. :.::::.. .::::::::..::::::............ .............:....:..::.: „:„.,,,::::::„,:„:„:„„„„::::::.:.,,„,,„„.„,,„,.:::„„„„„:„::,;,::„,„,,,,„„„„,;„„,,„„„,„:.,„,„„„:,„,„:.„„„,::„„,„„„,„:::,„„,„,„,,„„,,,„,„,,i,:„:„.„.:,,,„„,„,„„„„,,„.„,„„„,„„„„„„„„,„:,„,„,,„::::::„. i).R:::i.mmoig.in:.,,,,,,:.t.p:,,,t,,,Rlmg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,w4g,.b„,o,,t:,,,:„,.•,20.00,::„,.,,,„„„,::,„,::,„.,,.,,::,„„,„,.„,„,,,;,„„::,::::,,::,,,,::„,„„:,,„,„,„„„::„,::„:":„,„„„„,::,,..:,„,:„,,„:,,.:„,,..: :::,..::::,:,,,:,:,:,:,_,:,:,_,:,:,:::,:,:,:,:„:„„3,,,,:,:,:„„:„:.„„,„,„:„„„,,..„„,,..„::.:,,„,:..„,„„„„,,,•,,,::,,,:„.:,:„:„,::,::,:,::,,::::,:::::,,..:„,„,„:,,,:::::::,:,:,„„:,,,:,,,,:„.„,:.::::,::::,..:::.:,..,„.::::::::::.:,:,..s.:::.:::::..5::::..„.:.,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:......:.:.:.,...„...:_x.:::„:,_:.:„:_:,_::............„ .:::::::::.:::„.„,::::::.::::::„...:::::::„:::::•„.„:::•::::::::::::::::..:::::::.:::.::::::„:„:::::..,:::::.::::::::::::::.:„..„.,...„...„,.::::„.:„.„:„.:::•:::::::::,:,:::::::,:::::::::„.:„::::::„„::::::::::„:„:„.:::::.:„.:::::::.:::::„.„,„..,.,:,„:::,.::::„...,:„,:::,.,:,.„,,,,:,,,,,„:„:,,,„,,,,,...§,:::„:„,..„..,.,:„:,:„..„.„....:, :ia'• ::`:,::}is::}::::}.::vY:::ii: _ _ 'tit\v%l:' <�iji:.}i`•...:.} ,'v:i.;:>iy::I.�::i]}'?]::::ii::�]`! }� F;i::ii^::F:r;}}Y,.:. ,,:::,,,,,,,:::::„„.,,„: ri:Y::} ~:::1:::<::i:v ,:::•„,,,,:::::::,:,:„„,:,,g,:::::,:,:::,:,:,::.:,,,:,:,:„:„,,:,,,:,,,,:.:,„:„:•:,,,..„:..,:,„:,,:,,,,„,,:„:„..::„..,:„.:„..,,,„::„.„„,„:„.„.„.,,,„:„.„,.:„.„,,,,,.,:„.„,..„,:,::: .:..:::.n..:::.-.v:x{•]:i:....L:4:.:,....:......::i:iti•::•. . • „,:„.„..„:::::::„:„:„:„:„,„„:„.„,:::::,::::::::::::::,:,::::::.:::: ..............................:......................... ::._....................,...............:................................... ... ...........• EXHIBIT 50 LU 00-0007 j7 DKS Associates •921 S. W. Washington Street, Suite 612 Portland, OR 97205-2824 Phone: (503)243-3500 Fax: (503)243-1934 March 31, 2000 Mr. Barry Cain Gramor Oregon, Inc. 9895 SE Sunnyside Road Suite P Clackamas, OR 97015 Subject: Revised Transportation Impact Analysis of the Re-Development Projects on Blocks 136 and 138 in Downtown Lake Oswego, Oregon Dear Mr. Cain, DKS Associates is pleased to submit this final traffic report for your land use application requirements in the City of Lake Oswego. This revised final report responds to comments ID submitted by the City of Lake Oswego (February 7, 2000), Oregon Department of Transportation(February 4, 2000) and Charbonneau Engineering (March 6, 2000). Our findings include: • The proposed projects on Blocks 136 and 138 will add approximately 350 new vehicle trips to the local street system during peak travel hours. • The traffic added by the proposed developments will be primarily oriented to and from "A"Avenue. • The project-added traffic will cause the 1st Street and "A"Avenue intersection to drop below the city's minimum performance standards. The existing traffic signal will require protected left-turn phasing for traffic on"A"Avenue as a project mitigation measure. The current configuration requires traffic to wait for gaps in the opposing traffic. With higher traffic demands, this configuration will not be adequate. • The traffic added by the Blocks 136 and 138 development onto Evergreen Road could increase volumes on the blocks near the site to near the maximum level preferred by the city for a local street— 1,000 vehicle daily. Traffic calming measures recommended in the Evergreen Road Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan should be implemented. • Long-range traffic growth on State Street and"A"Avenue will cause that intersection to exceed its planned capacity. This will occur whether or not this proposed development is approved and constructed. • X:\PROJECTS\1999\P99180 (L0 Downtown)\Cover Letter2.doc Barry Cain March 31,2000 Page 2 of 2 • ■ The proposed access plan for Blocks 136 and 138 is effective in providing convenient and safe access for autos, pedestrians and bicycle travel. • We recommend provide a separate left-turn lane on the l st Street approaches to "A" Avenue to better serve higher traffic demands. • We recommend that traffic signals on"A" Avenue between State Street and 4th Avenue be interconnected to reduce system delays along the project frontage. This improvement is identified in the city's Transportation System Plan, and it would logically be implemented concurrent with these development projects. If you have any further questions,please call me. PROF�c Sincerely, �F. 5 4),G)Nfe,9 4$0 DKS Associates, Inc. 4 nylons ¢LD Carl D. S ringer .E. L p,gpaitrfr Project Manager MUM 41.1› • cc: Hamid Pishvaie,Project Planner,City of Lake Oswego(3 copies) Gramor Oregon,Inc.(2 copies) • X:\PROJECTS\1999\P99180 (LO Downtown)\Cover Letter2.doc 0 .'3 Table of Contents • CHAPTER 1: SUMMARY 1 Background Material 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACTS Approved and Other Pending Development Impacts 2 MITIGATION MEASURES 2 Blocks 136 and 138 Re-Development 2 Block 137 Impacts 3 Long-Term Issues 3 CHAPTER 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 ROADWAY NETWORK 4 Traffic Controls 4 Description of Roadway Facilities 5 Definition of Level of Service 7 Evaluating Intersections without Traffic Signals 7 INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE 7 • Variations in Seasonal Traffic Volumes 7 Intersection Level of Service 10 Vehicle Queues on"A"Avenue 10 Evergreen Road Traffic Conditions 11 PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE 12 PUBLIC TRANSIT 12 PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS 12 CHAPTER 3: PROJECT IMPACTS 13 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 13 TRAVEL DEMAND 13 Approved and Other Pending Projects 16 Trip Distribution and Assignment 17 Short-Term Traffic Forecast 17 Roadway Improvements 20 SHORT-TERM INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE 20 Existing plus Approved Conditions 20 Total Conditions 21 Incremental Impact of Block 137 21 Mitigation 22 • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates 0140 2017 TRAFFIC FORECASTS 23 2017 Planned Roadway Improvements 26 • LONG-RANGE INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE 26 Future Baseline Conditions 26 2017 Plus Re-Development on Blocks 136 and 138 Traffic Conditions 27 SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 28 SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION 28 Site Access 28 Emergency Vehicle Access 29 Turn Lane Needs 29 PedestrianiBicycle 30 Vehicle Queueing on "A"Avenue 30 EVERGREEN ROAD TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 31 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS 32 MITIGATION MEASURES 32 Existing Traffic Plus Blocks 136 and 138 Re-Development 32 Short-Term Impacts from Block 137 32 Long-Term Issues 33 EVERGREEN ROAD 33 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-Study Area 6 Figure 2-Existing Traffic Volumes 9 Figure 3 Project Volumes and Trip Distribution 15 Figure 4 Existing Plus Approved 18 Figure 5 Total Volumes 19 Figure 6-2017 Base Traffic Volumes 24 Figure 7-2017 Traffic Volumes Plus Blocks 136, 137& 138 25 Figure 9:Recommended Street Improvements 34 LIST OF TABLES • Table 1: Seasonal Traffic Volumes on"A"Avenue 8 Table 2: Intersection Conditions— 1999(PM Peak Flour) 10 Table 3: Trip Generation Estimate for Blocks 136 and 138 14 Table 4:Trip Generation Estimate for Block 137 Expansion 16 Table 5:Intersection Conditions—Existing Plus Approved 20 Table 6: Intersection Conditions—Existing plus Approved Plus Project(Total) 21 Table 7: Intersection Conditions—Total Plus Block 137 22 Table 8: Intersection Conditions—Mitigated Total Plus Block 137 23 Table 9: Intersection Conditions—2017 Base(PM Peak Hour) 26 Table 10:Intersection Conditions—2017 Plus Blocks 136& 138 28 Table 11: Left-Turn Lane Vehicle Storage Requirements(2017 Plus All Blocks) 29 • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates r + * 1 U .i # 1 DKS Associates • Chapter 1 : Summary The report presents the transportation impacts analysis for the proposed re-development project in Downtown Lake Oswego along "A"Avenue on Blocks 136 and 138. The analysis includes assessment of intersections and roadway for existing and future scenarios, evaluation of signal warrants, sight distances, left turn lane needs, pedestrianibicycle needs, and transit needs. Recommendations are made to maintain city and state standards for transportation performance and safety, and to enhance access, circulation and safety near the development. A special analysis was conducted along Evergreen Road to assess the potential for impacts in that neighborhood. The recommended solution for Evergreen Road was developed through a separate process and incorporated into this report. Background Material In preparation of this report, the city's transportation plans and policies were reviewed along with past transportation studies conducting for the downtown area. These studies included Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan, Kittelson&Associates, 1997; DDu711o11,71 Transportation Plan, David Evans&Associates, 1991; and Millennium Park Transportation • Impact Analysis,KJS &Associates, 1998. Applicable policies included the city's Comprehensive Plan Goal 12: Transportation, and Metro's 2040 Functional Plan, Title 6: Regional Accessibility. Project Description Blocks 136 and 138 are south of"A"Avenue between State Street(Highway 43)and 3rd Street in Downtown Lake Oswego. These blocks are zoned for commercial uses and have several existing buildings. The proposed re-development project will eliminate all existing buildings on these two blocks with a few exceptions. The new uses built in their place will include a mix of retail, office and residential uses. Vehicle access to these two blocks will be provided from and 3'I Street.No direct vehicle access onto"A" Avenue or Evergreen Road is proposed. Existing Conditions Existing traffic conditions are Level of Service D or better at all study intersections with traffic signals. This is above the city's minimum performance standard that requires a minimum Level of Service E for the arterial and major collector street network. State Street at"A"Avenue—ODOT standards, applicable to State Street only,require a volume-to-capacity ratio less than 0.95. This is slightly better performance than the City's standard requires. The"A"Avenue at State Street intersection exceeds this level today, S Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 1 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 0142 although the street improvements made last year have substantially reduced peak hour congestion at this location. A review of the vehicle queues on "A"Avenue approaching State Street showed that queues vary from one vehicle in length to over 50 vehicles for short periods during the peak hour.Nearly all vehicles entering the end of the queue cleared the intersection at State Street within two cycles of the traffic signal, or three minutes. 2°d Street at"A"Avenue—This intersection is not controlled by a traffic signal, but it will be improved to signal control in conjunction with re-development. For now,the PM peak hour delay for left-turning vehicles from the minor streets is LOS E and serves relatively low traffic volumes.All other movements operate at acceptable service levels. Evergreen Road—Traffic volumes on Evergreen Road vary from 400 to 700 vehicles daily. The volumes are higher closer to the project site,and lower closer to 10`h Street. This level of traffic is consistent with its local street designation. It carries roughly two percent of the traffic volume served on"A"Avenue, an arterial. The intersections on Evergreen Road at 3`d, 6th, and 10th Street operate with little or no delay(LOS A)during the PM peak hour. Project Traffic Impacts The Blocks 136 and 138 developments will add approximately 350 vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour to local streets and intersections. The majority of site traffic will enter and exit the site from "A"Avenue(81 percent), and 12 percent cross"A"Avenue via 1�,2nd or 3`d Street. Approximately two to seven percent of the site traffic will use Evergreen Road. Site traffic impacts include: ■ "A"Avenue and 1g Street intersection degrades to LOS F. Signal modification required for acceptable service during peak hours. • • Added traffic on Evergreen Road may cause volumes to reach upper limits for local streets.Neighborhood traffic calming measures should be implemented. Approved and Other Pending Development Impacts Potential expansion pending for Block 137 where Wizer Foods grocery store resides was also studied. The impact of expanding uses on this block was evaluated separate from Blocks 136 and 138 proposed uses.Background added traffic from approved developments in the vicinity that also have been incorporated into this analysis. These various developments will add approximately 250 vehicle trips in the p.m.peak hour. The added traffic from the re-development on Block 137 will not significantly impact local intersections. The intersection of State Street and"A"Avenue will degrade from LOS D to LOS E, but this is still within the accepted performance criteria established by the city. The incremental impact relative to existing volumes identified the following issues: • "A"Avenue and 2"Street intersection must be constructed with traffic signal controls prior to full expansion of the Block 137 plan. • No raised center median can be accommodated between 2"Street and 1'Street on"A" Avenue because of the higher left-turning demands at the cross streets. No other impacts were identified on local streets or intersections. Mitigation Measures • Blocks 136 and 138 Re-Development Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 2 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 '4 Mitigation measures associated with the proposed re-development are noted below to comply with City performance standards.The only study intersection to drop below minimum standards with project-added traffic was at l' Street/"A"Avenue. The existing traffic signal1111 must be modified to meet city's minimum operating standards. The traffic signal interconnection will enhance traffic progression on"A"Avenue, but it is not required to comply with the City's performance standards. • Modify the 1' Street/"A"Avenue eastbound and westbound left turn signals to operate with protected signal control. This will provide a protected left-turn"arrow"for traffic movements, so that turning traffic does not have to wait for gaps in the opposing traffic stream. ■ Provide a separate left-turn lane at the I' Street for the northbound and southbound approach to`A"Avenue. ■ Construct signal interconnection and coordinate all traffic signals along"A"Avenue between State Street and 4th Street to facilitate traffic progression. • Install a semi-diverter on the west leg of Evergreen Road at 4th Street to restrict eastbound traffic. The evaluation of traffic calming measures along Evergreen Road is summarized in the Evergreen Road Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan which is included in the appendix. Block 137 Impacts The addition of Block 137 traffic related to the expansion of uses on this block did not adversely impact any study locations. However, it is recommended that the planned traffic signal at"A"Avenue and 2°d Street be operational prior to completion of this expansion to better service the higher side street traffic demands. Long-Term Issues The 2017 conditions at"A"Avenue at State Street degrade to LOS F with or without the proposed re-development.Therefore,the solution to this long-term problem is not directly associated with the proposed project. Possible capacity improvements at this intersection could reduce delays during peak hours. However,major road widening improvements at this location would not sufficient to reach the city's preferred minimum of LOSE during peak hours.Impact to adjoining buildings and property would be severe,and such a improvement may not be desirable at this major junction in the downtown core.A list of possible long-term improvements to be further considered by the City should include: ■ Expand Turn Lane Capacity at State Streetl"A"Avenue—Add a southbound right turn lane at State Street and"A"Avenue. This will require road widening and possible building relocation on the northwest corner of the intersection. Construct a second northbound left turn lane at State Street and"A"Avenue. • Enhance Capacity by Alternative Downtown Circulation Routes—Northbound traffic on State Street could be directed past"A"Avenue to"B"Avenue to make the left-turn,then be re-directed back to"A"Avenue via 2°d, 3`i or 4th Street. I Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 3 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 0144 • DKS Associates Chapter 2: Existing Conditions This chapter presents the background transportation facilities and the existing operating conditions within the study area. This baseline information includes a review of the transportation systems for vehicle traffic, pedestrians, bicycle and transit service. Any situations where the existing transportation services do not meet the city's standards for traffic performance, connectivity, or safety are noted. The baseline traffic operating conditions are a useful comparison to evaluate the net changes with travel activity associated with the proposed development and other pending growth. The project site is located on Blocks 136 and 138 south of"A"Avenue between State Street (ORE 43) and 3`d Street in downtown Lake Oswego. The following intersections were selected for analysis in this report based on discussions with City staff: • State Street/"A"Avenue • State Street/"B"Avenue • State Street/Foothills Road • 1st Streetl"A"Avenue • • 2nd Street/"A" Avenue • 3'd Street/"A" Avenue • 4th Street/"A"Avenue • 3`d Street/Evergreen Road • 6th Street/Evergreen Road • 10`s Street/Evergreen Road A separate analysis was made of the ambient traffic conditions along Evergreen Road between 2"Street and 10th Street. This information included travel speeds,hourly traffic volumes and the existing type of traffic controls. Roadway Network Traffic Controls Each study intersection on State Avenue and"A" Avenue is controlled by a traffic signal except for the 2°d Street/"A"Avenue intersection. The intersections on Evergreen Road are controlled by two-way or four-way STOP controls. Traffic controls and road maintenance are done by Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT)along State Street, and the other traffic signals are maintained by the City of Lake Oswego. Traffic signals on"A"Avenue are not coordinated to enhance traffic progression. The city plans to add signal interconnect system between State Street and 10th Street as described in the city's TSP, however, funding has not been allocated for this signal interconnect project in the city's six-year capital improvement program. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 4 DKS Associates Mach 31, 2000 .) Description of Roadway Facilities The downtown streets form a grid pattern in this area as shown in Figure 1.Two major • roadways are State Street(ORE 43)and"A"Avenue that provide regional access to the project site. Local facilities that provide direct access to the project site and other businesses and residential areas in the immediate downtown include 1s`,2°a,3I'd and 4th Street,Foothills Road and Evergreen Road. State Street(ORE 43) is classified as a District facility by the ODOT. The City of Lake Oswego' has designated it as a major arterial. Metro identifies this State Street south of"A" Avenue as part of the National Highway System. This north-south route provides regional access from interstate 205 (five miles to the south)through the Cities of West Linn and Lake Oswego to downtown Portland.Near the project site,the facility has rive Ianes with two through lanes in each direction,and a center lane for left-turn movements. State Street carries approximately 2,300 vehicles during the PM peak hour(35,300 vehicles daily2)south of"A" Avenue. The posted speed limit on State Street is 25 miles. Sidewalks are present on both sides of the street near the project site. There are no bike lanes. "A"Avenue is a major arterial that provides regional access between State Street and Interstate 5 (five miles to the west)via connections with Country Club Road,Boones Ferry Road and Kruse Way.Metro identifies this facility as part of the National Highway System. The facility has five lanes with two through lanes in each direction and a center left turn lane. "A"Avenue carries approximately 1,800 vehicles during the PM peak hour in the downtown project area. The posted speed limit is 30 miles per hour. Foothills Road is a local street that provides access to commercial and residential property to the east of State Street.Foothills Road carries approximately 300 vehicles during the PM peak hour. Sidewalks are present on both sides of the road near the project site.No bike lanes are on Foothills Road. • Evergreen Road is a local street that provides east-west road circulation to residential and commercial property south of the downtown project area.Evergreen Road carries approximately 40 to 75 vehicles during the PM peak hour(400 to 700 vehicles daily). The posted speed is 25 miles per hour. There are no curbs, gutters, sidewalks or bike lanes present for most of the length of Evergreen Road(west of Third Street). Evergreen Road has"speed humps" in two locations.These are traffic calming devices that can be effective in reducing average vehicle speeds. Transportation System Plan, City of Lake Oswego, 1997,Roadway Functional Classification Plan, Figure 3-1. 2 1998 Transportation Volume Tables, Oregon Department of Transportation,June 1999. Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 5 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 } l .#Es DKS Associates , • TO NOT F Cl . i ,. , ! , , z 7 , I c • ,7_, _ co i I u) r L O `S ,i EvE ly RARE Broelf'�,36 Block 137 PROJECT 0 RD 0 is > !.in-- .Block 38 YS / � v i RR i Lakewood ' 0 Bay r /�; LEGEND Figure 1 0 - Study Intersection STUDY AREA Definition of Level of Service Level of service(LOS) is used as a measure of effectiveness for intersection operation.It is similar to a "report card" rating based upon average vehicle delay. Level of service A,B and C indicate conditions where vehicles can move freely.Level of service D and E are progressively worse. Level of service F represents conditions where traffic volumes exceed the capacity of a specific movement,in the case of unsignalized intersections,or an entire intersection, in the case of signalized control, resulting in long queues and delays. Level of service D or better is generally desirable for signalized intersections. Unsignalized intersections provide levels of service for major and minor street turning movements. For this reason. LOS E and even LOS F can be acceptable where traffic signal controls are not warranted or when they would adversely affect overall intersection operations. A summary of the level of service descriptions is provided in the appendix. The City of Lake Oswego has adopted a minimum performance standard of LOS E for its arterial and major collector street network(Comprehensive Plan,Goal 12, Major Street System,Policy 1). On State Street,ODOT requires a volume-to-capacity ratio of less than 0.95 for regional state highways(Oregon Highway Plan, 1999). Evaluating Intersections without Traffic Signals The unsignalized intersection level of service calculation evaluates each movement separately to identify problems(typically left turns from side streets).The calculation is based on the average stopped delay per vehicle for stop controlled movements. Level of service(LOS)F indicates that there are insufficient gaps of suitable size to allow minor street traffic to safely • enter or cross the major street.This is generally evident by long delays and queuing on the minor street. Level of service F may also result in more aggressive driving,with side street vehicles accepting shorter gaps.In such cases,some increase in conflicts and disruption to major street traffic can result.It should be noted that the major street traffic can still move effectively at LOS F and only side street left turns experience difficulty,which may be only a small percentage of the total intersection volume. It is for these reasons that level of service results must be interpreted differently for signalized and unsignalized locations. Intersection Performance Intersection turn movement counts were conducted during the PM peak periods to determine existing LOS based on the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for signalized and unsignalized intersections3.Traffic counts were conducted in July,August and September 1999(see Appendix).Figure 2 provides a summary of the existing traffic volumes. Variations in Seasonal Traffic Volumes The ODOT 1998 Transportation Volume Tables'includes a Summary of Traffic Trends at Permanent Station Locations that present average weekday traffic volumes for each month during the year.These trends show that the average daily traffic for state facilities have a peak during the summer months(July,August and September).In addition,historical traffic 3 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Chapters 9& 10, 1994. 4 1998 Transportation Volume Tables, Oregon Department of Transportation, June 1999,Page 213. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 7 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 0148 counts on"A"Avenue in October 1998 and July 1999 were compared to review seasonal volume trends for arterial streets in the downtown area. In general,traffic volumes in the fall were 10 percent higher than summer volumes. "A"Avenue count volumes for both seasons are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Seasonal Traffic Volumes on "A" Avenue October 8, 1998 July 28, 1999 Time EB Volume WB Volume Total ( EB Volume WB Volume Total 4:00-5:00 p.m. 1100 757 1857 970 706 1676 5:00-6:00 p.m. 1143 739 1882 1122 655 1777 Source:Traffic data collected by Traffic Smithy. To confirm the difference between summer and fall traffic activity,another traffic count was taken at State Street and"A"Avenue in September 1999. The new volumes showed an increase of eight percent from the July count. The traffic volumes at the other locations counted in July were adjusted to reflect these higher volumes. Therefore,the baseline 1999 volumes used in this study represent September 1999 conditions. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 8 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 DKS Associates (11f) JD NOT TO SCALE (:\)/ o�t83 N 'r �20 vNi2N t24 � �69 �1 .r235 /1tffJ8 r j r783 Ip77S � 1.f llgj�:� i r • "'53 ; 1 jb •j apt'_) 1 r I ;9, N., y 231, a� V,� —� ,� •�� `over t ;i co • h ~ toQ y • Hai .... . . y 33 • •1• 156 i a a • '+ 'v ... • ti ei • y •E RG- i.04.134i Block 137 1 �Q EEN R� :: 327.E t • \\:8,7:., 1,`,,,c! RR ;r P 8 • t oNro L7• �3o 7 � t8 ``�°,� ti 'p ::. "..........") 9+{ �� i E7� 1 fr L`'.,....—• -2-'8 �� 7 i \ 45.:". y LEGEND Figure 2 0 - Study Intersection EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Intersection Level of Service • As shown in Table 2,all study intersections controlled by a traffic signal currently operate at LOS D or better during the PM peak hour. The highest overall travel delays occur at State Street and"A"Avenue with 26 seconds per vehicle and an overall Level of Service D. The intersection operates with a v/c ratio of 0.98, exceeding the ODOT required operating limit. The recent capacity improvements at the State Street and"A"Avenue intersection have significantly reduced average delays at this intersection. The unsignalized intersections on Evergreen Street at 3'd, 6th, and 10th Street operate at LOS A during the PM peak hour. The 2°d StreetP'A" Avenue intersection is not controlled by a traffic signal. During the p.m. peak hour, the delay for left-turning vehicles from the minor streets is LOS E. The traffic volume on 2°d Street approaching this intersection is relatively low today.All other movements operate at acceptable service levels. Intersection performance calculations are included in the appendix.A detailed listing of Level of Service conditions for each traffic movement is also included in the Appendix. Table 2: Intersection Conditions-1999 (PM Peak Hour) Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection Average Delay Per Level of Servic Volume to Capacity Vehicle(seconds) Ratio State Street/"A"Avenue 25.6 D 0.98 State Street/"B"Avenue 12.8 B 0.75 State Street/Foothills Road 5.1 B 0.57 • 1"Street/"A"Avenue 3.7 A 0.42 3`d Street/ A"Avenue 2.1 A 0.50 4th StreetP'A"Avenue 8.4 B 0.54 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections Most Delayed Minor Level of Service Volume-to-Capacity Street Approach (Major/Minor Ratio (seconds) Approach) 2°d StreetP'A"Avenue(1) 43.6 B/E — 3r1 Street/Evergreen Road 3.4 A/A — 6t Street/Evergreen Road (All-Way STOP) 1.3 A 0.09 10th Street/Evergreen Road 3.3 A/A — A/A= The level of service for left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street at unsignalized intersections. (1) Traffic signal controls planned to be built at this location will improve the existing poor condition for the minor approach traffic. Vehicle Queues on "A"Avenue Vehicle queues on"A"Avenue approaching State Street vary substantially during the p.m. peak hour, from one vehicle in length to over 50 vehicles.The block between State Street and 1'Street has two lanes allocated for right-turning vehicles to wait for a"green light" signal indication. Surveys taken on August 26, 1999 showed that on average the vehicle queue was 325 feet long,just west of 1' Street.In a few instances, vehicle queues extended past 2nd Street for short periods. Refer to the Appendix for a chart of the vehicle queue lengths observed during the p.m.peak hour. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 10 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 iJ .A_ No matter how long the queue reached,vehicles entering the back of queue cleared the intersection at State Street generally within one signal cycle or less(90 seconds), but certainly with two signal cycles(three minutes). Prior to the recent construction at State Street and"A" • Avenue, vehicle queues on"A"Avenue regularly extended back to 4`11 Street and beyond during the peak hours. Evergreen Road Traffic Conditions An hourly volume and speed survey was conducted on Evergreen Road west of 46 Street for five consecutive days beginning August 2, 1999. The average 85`h percentile speed was 24 miles per hour in both the eastbound and westbound direction. By definition, 15 percent of :he vehicles surveyed were traveiing faster than the 356 percentile speed and 85 percent of the vehicles were traveling slower than the 85t percentile speed. Figure 3 shows a profile of the hourly volumes on Evergreen Road near 46 Street and "A" Avenue near 3`d Street. When compared,the daily traffic volume on Evergreen Road is two percent of the volume on"A"Avenue. Traffic counts taken near 4th Street during August 1999 showed an average volume of 680 vehicles daily.Historical counts taken at various locations on Evergreen Road showed daily volumes ranging from 450(near 10`h Street)to 750 (near 3'd Street). This level of traffic is consistent with the local street volumes per the city's Transportation System Plans. 2,000 1,800 A Avenue 1,400 - 1,200 3 1,000 800 ---- 600 — ---- t 400> 200 Evergreen Rd — 0 . - - - o O O O O 0 CD CD CD O CD O O O O O O O O O O O O . .. . . .. . . . . . .. . . O N (D 65 O . 6 W N N Hour Figure 3: Hourly Traffic Volumes along Frontage of Project Site s Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan,July 1997. Table 3-1:Street Functional Classification System Characteristics notes 1,000 vehicles daily as upper limit for traffic on a local street. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 11 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 r w r. ; JJ4 Pedestrian/Bicycle • Sidewalks are provided throughout the downtown study area along"A"Avenue and State Street. Pedestrian signals are included at all intersections controlled by traffic signals.No on- street bike lanes are provided along any of the streets within the downtown project area. Bike lanes are included in the City's Transportation System Plan for"A"Avenue between 10th Street and 4th Street then continuing easterly on"B"Avenue to State Street.Also, bike lanes are indicated on State Street throughout the city.No specific funding or improvement projects have been identified for implementation of these plans. Public Transit The Lake Oswego Transit Center is located at 4th Street and"A" Avenue within 300 feet of Block 136, and less than one-quarter mile for the entire project area. Tri-Met currently operates four regular bus routes with connections at the transit center. Route 35-Macadam operates between Oregon City and downtown Portland with 15-minute headway during peak hours and 30-minute headway off-peak. Route 36-South Shore primarily operates weekdays between the Tualatin Park&Ride lot and Downtown Lake Oswego,but also provides limited peak hour service to downtown Portland. Route 37-North Shore is similar to Route 36 with service to North Lake Oswego between the downtown and the City of Tualatin. Route 78- Beaverton/Lake Oswego provides weekday and weekend service to transit centers in Tigard and Beaverton.The headways between buses are generally 30 minutes. Planned Improvements No capital improvement projects are in the City's six-year program that will affect traffic • operations or alternative modes traveling within the downtown study area. Current planned improvement projects per the City's Transportation System Plan include: • Bike lanes on State Street • Bike lanes on"A"Avenue from 10th Street to 4th Street • Bike lanes on 4th Street from"A"Avenue to"B"Avenue • Bike lanes on"B"Avenue from 4th Street to State Street • Traffic signal interconnect on"A"Avenue from State Street to 10th Street In addition,a traffic signal will be constructed at the intersection of"A"Avenue and 2" Street if the proposed re-development project is approved by the city. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 12 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 1.i l J DKS Associates • Chapter 3: Project Impacts This chapter reviews the impact of the proposed re-deveiopment project on the transportation system. The analysis includes assessment of trip generation, trip distribution, capacity of study intersections for existing and future scenarios, evaluation of signal warrants, sight distance. site access needs, pedestrian/bicycle needs and transit needs. Analysis Period—The focus of this transportation impact analysis is the evening peak hour, the highest one-hour period between 4:00 p.m.and 6:00 p.m. The a.m. peak hours were not included in this study because retail and residential uses typically have much lower intensity levels than during the selected p.m. peak hour. Project Description Blocks 136 and 138 are located south of"A"Avenue between State Street(Highway 43)and 3`d Street. The proposed re-development project on these two blocks would essentially remove all existing buildings and uses, and replace them with new structures. The Block 138 project includes about 80,000 square feet of retail, office and restaurant uses in one to two-story buildings.(Refer to the Site Plans attached in the appendix and the • detailed use description in the Trip Generation section of this chapter.)On-site head-in parking along the retail storefronts would be supplemented with a multi-story parking structure at the center of the block. On-street parking will be provided along both sides of 1st Street.No on-street parking is planned along State Street, "A"Avenue or Evergreen Road. Vehicle access will be onto 1' Street at two driveways.No direct access onto State Street or Evergreen Road is proposed. Pedestrian connections will be provided onto fronting streets on all four sides of the block via connecting passageways or sidewalks. The city's Millennium Park is under construction immediately to the south across Evergreen Road. The Block 136 project is predominantly townhouses (41 units)with a small allocation for supporting neighborhood commercial (about 8,000 square feet) and general office uses(about 8,000 square feet). Vehicle access will be provided to 2' Street and 3rd Street via site driveways. On-site parking is proposed for residents under each housing units. Visitor parking will be provided on-site and supplemented with on-street parking along the perimeter.No direct vehicle access onto Evergreen Road or"A" Avenue is proposed. Travel Demand The vehicle traffic generation associated with the proposed re-development was evaluated using national data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers6(ITE). Trip Generation for the proposed project is shown in Table 3. The project will add 347 vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour and approximately 4,700 vehicle trips during an average 6 Trip Generation,Sixth Edition, 1997, Institute of Transportation Engineers,Land Use Code 710(General Office),Code 820(Shopping Center), Code 230(Townhouse),and Code 831 (Quality Restaurant). • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 13 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 weekday. Existing trips generated for Block 136 and 138 land uses were determined to be minimal during peak hours, and no reduction was made from the proposed project trip • generation. Pass-By Trip Reductions—For retail land uses a portion of the future patrons are passing by the site today on "A"Avenue or otherwise drive by the site to other destinations. These trips are referred as"pass-by"trips and are separated out so as to not double count traffic added by the development.Pass-by trip activity was based on ITE Trip Generation research for similar land uses. The average percentage of pass-by trips for retail uses ranged from 34 to 36 percent. These pass-by trips were subtracted from the total trip generation to determine a new net vehicle trip generation of 347 trips during the p.m.peak hour and 4,700 trips during an average weekday. These pass-by trips were then re-routed from the passing traffic stream into and out of the site access points to represent new activity for these blocks. The project added traffic on the local streets is shown in Figure 3. No pass-by adjustment was made for office or residential uses on site. Table 3: Trip Generation Estimate for Blocks 136 and 138 Daily Vehicle PM Peak Hour Trips Trips Land Use Quantity In Out Total Block 136 Townhouses 41 DU 305 19 10 29 Shopping Center 8 KSF 587 26 28 54 General Office 8 KSF 191 3 13 16 Pass-By Trips to New Uses -9 -10 -19 • Block Total Added Trips 1,083 39 41 80 Block 138 General Office 40.1 KSF 658 15 77 92 Shopping Center 33.9 KSF 2488 110 119 228 Quality Restaurant 6 KSF 540 30 15 45 Pass-By Trips to New Uses -50 -47 -98 Block Total Added Trips 3,686 105 164 267 Block 136& 138 Total Added Trips 4,769 144 205 347 Refer to Appendix for trip generation detailed calculations. Trip generation rates and pass-by data based on Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation,Sixth Edition for all proposed land uses. KSF= 1,000 gross square feet building area. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 14 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 0155 DKS Associates t Tt. NOT CLE • f�0 0 t0 (c)---:.t0 ZD or�oLp 1 �444..�139 j t►I• -126 4 14/4 18 4+ 4: 7 i '�'0 0 J, p,�' 39y�� I(‘ f d2�;.1! ' • ` 68•. 11 1 t8��N� O ' N 0� I • r~ . y h Lj2% • ..` l. y t4" ..415%,7 "\ 7"..---: V q • V n " 1 ,,,! 1 30% • • c -_w • I iti Y AV • • *ii:`•ii • h .. ;: 0#, Block137 R° o EVERGREEN • ;v: t_R • y Q 34.E 1 • 7/o r * a�. o 113 0 o° Z �R d • • 41% • ---....s*N...(- ?...------:. L o ° ip potp 0Tq �08 I o 14 _o 1' :p 1 j'4 1" I 0� iore • 3, to9 { on :.,:;* ao Di c"zz'c) • LEGEND Figure 3 Q - Study Intersection PROJECT ADDED PM PEAK HOUR - New Roadway TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND ° TRIP DISTRIBUTION 5/Q - Trip Distribution Percentage 1! * - Range on Evergreen Estimated from 2%io 7% (high end shown) 1 Approved and Other Pending Projects The short-term traffic forecasts also include traffic generated from approved projects that are not yet constructed and occupied. City staff provided information for four recently approved projects within the study area. However, one of the projects did not analyze traffic at any of the study intersections,and was eliminated from this analysis. The approved projects included in the short-term volumes include: • Millenium Parks • Mentrum's Office Building • Oswego Place Senior Apartments9 The traffic study for the park presented forecasts for an average weekday and for special weekday events. Weekday average park traffic was reported as 60 vehicles during the day (the majority of trips are expected to be walking trips).A specific quantity of park related vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour was not reported. As a conservative estimate, 20 percent of the daily traffic(12 trips)were assumed to occur during the p.m. peak hour. A traffic impact report was not prepared for the Mentrum's Office Building. Weekday average traffic for this project was estimated based on proposed land use information provided by the City. The project is expected to generate approximately 66 p.m. peak hour trips. In addition, Block 137 may re-develop to expand the existing grocery store and add more retail space. The estimated block trip generation is based on the added building square footage(the proposed total building area minus the existing building area)for both land uses. Although this specific project has not been approved by the city council,the potential traffic • impacts of the development have been included in the analysis. The estimate trip generation from the expansion on Block 137 is summarized in Table 4 below. The square footage quantity listed represents the proposed building expansion area only and does not include existing uses. Table 4: Trip Generation Estimate for Block 137 Expansion Block 137 PM Peak Hour Trips Land Use Quantity In Out Total Supermarket 17.8 KSF 114 109 223 Shopping Center 4.8 KSF 15 17 32 Pass-By Trips to New Use -46 -45 -91 Block Total Added Trips 83 81 164 KSF= 1,000 square feet of gross building floor area These trips are in addition to the existing activity associated with the Wizer's Grocery Store and existing retail uses that were counted in the baseline traffic volume surveys. River Bend Traffic Impact Analysis,Lancaster Engineer,April 1997 located on Furnace Street east of State Street. $ Millennium Park Plaza Transportation Impact Study, Final Report, KJS Associates, Inc.,December 3, 1998. The study also evaluated a worst case condition with special events(e.g.,concerts)at the park during weekdays,but this was not included in the study as it did not represent average weekday conditions. 9 Lake Oswego Senior Apartments Traffic Analysis Report, Charbonneau Engineering,May 1993 located at Second and"B"Avenue. Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 16 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 -i r- , J .- Trip Distribution and Assignment Vehicle trip distribution for the proposed project traffic was based on existing traffic volumes in the study area and published travel data from a previous study10 of Lake Oswego's downtown area. The project traffic distribution includes: • 15 percent of the vehicle trips to and from Highway 43 north of Lake Oswego, • 41 percent to and from Highway 43 to the south of Lake Oswego, ■ 30 percent to and from west on"A"Avenue and parallel streets, and • seven percent to and from the northern downtown area. Figure 3 shows the trip distribution for Blocks 136 and 138. The trip distribution estimate for project traffic on Evergreen Road ranged from two to seven percent of the site traffic generation. This acknowledges that a small proportion of site traffic may use Evergreen Road as an alternative route to"A"Avenue. For example, traffic bound for the parking garage on Block 138 may use a few blocks of Evergreen Road to circumvent vehicle queues on "A" Avenue approaching State Street. Our observations showed that vehicle queues extend back to 1 n Street on average and 22d Street occasionally today during peak hours. As noted later in the study, traffic growth may cause periodic vehicle queues back to 3`d Street during peak hours. This queue length is less than the conditions experienced prior to the improvements made a State Street and"A" Avenue.This queue is not expected to cause traffic headed southbound on State Street to use any portion of Evergreen Road to avoid this queue. However, for the purpose of this study, the highest end range, seven percent, was used to assess possible impacts on Evergreen Road. All of the project volume forecasts and impact analysis represents this seven-percent estimate. It is expected that the actual impacts and added traffic volumes will be less than this level. Short-Term Traffic Forecast The short-term traffic forecasts incorporate existing traffic volumes and approved project traffic. The existing plus the approved project traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4. The short-term forecast volumes were evaluated both with and without the added traffic from Blocks 136 and 138 to determine the impact associated with the proposed project. The combined existing, approved projects and proposed project traffic volumes, also referred to as the Total volumes, are shown in Figure 5. A separate analysis of Block 137 traffic in addition to Blocks 136 and 138 was made to determine the additional impact of this pending development. 1°East End Transportation and Parking Analysis and Design for Public Improvements for "A"and "B" Avenues and Alleys, David Evans and Associates, February 22, 1991. Origin and destination data for the east end of downtown uses shown in Figures 2-3 and 2-4. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 17 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 0158 DKS Associates I) ro SCALENor ii; I i Ii. (8,7R,,21.4,833 Na,_,y(" C9 i:v.„. N,�,�30 9 1-:,,,,��v��'))^b90 � �I("22 7�` 1 1��1L3 • I 9 J* 12 1 3$�� 1 t T089�tif 1<3�ac�r ; -ncv`� \^ � l '19�" I I i • • b it .. .. y• fIhci cI+ sue,_ ... "• Block 3.6 131oek 137 P1 WEO` 0 �,CRSEN AD tockg y4.1 • 328 0 5,93.1. ¢R {v Pb� • t yo cy t•7 co t 8 • a„� t N h 73 30 f 28 28 1 rj _ 18 �11 15 "5 r 11 r68 `�'*eems �� o � 1,411t& y ' t& 1 0 \\---.... 1 ::. " LEGEND Figure 4 0 - study Intersection EXISTING PLUS APPROVED 7 New Roadway PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES r, 1� 50•� 0 r DKS Associates t NOT(\ , TO scvE ..7..4._._3_....,._. : ; /;;5 ( 2 i 39 117 4l rj,' •f 7258. y 1T2;y 1 r \971,..4.•,6*j,,..-t \- • 7777. 4 T 9 4 N ci N 791,, p o rry \ 231., ,O`•, � \ 301, r.,, 1 1 ' •'\,...„....... 1 .......„,.." • • y h y � y V • h 2 ��„ (...'.....:::"I'e4 357.j t ...s......!-L .. e i 166...1, os.C47.......; • ^G it' h i;.;.::;...1.:!ii Pmeat 11gs/ !&TB,OCk137 �y0Hilj;:74gs) 111 RO •••••••• .: $loc/C f3&'• �i y • • t • �0 � RR r • P 6• • Y� • 04 0 L^ 27 N° co�78 (1. ::: �482 Ot2268 . 8 \\ .N..27"....:io ,, ,.."?r.:,.:,,) 6-1, .,...__ .'''. y LEGEND Figure 5 0 - Study Intersection TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR - New RoadwayVOLUMES TRAFFIC 0160 Roadway Improvements The roadway improvements in the study area that will be completed at the opening of the proposed project include: ■ A new traffic signal will be installed at the 2" Street/'A"Avenue intersection. A pedestrian signal will be included at all approaches of the intersection. ■ A roadway connection on Evergreen Road has been constructed from 2" Street to 1' Street as part of the Millennium Plaza Park project(this improvement was under construction when traffic volume counts were taken). • Raised medians will be constructed in the center of"A"Avenue from yad to 3'd Street. The medians will replace the existing eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes on "A" Avenue at 2°d and 3`d Street.It is assumed left-turns from"A"Avenue onto 2°d and 3`d Street will be made from the inside through lane. These improvements were assumed in the capacity analysis calculations for all the short-term and long-term 2017 scenarios.The intersection performance results are discussed in the next section. Short-Term Intersection Performance Existing plus Approved Conditions The existing volumes were combined with traffic generated from approved projects to determine a base for short-term operating conditions. Table 5 summarizes the level of service 41111 calculations for Existing Plus Approved conditions. All study intersections will operate at LOS D or better during the p.m. peak hour. The State StreetP'A"Avenue intersection will experience the highest average vehicle delay(approximately 32 seconds)and operate with LOS D. Table 5: Intersection Conditions - Existing Plus Approved Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection Average Delay Per Overall Intersection Volume to Capacity Vehicle(seconds) Level of Service Ratio State Streev"A"Avenue 32.4 D 0.94 State Streetf'B"Avenue 20.4 C 0.72 State Street/Foothills Road 7.4 B 0.55 1"Streett'A"Avenue 5.6 B 0.50 2°d StreetP'A"Avenue 3.0 A 0.64 3n°Streetl"A"Avenue 2.3 A 0.51 4`b StreetP'A"Avenue 8.3 B 0.54 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections Most Delayed Minor Level of Service Volume-to-Capacity Street Approach (Major/Minor Ratio (seconds) Approach) 3rd Street/Evergreen Road 3.4 A/A 6th Street/Evergreen Road (All-Way STOP) 1.3 A 0.09 a. 10 Street/Evergreen Road 3.3 A/A • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 20 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 0 1 Total Conditions The intersection of"A" Avenue at State Street will degrade to LOS E and the intersection of 4110 "A" Avenue at ls` Street will degrade below acceptable performance standards to LOS F (see Table 6 below)with project-added traffic. All other study intersections will operate at the same service level as they do today with somewhat higher delays on average. The traffic added onto Evergreen Road will not change the existing LOS A condition at any of the intersections. The project added traffic does not degrade any of the study intersections below the city's minimum performance standard(LOS E). The project added traffic also result in the"A" Avenue/State Street intersection operating at substandard ODOT conditions. The intersection will have a v/c ratio greater than 1.0. exceeding the required ODOT operating limit. All other study intersections on State Street vill operate within acceptable performance limits. Table 6: Intersection Conditions — Existing plus Approved Plus Project (Total) Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection Average Delay Per Overall Intersection Volume to Capacity Vehicle(seconds) Level of Service Ratio State Street/'A"Avenue 40.3 E >1.0 State Street/"B"Avenue 20.4 C 0.74 State Street/Foothills Road 7.2 B 0.58 In Street/"A"Avenue >60.0 F >1.0* 2nd Street/'A"Avenue 3.7 A 0.70 3`d Street/"A"Avenue 3.1 A 0.55 4th Street/"A"Avenue 7.6 B 0.63 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections .Most Delayed Minor Level of Service Volume-to-Capacity 111 Street Approach (Major/Minor Ratio (seconds) Approach) 3`d Street/Evergreen Road 3.5 A/A — 6t Street/Evergreen Road (All-Way STOP) 1.4 A 0.11 10th Street/Evergreen Road 3.3 A/A — ' The high v/c ratio indicates the existing signal is inadequate with the higher volumes of left-turning traffic onto In Street.The traffic signal should be modified to provide a protected left-turn arrow at this location. Incremental Impact of Block 137 The increment of new traffic from Block 137 was added to the traffic volumes for Blocks 136 and 138 and existing traffic. With the Block 137 traffic, the ls` Street/"A" Avenue intersection will continue to operate at LOS F and exceed the required ODOT operating limit. The 2°d Street/"A"Avenue intersection degrade from LOS A to LOS B. All other intersections will continue to operate at the same Level of Service during peak hours. Table 7 summarizes the level of service calculations. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 21 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 0162 Table 7: Intersection Conditions-Total Plus Block 137 • Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection Average Delay Per Overall Intersection Volume to Capacity Vehicle(seconds) Level of Service Ratio State StreetP'A"Avenue 47.3 E >1.0 • State Streett'B"Avenue 20.6 C 0.75 State Street/Foothills Road 7.2 B 0.61 1"Street/"A"Avenue >60.0 F >1.0• 2"d StreetP'A"Avenue 11.5 B 0.99 3`d Streev"A"Avenue 3,0 A 0.57 1d'StreetP'_A"Avenue 7.4 B 0.68 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections Most Delayed Minor Level ofService Volume-to-Capacity Street Approach (Major/Minor Ratio (seconds) Approach) • 3`d Street/Evergreen Road 3.6 A/A — 6's Street/Evergreen(All-Way STOP) 1.4 A 0.12 10th Street/Evergreen Road 3.3 A/A — * The high v/c ratio indicates the existing signal is inadequate with the higher volumes of left-turning traffic onto 1"Street.The traffic signal should be modified to provide a protected left-turn arrow at this location. Mitigation The Total Conditions were mitigated to identify roadway improvements that are required due • to proposed project traffic from Blocks 136 and 138. Project mitigation measures include the following improvements. • Modify the signal at 152 Street and"A"Avenue to provide protected left-turn phasing for the eastbound and westbound approaches. This type of configuration will provide more capacity for left-turning traffic from"A"Avenue onto 1st Street. The Total Plus Block 137 Conditions were mitigated further to determine impacts resulting from the increment of new traffic from Block 137.No additional mitigation measures are required with the additional Block 137 traffic. The resulting intersection performance for the Mitigated Total Plus Block 137 Conditions is summarized in Table 8. The State Street/"A"Avenue intersection will continue to exceed the required ODOT operating limit. This intersection can not be fully mitigated to meet performance standards. Improvements to this intersection are limited by the available right-of way. 4111 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 22 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 0 3 Table 8: Intersection Conditions - Mitigated Total Plus Block 137 Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection Average Delay Per Overall Intersection Volume to Capacity Vehicle(seconds) Level of Service Ratio State Street/"A"Avenue 47.3 E >1.0 State Street/"B"Avenue 20.6 C 0.75 State Street/Foothills Road 7.2 B 0.61 in StreetP'A"Avenue 16.5 C 0.77 2"d Street/"A"Avenue 17.3 C 0.89 Streev"A"Avenue 3.0 A 0.57 4th Streev"A"Avenue 7.4 B 9.86 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections Most Delayed Minor Level of Service Volume-to-Capacity Street Approach (Major/Minor Ratio (seconds) Approach) 3rd Street/Evergreen Road 3.6 A/A — 6t Street/Evergreen(All-Way STOP) 1.4 A 0.12 10th Street/Evergreen Road 3.3 A/A — 2017 Traffic Forecasts Long-range traffic forecasts were made for 2017 to test the performance of study intersections as required by city guidelines. The forecasts were made by applying annual growth factors to existing volumes.These growth rates are based on a comparison of 1996 and 2015 forecasts made during the city's Transportation System Plan update. A growth rate of 1.1-percent annually was applied to intersections along State Street that resulted in a 23 • percent growth factor over 18 years. A growth rate of 2.1-percent was applied to the remaining study intersections that resulted in a 46 percent growth factor over 18 years. The growth factors were applied to all traffic movements at the study intersections. This net change forecasted between 1999 to 2017 was added to existing traffic volumes to represent adjusted 2017 traffic volume conditions. No growth rate was applied to Evergreen Road.The 2015 forecasts in the Transportation System Plan did not identify a specific forecast for this roadway,and, except for the three blocks discussed in this study,development is essentially complete along this roadway.No additional background traffic growth beyond the volume forecasted in the short-term analysis is expected. Therefore,the Evergreen Road intersections would operate in the long-term (2017)scenario essentially the same as they were forecasted to operate in the short-term. Two long-range traffic volume scenarios were evaluated: • Future Baseline-The first was the 2017 base case conditions with no added traffic from re-development on Blocks 136 through 138. These traffic volumes are shown in Figure 6. • Future Baseline Plus Re-Development-The second was the 2017 base plus the added traffic from re-development on Blocks 136, 137 and 138. These traffic volumes are shown in Figure 7. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 23 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 01E) 4 DKS Associates Et TONor ii; � j,.: 1. ,l,' f40 I N�o t121 , ��N�t29 Qo It32 ^°,eit35 �1 r j091 ,1`�+j"3459 �1 ��i"ai' - 411 r265 1 v398.,t*1/,.9.‘r .! 152d„).4 714..�'4, f - r 51.,tk { _ y yr f� 432y _ -I 1J02 1 fo 28 4,i ^')N4 s4IIN5-N \ 34 1J •- `y / \ 25 + N L`+T ,! 1 y . h • o CO r_________,J,,,, e ,._. . 1*11 : c y !.., : 416.E It ,, 1921, ^,, a 0 •1I.Ia.. y 4: RGREEN '' o k.i Block 137 oJeor. ¢p v Ra ::_::JkR.?JR: : • 0444411.,` f • ]Zo;-� r • g z a¢ � V � P• I. (1. N 19 1....•.. o.MN t10 N� t2 1� Xiii7 411 .r2 *11 4-1 ' - 84 133rir� • 25� r — v\\,„.,..,_ :211.! \.... 1\0::1 °R11` 9,3, Nr.r... .: i I ,.,.,,,... krz_.,,,,,) LEGEND Figure 6 0 - Study Intersection YEAR 2017 BASE PM PEAK HOUR 111 New Roadway TRAFFIC VOLUMES r1k) J DKS Associates t 1. NOT TO SCALE I rI voo 121 i�� t29 (::# JJL r ‘olL5 .4J 1231 .4 i N7245 1090 ��98 5 C46 ! t 126 785 d. � � �T 1601 'hf ` ;73 +y� �f ` 1. ? �� ` 16 � I 57 j °�N •o281, ' cN 501,ih. a /I 1. 97 '' / > ' ' •• ., . y h • sex p • • X.. N • cov h ~ 101 ^ '• .l 192 i ^h • 11' • AV • as y • alb k 3 f. Block 137 X P2 .. RD .Block 138: VI 135 2'} y t ¢z {r '• • • ss:N N� t 39 (7."----:J1C/c%1L1:1"...:.\\69 fJ ^� �62 7c; t 34 l� 3 84 1 1 t� 10.�'' '� v t& 4)7y... IQ ; on,� 491, r• o en M ....; LEGEND Figure 7 0 - Study Intersection YEAR 2017 PLUS BLOCK 136, 137 and 138 New Roadway PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES • -. 1 .. ti 0 2017 Planned Roadway Improvements 4111/ Future transportation improvements that are programmed by the City of Lake Oswego per the latest Transportation System Plan'' were incorporated into the 2017 capacity analysis at the study intersections. The only improvement located within the study area included the addition of a southbound right turn lane at the State Street/"B"Avenue intersection. This improvement was assumed in place for all of the 2017 intersection analyses. Long-Range Intersection Performance Future Baseiine Conditions The baseline intersection conditions summarized in Table 9 below represent future year conditions without the proposed re-development project.All of the study intersections operate at or above the minimum performance level (LOS E where traffic signal controls are installed)with one exception: State Street at"A"Avenue. Conditions at State Street/"A" Avenue degrade from today's LOS D to LOS F. In addition,the intersection at 4t Street and"A"Avenue degrades from LOS B to LOS E conditions. The critical element at that location is the westbound approach lane that allows for through traffic shared with a left-turn movement.The center median on"A"Avenue does not provide for a separate left-turn pocket.The forecasted volume levels on"A"Avenue will be high enough that during peak hours there will be significant delays for westbound traffic if the left-turn lane is not provided.All other intersections operate adequately. Table 9: intersection Conditions - 2017 Base (PM Peak Hour) • Study Intersection Average Delay Per Level of Service Volume to Capacity Vehicle(seconds) Ratio State Street!"A"Avenue >60.0 F >1.0 State Streetl"B"Avenue 22.8 C 0.77 State Street/Foothills Road 8.6 B 0.63 1"Street/"A"Avenue 10.7 B 0.71 tad Street/"A"Avenue 8.7 B 0.94 3rd Streetl"A"Avenue 4.3 A 0.76 4d'Streett'A"Avenue 50.7 E >1.0 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections Most Delayed Minor Level of Service Volume-to-Capacity Street Approach (Major/Minor Ratio (seconds) Approach) 3rd Street/Evergreen Road 3.5 A/A -- 66 Street/Evergreen Road (All-Way STOP) 1.4 A 0.11 10d'Street/Evergreen Road 3.9 A/A — The long-term forecasted volumes significantly exceed the current intersection capacity at State Street and"A"Avenue.Additional roadway capacity could be provided for the major • "Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan,City of Lake Oswego,July 1997. Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 26 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 i 4 , 11 JL E, I • turning movements to reduce overall delays,but this would require substantial road widening and property acquisition. The most significant turning movement is the northbound left-turn that is forecast to reach nearly 700 vehicles an hour. This volume cannot be adequately served with the present configuration of a single left-turn lane and a shared through and left- turn lane. Two full-time dedicated lanes would be required.A further complication for this movement is its proximity to the railroad crossing.An alternative approach would be to tolerate a higher level of congestion at this location, and emphasize measures to reduce travel demands during the peak hour.This is consistent with the overall approach taken in the City's Transportation System Plan that balanced system capacity improvements with travel demand reducing programs including alternative modes,reduce parking ratios, and other measures. Another potential solution would be to emphasize circulation via"B" Avenue to supplement the capacity of"A" Avenue for local destinations. For example, northbound traffic on State Street could be directed to continue past"A"Avenue, then make a left-turn at"B"Avenue. The city's' Transportation System Plan identifies the long-term need to widen State Street at "B"Avenue to provide for a separate southbound right-turn lane. Other improvements may be necessary at intersections on"B"Avenue at 2"d or 3`d Street to increase the traffic control capacity for traffic bound for"A"Avenue.These circulation and capacity issues could be considered along with the most recent proposal to locate the new city library at"B"Avenue and 2"Street. In addition to capacity expansion,the city already has policies in place that seeks to reduce travel demands during the busiest hours of the day. These policies include minimum and maximum parking ratios,provision for alternative travel modes,and pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. 2017 Plus Re-Development on Blocks 136 and 138 Traffic Conditions • In 2017,the project-added traffic will degrade the"A"Avenue intersection at 151 Street to LOS D conditions,at 2"Street to LOS E conditions and at 3"Street to LOS B conditions. The level of operations at these intersections is within the minimum performance standards for an arterial facility, and no impacts are noted.All other intersections operate at the same Level of Service as they would without the re-development project traffic(see Table 10). • I Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 27 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 �`iILi ) Table 10: Intersection Conditions—2017 Plus Blocks 136 & 138 • Study Intersection Average Delay Per Level of Service Volume to Capacity Vehicle(seconds) Ratio State Street/"A"Avenue >60.0 F >1.0 State Street/"B"Avenue 23.3 C 0.81 State Street/Foothills Road 8.5 B 0.67 1"Street/'A"Avenue 39.5 D >1.0 _na Street/"A"Avenue 20.7 � 0.92 StreetP'A"Avenue '.0 3 0.38 4th Street/"A"Avenue 47.0 E >1.0 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections Most Delayed Minor Level of Service Volume-to-Capacity Street Approach (Major/Minor Ratio (seconds) Approach) 3`1 Street/Evergreen Road 3.5 A/A -- 6th Street/Evergreen Road (All-Way STOP) 1.4 A 0.11 10th Street/Evergreen Road 3.9 A/A -- "A/A" The level of service for left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street at unsignalized intersections. A supplemental long-term 2017 analysis was made for the incremental impact of Block 137 in 2017 in addition to the above volume analysis. The findings show the 15` Street and"A" 4111 Avenue intersection will operate at LOS F and exceed capacity without modifications to the existing traffic signal. The mitigation recommended with the proposed project will adequately development on all three blocks. Signal Warrant Analysis The traffic volume warrants for traffic signal controls were evaluated for study intersections that are currently controlled by STOP signs on the minor street approaches. The warrant evaluation considered only the peak hour traffic volumes which serves as a preliminary indicator for justifying traffic signal installation(see charts in the appendix). The only locations included in this study that are not planned for traffic signal controls are along Evergreen Road. The traffic volumes on Evergreen Road will not reach levels sufficient to justify installing traffic signal warrants. Site Access and Circulation This section discusses the access needs for motor vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles within the bounds of the proposed re-development site. Site Access A preliminary site plan for the proposed re-development indicates Block 136 has four vehicle access points,two onto 2'd Street and two onto 3`d Street and Block 138 has two vehicle access points onto 151 Street.No direct vehicle access onto"A"Avenue is proposed for either block. Site circulation plans also include extending Evergreen Road between 1'Street and 2°d • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 28 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 01I19 Street. These multiple access points and circulation schemes generally are suitable for the level of activity forecasted for these two blocks. • Emergency Vehicle Access Emergency vehicle access to the project site will be provided via multiple driveways onto 1'` and 3'd Street from Blocks 136 and 138.These routes are acceptable for emergency vehicle access to the project area. Turn Lane Needs Left-turn movements will be allowed on"A"Avenue at all approaches to study intersections. Separate left-turn lanes are provided at all locations with the following exception. The raised center median on"A"Avenue between 2"and 3m Street and 3`d Street and 4`h Street precludes a separate left-turn lane for the eastbound 2°d and 31° Street approaches and the westbound 3`d and 4th Street approaches. A review was made of the forecasted turn lane volumes and intersection conditions on"A"Avenue to determine the required length of the turn pockets to adequately store queued vehicles.It should be noted that the distance on"A" Avenue for vehicle storage between successive blocks is approximately 250 feet. The findings are summarized in Table 11. The most important findings are that the Ieft-turn vehicle queues approaching to ls` Street will extend outside the existing left-turn pocket periodically during the peak hour. Ultimately,this block will need to be re-striped to allow for adequate vehicle storage of left-turning traffic in the eastbound direction approaching State Street and in the westbound direction approaching P`Street. Adding vehicle storage will likely require on-street parking removal along the north side of this block.These improvements will not be required in the short-term with the development of Blocks 136, 137 or 138,but will be required ultimately as volumes on"A"Avenue approach forecasted 2017 levels. 411 Also,the westbound approach at 4th Street should have a left-turn pocket or the movement should be prohibited during peak hours.To provide a turn pocket would require modification to the landscaped center median in front of city hall. Table 11: Left-Turn Lane Vehicle Storage Requirements (2017 Plus All Blocks) Intersection Eastbound Approach Westbound Approach State Street >250 -- 1 Street <100 225 2°d Street — <100 3`d Street — -- 4t Street <100 -- Note: Existing left-turn pockets on"A"Avenue are generally 90 feet for vehicle storage.This is the minimum storage length recommended for"A"Avenue approaches.The exception is the eastbound approach to State Street extends 250,nearly the length of the entire block. The center raised median on"A"Avenue from 2nd to 4th Street precludes left-turn pockets on those approaches. In addition, a review was made of the forecasted side street left-turn volumes approaching "A"Avenue to determine the number of approach lanes and the length of the left-turn pockets required on each approach. The warrant for a left-turn pocket is based on the expected traffic signal operations. The review found the following: • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 29 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 C� � '7 0 • No separate left turn pockets are required on 3rd Street or 2°d Street approaches to"A" Avenue. 1111 • A separate left-turn lane and a shared through-right turn lane should be provided on northbound l'Street approach to"A"Avenue adjacent to the proposed project. This two- lane approach is similar to the approach on the opposite of"A"Avenue. • Traffic volumes and left-turning maneuvers on Evergreen Road are too low to justify separate left-turn pockets on any approach. Pedestrian/Bicycle Pedestrian facilities within the study are generally acceptable. Sidewalks are present along all study roadways except for Evergreen Road. Sidewalks will be constructed along the site frontage on Evergreen Road as part of the re-development project. The preliminary site plan shows connecting walkways to adjoining public streets in compliance with Metro Title 6 requirements(maximum spacing of 330 feet for pedestrian walkways). Bike lanes are planned for State Street and"A"Avenue from 10th Street to 4th Street. The bike route then shifts north to B Street for connections to State Street according to the Bike Facilities Plan in the Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan.The"A"Avenue blocks along the project frontage will not be required to provide separate bike lanes on-street. These planned facilities will provide sufficient regional bicycle access to the project site. On all other local streets it is expected the cyclists will share the roadway with motor vehicle traffic which is allowable under lower auto volume and speed conditions. Vehicle Queueing on "A" Avenue Traffic on "A"Avenue approaching State Street during the evening peak hour routinely forms vehicle queues. As noted in the Existing Conditions section of this report,the length of the queue varies from one to 30 vehicles. The greatest queuing occurs for the right-turning traffic.Existing peak hour activity extends back to 1'Street on average, and beyond 2°d Street occasionally. However,the queues clear quickly, usually within one traffic signal cycle or 90 seconds.Future conditions(2017)are expected to have longer queues as volumes grow and delays at the State Street intersections increase. The forecasted vehicle queue12 for the right-turn movement is back to 2°d Street on average and to 3nd Street occasionally.These queues will restrict access onto eastbound"A"Avenue for short periods during the peak hours. Future(2017)vehicle queues on State Street approaching"A"Avenue will be severe during peak hour because the street capacity cannot adequately serve forecasted demand(as indicated by the LOS F at State Street/"A"Avenue.If solutions are not implemented either at the intersection or within the local circulation system to help alleviate the congestion,vehicle queues for the northbound left-turn movement theoretically extends over one-quarter mile back to the Albertson's signal at Leonard Street. The southbound right-turn movement will extend north to"B"Avenue. Alternative solutions and further study will be required to address this long-range system inadequacy. • 12 Based on the calculated 95%design queue with 25-feet required per vehicle. Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 30 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 -11 71 Evergreen Road Traffic Analysis - c Evergreen Road is a local street that parallels A„ •� Avenue one-block south of the downtown area. 'y Speed humps are located along the roadway for traffic calming between 10th and 9th Street,and / ,` between 6th and 7th Street to reduce overall travel "4 speeds. Evergreen Road is continuous from 10th to - - 2"d Street. The Millennium Plaza Park construction is connecting Evergreen Road from 2"d to lst Street. - l' A concern of adjoining residents along Evergreen r.,. Road is that the connection to 1st Street and the ' './.. project site will attract"cut-through"traffic that has - no origin or destination in these neighborhoods. This"cut-through"traffic may use this route as a convenient short-cut to the project site and to by- � r.1 pass congestion"A"Avenue near State Street. The foregoing analysis has shown that the added f _; !_ traffic volumes associated with the proposed re- development `rJ will be relatively minor to Evergreen Road,relative to the road's carrying capacity. Figure 8: Semi-Diverter Approximately two to seven percent of the project traffic is expected to use Evergreen Road for site access. During the peak hour,this could be as high as 29 additional vehicles on Evergreen Road(or as low as 8 vehicles).As noted in the previous analysis,this is the high end of the range estimated to be from two to seven percent of site traffic. The combined volume of 103 vehicles during an hour is consistent with the upper end that is suitable for local streets.The equivalent daily volume is roughly ten times the peak hour volume,or 1,030 vehicles.The city's Transportation System Plan identifies the desired upper limit of a local street such as Evergreen Road to be 1,000 vehicles daily. On a capacity basis,this volume appears to be near the limits for a local street. However,the magnitude of the change may be perceived by residents as a substantial impact compared to their current experience.When compared to the low existing volumes,this amount of additional traffic may seem very substantial on a percentage basis,an increase of 39 percent(current two-way volume of 74 vehicle at 6t°Street).As a condition of approval, the city should implement the Evergreen Road Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan. A copy of the Plan is included in the appendix. In general,we recommend the installation of a semi-diverter(see Figure 8)on the west leg of Evergreen Road at 4th Street per the Evergreen Road Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan. Further traffic monitoring on Evergreen Road during and after the construction of the proposed project is also recommended.This will allow the city to monitor traffic volume and speed changes and to validate the plan is still appropriate for meeting the overall calming objectives without unduly infringing on the travel freedoms of current residents. I Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 31 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 r.< r� DKS Associates O Chapter 4: Conclusions The transportation impacts associated with the re-development of downtown Blocks 136 and 138 Lake Oswego have been investigated in this report. The findings and recommendations are summarized in the following sections. Mitigation Measures To maintain adequate traffic service in the study area during the p.m. peak hour,mitigation measures and required improvements are recommended in conjunction with the proposed re- development project. The recommended street improvements and related information are summarized on Figure 9 following this section. Existing Traffic Plus Blocks 136 and 138 Re-Development All of the study intersections will perform within the city's minimum operating standards (LOS E)with the project-added traffic.An exception is the 1'`Street/"A"Avenue intersection • which will operate at LOS F. The signal modification described below improves the intersection within the city's minimum operating standards.Another off-site mitigation measure is recommended to improve circulation and access to the project blocks as noted below, but is not required to provide adequate system capacity. The new traffic signal at"A" Avenuet2"'Street should be completed prior to build-out of Block 137 proposed expansion, but is not required in conjuction with Blocks 136 or 138 development. • Modify eastbound and westbound left turn signals to operate with protected signal control at 1"Street and"A"Avenue. • Construct traffic signal interconnection and coordinate all traffic signals along"A" Avenue between State Street and 4th Street to facilitate traffic progression. • Install a semi-diverter on the west leg of Evergreen Road at 4th Street to restrict eastbound traffic. The evaluation of traffic calming measures along Evergreen Road is summarized in the Evergreen Road Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan which is included in the appendix. Short-Term Impacts from Block 137 The added traffic from the re-development on Block 137 will not significantly impact local intersections beyond the level identified in the previous section.No further improvements are recommended. Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 32 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 '73 Long-Term Issues The 2017 conditions forecasted in this report show that the intersection of"A"Avenue and at State Street would degrade to LOS F with or without the proposed re-development.Possible capacity improvements listed below reduce delays at this intersection during peak hours. However, even with these major improvements the intersection of"A"Avenue and State Street would not reach the city's preferred minimum of LOS E during peak hours. In addition,street widening and property acquisition would be required and may not be desirable at this major junction in the downtown core.The possible long-term improvements include: ■ Add a southbound right turn lane at State Street and"A"Avenue. This will require road widening and possible building relocation on the northwest corner of the intersection. ■ Construct second northbound left turn lane at State Street and "A"Avenue. The existing shared left-thru lane northbound will not suffice in the long-term. Road widening will be required to allow for a dedicated second left-turn lane while retaining two northbound thru lanes. Other alternatives should be considered to obviate the need for major widening or right-of- way acquisition at State Street and"A"Avenue.This could include: • Enhancing the capacity of alternative routes via"B"Avenue for local destinations,and • Implementing transportation demand measures to reduce travel activity during the highest hours. In addition to the State Street intersection, other traffic circulation and operational issues to be addressed in the long-term design for"A"Avenue include: • Extend the left-turn lane storage for westbound traffic on"A"Avenue approaching 1' 4111 Street. This added storage might require on-street parking removal along the north side of "A"Avenue. • Consider modifying the center median on"A"Avenue between 3`d and 4th Streets to allow for a left-turn pocket at 4th Street.The shared left-turn and through movement cannot be satisfactorily served as volumes increase on"A"Avenue. An alternative approach is to restrict left-turns during peak periods such that NO LEFT TURNS are allowed between the hours of 3: 00 p.m.to 6:00 p.m. Evergreen Road The Evergreen Road Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan evaluated the need for alternative neighborhood traffic calming measures in response to the proposed project. Approximately two to seven percent of the project traffic is expected to use Evergreen Road for site access. This could be as high as 29 additional vehicles(or as low as 8 vehicles)on Evergreen Road during the evening peak hour. The plan recommends the installation of a semi-diverter on the west leg of Evergreen Road at 4th Street to restrict eastbound traffic. Further traffic monitoring on Evergreen Road during and after the construction of the proposed project was also recommended to determine the effectiveness of the semi-diverter and a need for additional traffic calming measures. Refer to the Evergreen Road Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan in the appendix for further details. • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis Page 33 DKS Associates March 31, 2000 r, '7 4 DKS Associates TO0 l(t OT N SCALE LE k. co c- I w 1i h 8 �v ? co 1 z ;, • co co 1 11 t AAV , V zAi , . , 1- r- STOP 4-way) FEERGREEN Till111.1.1.:1: 3 R.E.4 Block 137 Z: �P • RD Z) t k. Ci R P & w ' co Lakewood :/ 0' Bay i LEGEND Figure 9 • - Existing Traffic Signal RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS ® - New Traffic Signal - Stop Sign Controlled III M - Raised Median Q - Existing Lane r - New Lane _ ( J DKS Associates Appendices • Level of Service Descriptions • Level of Service Calculation Worksheets • Traffic Counts and Queue Survey • Traffic Generation • Project Site Plans • Evergreen Road NTM Plan • Turn Movement LOS Table • • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates A f ') DKS Associates • Level of Service Descriptions • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates A. I 1 • TRAFFIC LEVELS OF SERVICE Analysis of traffic volumes is useful in understanding the general nature of traffic in an area, but by itself indicates neither the ability of the street network to carry additional traffic nor the quality of service afforded by the street facilities. For this, the concept of level of service has been developed to subjectively describe traffic performance. Level of service can be measured at intersections and along key roadway segments. Level of service categories are similar to report card ratings for traffic performance. Intersections are typically the controlling bottlenecks of traffic flow and the ability of a roadway system to carry traffic efficiently is generally diminished in their vicinities. Levels of Service A, B and C indicate conditions where traffic moves without significant delays over periods of peak travel demand. Level of service D and E are progressively worse peak hour operating conditions and F conditions represent where demand exceeds the capacity of an intersection. Most urban communities set level of service D as the minimum acceptable level of service for peak hour operation and plan for level of service C or better for all other times of the day. The Highway Capacity Manual provides level of service calculation methodology for both intersections and arterials.' The following three sections provide interpretations of the analysis approaches. • 1111 t 1994 Highway Capacity Manual,Special Report 209,Transportation Research Board,Washington D.C., 1994, Chapters 9, 10, 11. 0170 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS • Unsignalized intersections and all-way stop controlled intersections are each subject to a separate capacity analysis methodology. All-way stop controlled intersection operations are reported by leg of the intersection. This method was developed by Dr. Michael Kyte of the University of Idaho.' This method calculates a delay value for each approach to the intersection. The following table describes the amount of delay associated with each level of service. Delay (Seconds) Level of Service s5 A 6 - 10 B 11 -20 C 21 - 30 D 31 -45 E > 45 F S 2 Transportation Research Circular M373,Transportation Research Board. • s,; no • UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (Two-Way Stop Controlled) Unsignalized intersection level of service is reported for the major street and minor street (generally, left turn movements). The method assesses available and critical gaps in the traffic stream which make it possible for side street traffic to enter the main street flow. The 1994 Highway Capacity Manual describes the detailed methodology. It is not unusual for an intersection to experience level of service E or F conditions for the minor street left turn movement. It should be understood that, often, a poor level of service is experienced by only a few vehicles and the intersection as a whole operates acceptably. Unsignalized intersection levels of service are described in the following table. Level of Service Expected Delay (Sec/Veh) A Little or no delay < 5.0 B Short traffic delay 5.1-10.0 C Average traffic delays 10.1-20.0 D Long traffic delays 20.1-30.0 E Very long traffic delays 30.1-45.0 F Extreme delays potentially affecting > 45 other traffic movements in the intersection Source: Highway Capacity Manual,Special Report 209(Third Edition),Transportation Research Board Washington,D.C.,1994. • :; � S 1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS For signalized intersections, level of service is evaluated based upon average vehicle delay experienced • by vehicles entering an intersection. As delay increases, the level of service decreases. Calculations for signalized and unsignalized intersections are different due to the variation in traffic control. The 1994 Highway Capacity Manual provides the basis for these calculations. • Level of Delay Service (secs.) Description A <5.00 Free FlowfInsignificant Delays: No approach phase is fully utilized by traffic and no vehicle waits longer than one red indication. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. S 5.1-15.0 Stable Operation/Hfinhtnal Delays: An oerssional approach phase is fully utilized. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within platoons of vehicles. This level generally occurs with good progression,short cycle lengths,or both. C 15.1-25.0 Stable Operation/Acceptable Delays: Major approach phases fully utilized. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted. Higher delays may result from fair progression,longer cycle lengths,or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level,and the number of vehicles stopping is significant. D 25.1-40.0 Approaching Unstable/Tolerable Delays: The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indication. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression,long cycle lengths,or high v/c ratios. The proportion of vehicles not stopping declines,and individual cycle failures are noticeable. E 40.1-60.0 Unstable Operation/Significant Delays: Volumes at or near capacity. Vehicles may wait though several signal cycles. Long queues form upstream from intersection. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are a frequent occurrence. r >60.0 Forced Flow/Excessive Delays: Represents jammed conditions. Queues may block upstream • intersections. Tnis level occurs when arrival flow rates exceed intersection capacity, and is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. Poor progression,long cycle lengths,and v/c ratios approaching 1.0 may contribute to these high delay levels. Source:Highway Capacity Manual,Transportation Research Board,Special Report No.209(Thud Edition),Washington D.C.,1994. • • p 1 j„, • DKS Associates Level of Service Calculations Worksheets S 11110 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates 0183 _ _ i •, • 0184 110 • 10/11/199 :28 Filename: EX.OUT Page 1 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT • Page Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:09 Page 1-1 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 2-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Conditions Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analysis Report Scenario: Default Scenario Level Of Service Command: ex Intersection Base Future Change Volume: ex Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: ex LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee 11 1 3rd St/A Ave A 2.2 0.456 A 2.1 0.497 -0.019 D/V Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution 8 2 2nd St/A Ave E 1.7 0.000 E 2.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes 8 5 1st St/A Ave A 3.7 0.422 A 3.6 0.446 -0.126 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration # 6 State St/A Ave D 25.6 0.983 D 25.6 0.983 + 0.000 D/V # 10 State St/B Ave B 12.7 0.714 B 12.8 0.748 + 0.058 D/V # 11 State St/Foothills Rd B 5.2 0.536 B 5.1 0.569 -0.059 D/V # 15 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 1.7 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 A 1.5 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 24 4th St/A Ave B 8.5 0.513 B 8.4 0.535 -0.169 D/V # 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.3 0.085 A 1.3 0.085 + 0.000 V/C Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Cr CA I J 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT Page 3 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT Paae 4 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 3-1 1 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 4-1 1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment I Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Conditions I Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Uneignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection ttl 3rd St/A Ave Intersection 42 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 80 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.497 Average Delay (sec/veh) : 2.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: E Loss Time (sec) : 8 (Y.R e 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 2.1 Optimal Cycle: 31 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Sound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound I II II II I Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled I II II 11 I Rights: Include Include Include Include Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Rights: Include Include Include Include I II II II I Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:05-17:05 Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Base Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 II II II I Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:30-17:30 Initial Bse: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Base Vol: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 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 Fall/Summer: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 70 0 Initial Bee: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Initial Fut: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 1051 23 32 728 22 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fall/Summer: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 70 0 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 Initial Fut: 19 a 16 14 8 25 19 1181 23 23 795 20 PHF Volume: 7 1 19 14 4 32 83 1122 25 34 777 23 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Adj: 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Final Vol.: 7 1 19 14 4 32 83 1122 25 34 777 23 PHF Volume: 20 8 17 14 8 26 20 1220 24 24 821 21 Adjusted Volume Module: Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade: 0% 0% 04 0% Reduced Vol: 20 8 17 14 8 26 20 1220 24 24 821 21 % Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 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 % Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 20 8 17 14 8 26 21 1281 2S 24 862 22 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx I II I I II I Trck/Cmb PCE: YYYY xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Saturation Flow Module: Adj Vol.: 8 1 21 15 5 35 92 1122 25 38 777 23 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Critical Gap Module: Adjustment: 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.09 1.00 1.00 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xYYYY Lanes: 0.44 0.18 0.38 0.29 0.17 0.54 0.03 1.93 0.04 1.00 1.95 0.05 Critical Gp: 7.0 6.5 5.5 7.0 6.5 5.5 5.5 xxxx xxxxx 5.5 xxxx xxxxx Final Sat.: 689 276 586 442 252 820 51 3081 60 171 3705 95 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Cnflict Vol: 2030 2052 573 2028 2052 400 800 xxxx xxxxx 1146 XXXx •xxxx Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.14 0.23 0.23 Potent Cap. : 53 69 709 53 69 868 637 xxxx xxxxx 416 xxxx xxxxx Crit Moves: **** ••** Adj Cap: 0.74 0.78 1.00 0.79 0.78 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx rxxxx Green/Cycle: 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 Move Cap.: 40 54 709 42 54 868 637 xxxx YYYYX 416 YYYx XXXXx Volume/Cap: 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.17 0.2B 0.28 I 11 II II I Delay/Veh: 25.6 25.6 25.6 26.6 26.6 26.6 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.9 0.9 0.9 Level Of Service Module: 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 Stopped De1:111.5 68.6 5.2 125.1 73.1 4.3 6.5 xxxx xxxxx 9.4 xxxx YYYYY AdjDel/Veh: 25.6 25.6 25.6 26.6 26.6 26.6 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.9 0.9 0.9 LOS by Move: • • * * * • B * • S • • DeeignQueue: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 10 0 0 7 0 Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx 118 xxxxx xxxx 113 xxxxx xxxx YYYx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 36.3 xxxxx xxxxx 43.6 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xrrxx xxxx xYYYx Shared LOS: * E * * E * • * * • • ApproachDel: 36.3 43.6 0.5 0.4 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR F...a 11111 01111 ID 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT Paae 5 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT Page 6 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 5-1 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Conditions Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 05 let St/A Ave Intersection $16 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 75 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.446 Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.983 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y*R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 3.6 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (YrR . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 25.6 Optimal Cycle: 29 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 154 Level Of Service: D Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 1 1 0 Lanes: 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 « 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Sep 1999 « 16:55-17:55 Base Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Bane Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 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 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 Bee: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Initial Bee: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fall/Summer: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 70 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1140 17 18 683 24 Initial Fut: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 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 User Adj: 1.0D 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Adj: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 PHF Volume: 18 9 36 58 14 58 39 1265 19 20 758 27 PHF Volume: 605 661 0 0 1284 156 355 0 1065 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 18 9 36 58 14 58 39 1265 19 20 758 27 Reduced Vol: 605 661 0 0 1284 156 355 0 1065 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.0S 1.00 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 18 9 36 58 14 58 39 1329 20 20 796 28 Final Vol. : 665 727 0 0 1349 164 355 0 1204 0 0 0 I II II II I I II II II Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.81 0.81 0.85 0.87 0.87 0.85 0.23 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.67 0.33 1.00 0.81 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.97 0.03 1.00 1.93 0.07 Lanes: 1.43 1.57 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1026 513 1615 1332 321 1615 437 3744 56 171 3671 129 Final Sat.: 2669 2917 0 0 3320 404 1805 0 3230 0 0 0 11 II 11 1 1 11 11 11 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.36 0.35 0.12 0.22 0.22 Vol/Sat: 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.20 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Green/Cycle: 0.25 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.20 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.0D 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.18 0.18 0.23 0.45 0.45 0.37 0.11 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.27 0.27 Volume/Cap: 0.98 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.9B 0.98 0.98 0.00 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 23.7 23.7 23.9 25.6 25.6 24.7 1.3 1.9 1.9 1.4 1.5 1.5 Delay/Veh: 36.6 4.3 0.0 0.0 31.2 31.2 55.4 0.0 16.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 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: 23.7 23.7 23.9 25.6 25.6 24.7 1.3 1.9 1.9 1.4 1.5 1.5 AdjDel/Veh: 36.6 4.3 0.0 0.0 31.2 31.2 55.4 0.0 16.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 1 0 1 2 1 2 0 12 0 0 7 0 DesignQueue: 27 13 0 0 44 5 15 0 36 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CI': 00 L_ J 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT Page 7 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT Page 8 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 7-1 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 8-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Conditions Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #10 State St/B Ave Intersection #11 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.748 Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.569 Lose Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R • 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.8 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 5.1 Optimal Cycle: 65 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 45 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 II II II 1 1 II II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-17:00 Base Vol: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 108 901 0 0 1192 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 1077 58 115 1568 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 112 936 0 0 1238 152 351 0 162 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1129 61 121 1644 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 112 936 0 0 1238 152 351 0 162 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1129 61 121 1644 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 112 982 0 0 1300 159 351 0 162 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 1185 64 121 1726 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3318 406 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat. : 0 3569 193 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.19 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.07 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.61 0.00 0.00 0,52 0.52 0.26 0.00 0.26 0,00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.13 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Volume/Cap: 0.75 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.00 0.26 Delay/Veh: 38.3 6.1 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 24.3 0.0 18.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 5.1 5.1 24.8 2.4 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.6 0.0 25.9 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 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: 38.3 6.1 0.0 0.0 12.D 12.0 24.3 0.0 18.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 5.1 5.1 24.8 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.6 0.0 25.9 Designoueue: 5 21 0 0 34 4 14 0 6 0 0 0 DeeignQueue: 0 22 1 5 20 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR p.. .. • 11111 i 1110 10/11/199�:28 Filename: EX.OUT Page 9 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT Page 10 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 9-1 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28,10 Page 10-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Conditions Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Flour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #15 10th St/Evergreen Rd Intersection #21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd Average Delay lees/veh) : 1.7 Worst Cafe Level Of Service: A Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.5 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - ' R L - T - R L - T R 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Base Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Initial Bse: 3 5 4 4 B 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 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 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Initial Fut: 3 5 4 4 B 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Volume: 0 15 7 9 27 0 0 0 0 24 0 18 PHF Volume: 3 6 4 4 9 16 6 19 7 12 31 9 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 0 15 7 9 27 0 0 0 0 24 0 18 Final Vol.: 3 6 4 4 9 16 6 19 7 12 31 9 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 0% 04 01 04 Grade: 04 0% 0% 04 ♦ Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx I Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ♦ Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ♦ Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx XXXX xxxx XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx YYYY xxxx Adj Vol.: 0 15 7 10 27 0 0 0 0 27 0 19 Adj Vol.: 4 6 5 5 10 17 6 19 7 13 31 9 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:YxxxY xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Gp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xXrxx 22 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 55 xxxx 18 Cnflict Vol: 88 80 22 81 79 36 40 xxxx *xxxx 26 xxxx XxxxX Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1674 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 984 xxxx 1355 Potent Cap.: 942 990 1349 951 992 1328 1641 xxxx xxxxx 1667 xxxx xxxxx Adj Cap: xxxx MY XXXXX 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 7YYYY 0.99 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.97 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1674 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 978 xxxx 1355 Move Cap.: 914 978 1349 934 980 1328 1641 xxxx xxxxx 1667 xxxx xxxxx 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.9 xxxx 2.7 Stopped Del: 4.0 3.7 2.7 3.9 3.7 2.7 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * • * * * * * * LOS by Move: * * * * A A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT 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 1107 xxxxx Shared Cap. : xxxx 1057 xxxxx xxxx 1131 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx YYxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:XXYYX 3.4 xxxxx xxxxx 3.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx VYMYX xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * A Shared LOs: * A * A * * ApproachDel: 0.0 0.6 0.0 3.3 ApproachDel: 3.4 3.2 0.4 0.5 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR C" Ma CZ 1 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename- EX.OUT Paae 11 10/11/1999 14:28 Filename: EX.OUT Page 12 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 11-1 Default Scenario Mon Oct 11, 1999 15:28:10 Page 12-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Conditions Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection )$24 4th St/A Ave Intersection )!33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.535 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.085 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 8.4 Loss Time (sec) : 0 (Y+R = 4 eec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.3 Optimal Cycle: 34 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 I1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 I I I I I I I I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 <! 16:45-17:45 Base Vol: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Base Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Initial Bee: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 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 Fall/Summer: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 70 0 Initial Fut: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Initial Fut: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1076 19 1 769 83 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 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 18 6 9 27 7 1 10 8 17 33 8 PHF Volume: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1112 20 1 794 86 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 10 8 17 33 8 Reduced Vol: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1112 20 1 794 86 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 10 8 17 33 8 Final Vol.: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1167 21 1 834 90 I II II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 432 432 432 551 551 551 473 473 473 679 679 679 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.15 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 0.00 0.75 0.25 0.21 0.63 0.16 0.05 0.53 0.42 0.29 0.57 0.14 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.96 0.04 0.01 1.80 0.19 Final Sat. : 0 324 108 115 346 90 25 249 199 199 386 94 Final Sat. : 492 397 435 653 120 584 285 3733 67 4 3256 351 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.09 0.09 Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.27 0.31 0.31 0.26 0.26 0.26 Crit Moves: *"sr+ +++ ++++ Crit Moves: •••• .... ApproachV/S: 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.09 Green/Cycle: 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.4 Volume/Cap: 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.46 0.53 0.53 0.44 0.44 0.44 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 13.9 13.9 13.9 17.0 17.0 17.0 8.2 7.5 7.5 6.8 6.8 6.8 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.4 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 LOS by Move: * A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 13.9 13.9 13.9 17.0 17.0 17.0 8.2 7.5 7.5 6.8 6.8 6.8 ApproachDel: 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.4 DesignQueue: 1 1 1 4 1 4 2 26 0 0 19 2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.4 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Aseoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Aseoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR l I a a • ill III/1 03/29/2000 15,22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Page 1 03/29/2000 15,22 Filename, EXAPP.OUT Page 2 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15,04:25 Page 1-1 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 2-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Plus Approved Projects Existing Plus Approved Projects PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analysis Report Scenario: ex+app Level Of Service Command: ex+app Intersection Base Future Change Volume: ex+app Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: ex+app LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee # 1 3rd St/A Ave A 2.3 0.455 A 2.3 0.507 -0.017 D/V Trip Generation: pm Trip Distribution: pm # 2 2nd St/A Ave A 2.2 0.517 A 3.0 0.635 • 0.787 D/V Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes # 5 lot St/A Ave B 5.7 0.468 B 5.6 0.495 -0.163 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration # 6 State St/A Ave D 31.7 0.932 D 32.4 0.940 + 0.612 D/V # 10 State St/B Ave C 20.1 0.677 C 20.4 0.722 + 0,284 D/V # 11 State St/Foothills Rd B 7.7 0.508 B 7.4 0.547 -0.268 D/V # 15 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 1.7 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 A 1.5 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 24 4th St/A Ave B 8.5 0.513 B 8.3 0.537 -0.185 D/V # 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.3 0.085 A 1.3 0.085 + 0.000 V/C Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR a- = H— 03/29/2000 15:22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Pace 3 03/29/2000 15:22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Page 4 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 3-1 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 4-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Plus Approved Projects Existing Plus Approved Projects PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 3rd St/A Ave Intersection #2 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.507 Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.635 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R e 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 2.3 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 3.0 Optimal Cycle: 32 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 41 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T R L T R I II II 11 1 I 11 II II 1 Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I 11 11 II I 1 II 11 11 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 <c 16:30-17:30 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 << 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Base Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Initial Bee: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 0 0 84 0 PaseerByVol: 0 0 0 9 0 12 13 72 0 0 72 7 Initial Fut: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1196 23 23 809 20 Initial Fut: 7 1 18 22 4 42 91 1053 23 32 730 29 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 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 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: 20 8 17 14 8 26 20 1236 24 24 836 21 PHF Volume: 7 1 19 23 4 45 97 1124 25 34 779 31 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 20 8 17 14 8 26 20 1236 24 24 836 21 Reduced Vol: 7 1 19 23 4 45 97 1124 25 34 779 31 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 20 8 17 14 8 26 21 1297 25 25 878 22 Final Vol.: 7 1 19 23 4 45 102 1180 26 34 819 32 II 11 II I I II 11 11 1 Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.91 0.92 0.82 0.82 0.73 0.73 0.73 Adjustment: 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.09 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.44 0.18 0.38 0.29 0.17 0.54 0.03 1.93 0.04 0.05 1.90 0.05 Lanes: 0.26 0.04 0.70 0.32 0.06 0.62 0.16 1.80 0.04 1.00 1.92 0.08 Final Sat.: 682 273 580 446 255 829 49 3009 58 75 2633 66 Final Sat.: 379 54 1029 467 81 914 193 2228 49 171 3620 142 11 I I 11 1 I I I 11 11 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.33 0.33 0.33 Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.20 0.23 0.23 Crit Moves: +ttrt ++« Crit Moves: te*• •**+ Green/Cycle: 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 Volume/Cap: 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.39 0.39 0.39 Volume/Cap: 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.24 0.27 0.27 Delay/Veh: 29.1 29.1 29.1 30.0 30.0 30.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 Delay/Veh: 25.4 25.4 25.4 33.5 33.5 33.5 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 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 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: 29.1 29.1 29.1 30.0 30.0 30.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 AdjDel/Veh: 25.4 25.4 25.4 33.5 33.5 33.5 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 DesignQueue: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 11 0 0 7 0 DesignQueue: 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 11 0 0 7 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR t % . 1111 111/1 • III/ 111/1 01/29/2000 15:22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Pace 5 03/29/2000 15:22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Pace 6 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 5-1 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Plus Approved Projects Existing Plus Approved Projects PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 let St/A Ave Intersection #6 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.495 Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.940 Lose Time (sec): 8 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 5.6 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sac/veh): 32.4 Optimal Cycle: 31 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 162 Level Of Service: D Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II II II I I II II II Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lanes: 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 I II II II I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 « 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Sep 1999 « 16:55-17:55 Base Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Base Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 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 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 Bee: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Initial Bee: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 79 2 4 77 0 PasserByVol: 10 7 0 0 10 1 1 0 12 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 18 8 36 52 13 52 35 1149 19 22 690 24 Initial Fut: 567 616 0 0 1193 145 328 0 993 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 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: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Adj: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 PHF Volume: 20 9 40 5B 14 58 39 1275 21 24 766 27 PHF Volume: 616 669 0 0 1295 157 356 0 1078 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 20 9 40 58 14 58 39 1275 21 24 766 27 Reduced Vol: 616 669 0 0 1295 157 356 0 1078 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 20 9 40 58 14 58 39 1339 22 24 804 28 Final Vol.: 677 736 0 0 1360 165 356 0 1218 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I II II II Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.21 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.29 0.13 0.58 0.45 0.11 0.44 1.00 1.97 0.03 1.00 1,93 0.07 Lanes: 1.44 1.56 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 406 183 813 627 151 627 399 3739 61 152 3672 128 Final Sat.: 2676 2910 0 0 3321 403 1805 0 3230 0 0 0 I II II II I I I I I I I I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.36 0.36 0,16 0.22 0.22 Vol/Sat: 0.25 0.25 0.00 0,00 0.41 0.41 0.20 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: ***+ +*+* Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 Green/Cycle: 0.27 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.21 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.14 0.49 0.49 0,22 0,30 0.30 Volume/Cap: 0.94 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 23.9 23.9 23.9 26.1 26.1 26.1 2.9 4.2 4.2 3.3 3.4 3.4 Delay/Veh: 46.7 6.2 0.0 0.0 36.9 36.9 64.1 0.0 25.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 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: 23.9 23.9 23.9 26.1 26.1 26.1 2.9 4.2 4.2 3.3 3.4 3.4 AdjDel/Veh: 46.7 6.2 0.0 0.0 36.9 36.9 64.1 0.0 25.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 1 0 2 2 1 2 1 20 0 0 12 0 DeeignQueue: 41 18 0 0 67 8 23 0 54 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 4 CO C.4) l 03/29/2000 15:22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Pave 7 03/29/2000 15:22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Page e ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 7-1 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 8-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Plus Approved Projects Existing Plus Approved Projects PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #10 State St/B Ave Intersection #11 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.722 Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.547 Lose Time (sec): 12 (Y+R : 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 20.4 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 7.4 Optimal Cycle: 67 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 46 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II 11 1 I 11 II II Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II 11 I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-17:00 Base Vol: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 977 58 115 146B 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 8 100 0 0 101 7 9 0 10 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 117 0 0 122 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 116 901 0 0 1193 153 347 0 166 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 1094 58 115 1590 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 120 936 0 0 1239 159 360 0 172 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1147 61 121 1667 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 120 936 0 0 1239 159 360 0 172 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1147 61 121 1667 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 120 982 0 0 1301 167 360 0 172 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 1204 64 121 1750 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 I 11 11 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.77 0.23 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3300 424 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat.: 0 3572 190 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 II 11 II 1 1 II 11 II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.20 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.07 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: •..`� **** rrra Crit Moves: **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.09 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.14 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Volume/Cap: 0.72 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.25 Delay/Veh: 56.5 9.5 0.0 0.0 19.0 19.0 38.3 0.0 31.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 7.2 7.2 43.3 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 51.3 0.0 46.9 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 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: 56.5 9.5 0.0 0.0 19.0 19.0 38.3 0.0 31.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 7.2 7.2 43.3 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 51.3 0.0 46.9 DesignQueue: 9 30 0 0 51 7 21 0 10 0 0 0 DesignQueue: 0 31 2 8 24 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR w. • a s Cr) 1r.,4. • 01/29/2000 15:22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Page 9 03/29/2000 15:22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Page 10 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 9-1 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 10-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing Plus Approved Projects Existing Plus Approved Projects PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Uneignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #15 10th St/Evergreen Rd Intersection #21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.7 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.5 Worst Cane Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 I II II II I I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Base Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Initial Bee: 3 5 4 4 e 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 11 S 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Initial Fut: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Volume: 0 15 7 9 27 0 0 0 0 24 0 18 PHF Volume: 3 6 4 4 9 16 6 19 7 12 31 9 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 15 7 9 27 0 0 0 0 24 0 18 Final Vol.: 3 6 4 4 9 16 6 19 7 12 31 9 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 04 04 04 0% Grade: 01 04 04 04 4 Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Cycle/Cars: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx XYYY XXXX xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Adj Vol. : 0 15 7 10 27 0 0 0 0 27 0 19 Adj Vol.: 4 6 5 5 10 17 6 19 7 13 31 9 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Gp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 1 II II II I I II II II 1 Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 22 rxxz XYYYX XXXX XXXX XXXXX 55 xxxx 18 Cnflict Vol: 88 80 22 81 79 36 40 xxxx XXXXX 26 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1674 xxxx, xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 984 xxxx 1355 Potent Cap. : 942 990 1349 951 992 132E 1641 xxxx xxxxx 1667 xxxx xxxxx Adj Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.99 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.97 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx YYYZY Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1674 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 978 xxxx 1355 Move Cap.: 914 978 1349 934 980 1328 1641 xxxx xxxxx 1667 xxxx xxxxx 1 11 11 II 1 I 11 II II 1 Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxXxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.8 xxxx 2.7 Stopped Del: 4.0 3.7 2.7 3.9 3.7 2.7 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • • * A * * ' * * * * LOS by Move: * * * * * A • • A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT 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 1107 xxxxx Shared Cap.. xxxx 1057 xxxxx xxxx 1131 XYYYY xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx XXXX XXXXX Shrd StpDel:xxxxx XXXX XXXXX XXXXX xxxx XXXXX XXXXX XYxX XYYYY xxxxx 3.3 XXXXX Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 3.4 xxxxx XYYYX 3.2 xxxxx XXXXX xxxx XXXXX XYYYX xxxx rxxxX Shared LOS: • * * • * • • * * * A * Shared LOS: * A * * A * • ' * • * • ApproachDel: 0.0 0.6 0.0 3.3 ApproachDel: 3.4 3.2 0.4 0.5 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I.. i U1 03/29/2000 15.22 Filename: EXAPP.OUT Page 11 03/29/2000 15:22 Filename. EXAPP-OUT Page 12 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 11-1 ex+app Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:25 Page 12-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Exiating Plue Approved Projects Existing Plue Approved Projects PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection $24 4th St/A Ave Intersection $33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.537 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.085 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (eec/veh) : 8.3 Loss Time (Dec) : 0 (Y+R a 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.3 Optimal Cycle: 34 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound Eaet Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 11 II II I I II I I II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:45-17:45 Bane Vol: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Base Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Initial Bee: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 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 PaeeerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 0 0 74 0 Initial Fut: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Initial Fut: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1081 19 1 773 83 Deer Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 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 18 6 9 27 7 1 10 8 17 33 8 PHF Volume: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1117 20 1 799 86 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 10 8 17 33 8 Reduced Vol: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1117 20 1 799 86 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 PC& 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.r10 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 Final Vol. : 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 10 8 17 33 8 Final Vol.: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1173 21 1 838 90 I II II II I I II II II I Saturation Plow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 432 432 432 551 551 551 473 473 473 679 679 679 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.15 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 0.00 0.75 0.25 0.21 0.63 0.16 0.05 0.53 0.42 0.29 0.57 0.14 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.96 0.04 0.01 1.80 0.19 Final Sat. : 0 324 108 115 346 90 25 249 199 199 386 94 Final Sat.: 492 397 435 653 120 584 285 3733 67 4 3258 350 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.09 0.09 Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.27 0.31 0.31 0.26 0.26 0.26 Crit Moves: ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ Crit Moves: ++++ ++++ ApproachV/S: 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.09 Green/Cycle: 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.4 Volume/Cap: 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.46 0.54 0.54 0.44 0.44 0.44 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 14.0 14.0 14.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 8.2 7.5 7.5 6.8 6.8 6.8 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.4 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 LOS by Move: + A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 14.0 14.0 14.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 8.2 7.5 7.5 6.8 6.8 6.8 ApproachDel: 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.4 DeeignQueue: 1 1 1 4 1 4 2 27 0 0 19 2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.4 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DES ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DES ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD 03/29/2000 15.23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Page 1 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Page 2 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 1-1 I ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 2-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) PM Peak Hour j PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analysis Report Scenario: ex+project Level Of Service Command: ex+project Intersection Base Future Change Volume: ex+project Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: ex+project LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee # 1 3rd St/A Ave A 2.3 0.455 A 3.1 0.552 + 0.740 D/V Trip Generation: pm Trip Distribution: pm # 2 2nd St/A Ave A 2.2 0.517 A 3.7 0.695 + 1.433 D/V Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes # 5 let St/A Ave B 5.7 0.468 F 67.6 1.436 +61.816 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration # 6 State St/A Ave D 31.7 0.932 E 40.3 1.005 + 8.602 D/V # 10 State St/B Ave C 20.1 0.677 C 20.4 0.739 + 0.342 D/V # 11 State St/Foothills Rd B 7.7 0.508 B 7.2 0.582 -0.440 D/V # 15 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 1.9 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 A 1.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 24 4th St/A Ave B 8.5 0.513 B 7.6 0.629 -0.954 D/V # 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.3 0.085 A 1.4 0.108 + 0.022 V/C Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND. CiP C) l...a 02/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Pace 3 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Page 4 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 3-1 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 4-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 01 3rd St/A Ave Intersection #2 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.552 Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.695 Loss Time (s(5c) : 8 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 3.1 Loss Time (sec): B (Y+R = 4 nec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 3.7 Optimal Cycle: 35 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 47 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L T R L T R 1 II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Lance: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:30-17:30 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 19 B 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Base Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Initial Bee: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Added Vol: 11 1 0 0 1 0 0 27 10 0 43 0 Added Vol: 0 5 21 0 4 0 0 27 0 20 43 0 PaeserByVol: 12 0 6 0 0 0 0 120 6 12 147 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 9 0 12 0 113 0 0 147 0 Initial Fut: 42 9 22 14 9 25 19 1258 39 35 915 20 Initial Fut: 7 6 39 22 8 42 78 1121 23 52 848 22 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 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 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: 43 9 23 14 9 26 20 1300 40 36 945 21 PHF Volume: 7 6 42 23 9 45 83 1196 25 SS 90S 23 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 43 9 23 14 9 26 20 1300 40 36 945 21 Reduced Vol: 7 6 42 23 9 45 83 1196 25 55 905 23 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 43 9 23 14 9 26 21 1365 42 38 993 22 Final Vol.: 7 6 42 23 9 45 87 1256 26 55 950 25 I II II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.67 0.67 0.67 Adjustment: 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.09 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.57 0.12 0.31 0.29 0.18 0.53 0.03 1.91 0.06 0.07 1.89 0.04 Lanes: 0.13 0.11 0.76 0.30 D.12 0.58 0.13 1.83 0.04 1.00 1.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 862 180 461 424 272 787 46 3015 93 92 2401 53 Final Sat. : 188 161 1126 437 171 856 150 2162 45 171 3703 97 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.41 0.41 0.41 Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.32 0.26 0.26 Crit Moves: ••" ..`• Crit Moves: •'" .... Green/Cycle: 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 Volume/Cap: 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.50 0.50 0.50 Volume/Cap: 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.38 0.31 0.31 Delay/Veh: 28.9 28.9 28.9 25.6 25.6 25.6 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 Delay/Veh: 28.6 28.6 28.6 37.5 37.5 37.5 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.0 1.1 1.1 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 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: 28.9 28.9 28.9 25.6 25.6 25.6 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 AdjDel/Veh: 28.6 28.6 28.6 37.5 37.5 37.5 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.0 1.1 1.1 DesignQueue: 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 14 0 0 10 0 DesignQueue: 0 0 2 1 0 2 1 11 0 0 B 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (a) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR TraffiX 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR s.f . a s I i ' 01/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Page 5 03/29/2000 15.23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Page 6 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 5-1 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 let St/A Ave Intersection #6 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.436 Cycle (Dec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.005 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 67.6 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R - 4 eec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 40.3 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I I II II I I I I I I I I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 D 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lanee: 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 « 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Sep 1999 « 16:55-17:55 Base Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Bane Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Initial Bee: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Added Vol: 43 23 84 0 15 0 0 21 27 53 20 0 Added Vol: 59 0 0 0 0 14 21 0 84 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 66 0 38 0 0 0 0 86 36 68 88 0 PasoerByVol: 50 7 0 0 10 36 14 0 41 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 125 31 154 52 28 52 35 1177 80 139 721 24 Initial Fut: 666 616 0 0 1193 194 362 0 1106 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 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: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Adj: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 PHF Volume: 139 34 171 58 31 58 39 1306 89 154 800 27 PHF Volume: 723 669 0 0 1295 211 393 0 1201 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 139 34 171 58 31 58 39 1306 89 154 800 27 Reduced Vol: 723 669 0 0 1295 211 393 0 1201 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 139 34 171 58 31 58 39 1372 93 154 840 28 Final Vol.: 795 736 0 0 1360 221 393 0 1357 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.19 0.99 0.99 0.08 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.40 0.10 0.50 0.40 0.21 0.39 1.00 1.87 0.13 1.00 1.94 0.06 Lanes: 1.56 1.44 0.00 0.00 1.72 0.28 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 472 115 580 433 232 433 361 3523 239 152 3677 123 Final Sat.: 2871 2658 0 0 3203 521 1805 0 3230 0 0 0 I I II II 1 I II I I I I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.39 0.39 1.01 0.23 0.23 Vol/Sat: 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.22 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** Crit Moves: **** *+** **** Green/Cycle: 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Green/Cycle: 0.28 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.22 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 1.44 1.44 1.44 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.15 0.55 0.55 1.44 0.32 0.32 Volume/Cap: 1.01 0.40 0.00 0.00 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.00 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 373.0 373 373.0 29.4 29.4 29.4 3.3 5.0 5.0 391.9 3.9 3.9 Delay/Veh: 57.5 6.8 0.0 0.0 49.4 49.4 78.1 0.0 27.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 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: 373.0 373 373.0 29.4 29.4 29.4 3.3 5.0 5.0 391.9 3.9 3.9 AdjDel/Veh: 57.5 6.8 0.0 0.0 49.4 49.4 78.1 0.0 27.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 DeeignQueue: 6 1 7 2 1 2 1 22 2 2 13 0 DesignQueue: 48 19 0 0 69 11 25 0 59 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Cc CO 01/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Page 7 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Page 8 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 7-1 ex+project wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 8-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #10 State St/B Ave Intersection #11 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.739 Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.582 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 20.4 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R e 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 7.2 Optimal Cycle: 70 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 49 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound Eaat Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Right.: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-17:00 Base Vol: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Initial Bsa: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Added Vol: 0 21 0 0 14 7 10 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 59 0 0 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 113 0 0 136 0 9 0 10 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 157 0 0 151 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 108 935 0 0 1242 153 357 0 166 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 1193 58 115 1703 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 112 971 0 0 1290 159 371 0 172 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1251 61 121 1785 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 112 971 0 0 1290 159 371 0 172 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1251 61 121 1785 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 112 1019 0 0 1354 167 371 0 172 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 1313 64 121 1874 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 I II II II I I I I I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.9B 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.91 0.09 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3315 409 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat. : 0 3587 175 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 I I I I I II I I II II I I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.21 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.07 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: *••• **•• *••• Crit Moves: •••• **** •*•* Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.13 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Volume/Cap: 0.74 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.27 Delay/Veh: 59.1 9.7 0.0 0.0 19.0 19.0 38.9 0.0 31.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 6.9 6.9 44.6 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.0 0.0 47.4 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 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: 59.1 9.7 0.0 0.0 19.0 19.0 38.9 0.0 31.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 6.9 6.9 44.6 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.0 0.0 47.4 DeeignQueue: 8 31 0 0 53 6 22 0 10 0 0 0 DeaignQueue: 0 32 2 8 26 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR C'7 CD 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Paae 9 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Paae 10 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 9-1 exsproject Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 10-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #15 lath St/Evergreen Rd Intersection #21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 0 0 II 0 0 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Base Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Initial Bee: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Added Vol: 0 0 3 10 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 14 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 9 0 0 14 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 11 8 17 20 0 0 0 0 22 0 27 Initial Fut: 3 5 4 4 8 18 8 26 6 11 42 8 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Volume: 0 15 11 23 27 0 0 0 0 30 0 36 PHF Volume: 3 6 4 4 9 20 9 29 7 12 47 9 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 0 15 11 23 27 0 0 0 0 30 0 36 Final Vol.: 3 6 4 4 9 20 9 29 7 12 47 9 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 04 04 04 04 Grade: 04 04 0% 04 4 Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx % Truck/Comb: x YY YYYY XYYY xxxx xxxx 7YYY xxxx XYYX 4 Truck/Comb: XXTX YYYX xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCE: YYYY YYYX xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xrrx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx YYYY xxxx Adj Vol. : 0 15 11 25 27 0 0 0 0 33 0 40 Adj Vol.: 4 6 5 5 10 22 10 29 7 13 47 9 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:Yrrxx xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx Critical Gp:v YX xrYx X..Yx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xrrxY xxxx xxxx' 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Gp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx XYYYY 26 YYY; xxxxx xxxx xvvx YrYYX 70 xxxx 20 Cnflict Vol: 119 109 32 109 108 51 56 xxxx xxxxx 36 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xrrr xxxx xxxxx 1667 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 964 xxxx 1352 Potent Cap.: 904 956 1334 915 958 1304 1613 xxxx xxxxx 1649 xxxx xxxxx Adj Cap: YYYY YYYX xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.98 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.96 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: YYrx xxxx xxxxx 1667 xxxx xYYYX xxxx xxv. x.... 949 xxxx 1352 Move Cap : 872 942 1334 897 944 1304 1613 xxxx xxxxx 1649 xxxx xxxxx II II II I 1 II II II Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.9 xxxx 2.7 Stopped Del: 4.1 3.8 2.7 4.0 3.9 2.8 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * • LOS by Move: • • • • • * A • * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx YYYX xxxxx YYYX xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xYrrx xxxx 1136 xxxxx Shared Cap.: xxxx 1022 xxxxx xxxx 1122 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx x*YY xxxx ..x**- Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx XYYY YYYYX xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 3.5 xxxYY xxxxx 3.2 xxxxx Yrrxx Yrrx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx YYYYx Shared LOS: * * * • * * * * * * A * Shared LOS: * A * * A * * * * * * • ApproachDel: 0.0 1.1 0.0 3.3 ApproachDel: 3.5 3.2 0.5 0.4 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR (7) VD l _ 1 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: EXPROJ.OUT Page 11 03/29/2000 15.23 Filename: RXPROJ.OUT Page 12 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 11-1 ex+project Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:04:56 Page 12-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) Existing + Project (Block 136 & 138) PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #24 4th St/A Ave Intersection #33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.629 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.108 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (eet/veh) : 7.6 Lose Time (sec) : 0 (Y+R - 4 Dec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.4 Optimal Cycle: 40 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:45-17:45 Base Vol: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Base Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Initial Bee: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 18 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 54 0 PaseerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Summer/Fall: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 0 0 159 0 Initial Fut: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 21 7 15 48 7 Initial Fut: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1170 19 1 912 83 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 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 18 6 9 27 7 1 23 8 17 53 8 PHF Volume: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1209 20 1 942 86 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Reduced Vol: 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 23 8 17 53 e Reduced Vol: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1209 20 1 942 86 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 23 8 17 53 8 Final Vol.: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1269 21 1 989 90 I II II 11 I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 364 364 364 475 475 475 565 565 565 725 725 725 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.10 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 0.00 0.75 0.25 0.21 0.63 0.16 0.03 0.72 0.25 0.22 0.68 0.10 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.97 0.03 0.01 1.83 0.16 Final Sat. : 0 273 91 99 298 77 18 406 141 158 493 74 Final Sat.: 492 397 435 660 122 591 190 3738 62 3 3307 301 I II I I II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.11 0.11 Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.40 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.30 0.30 Crit Moves: •••• •••• •••• •••• Crit Moves: .... "a. ApproachV/S: 0.07 0.09 0.06 0.11 Green/Cycle: 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.5 Volume/Cap: 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.53 0.53 0.47 0.47 0.47 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 16.2 16.2 16.2 20.8 20.8 20.8 13.2 6.0 6.0 5.6 5.6 5.6 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.5 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 LOS by Move: • A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 16.2 16.2 16.2 20.8 20.8 20.8 13.2 6.0 6.0 5.6 5.6 5.6 ApproachDel: 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.5 DesignQueue: 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 25 0 0 19 2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.5 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR '....--) i`J 11111 II, 03/29/2000 :23 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Page . 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Page 2 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:32 Page 1-1 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:32 'Page 2-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Existing + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analysis Report Scenario: total w/137 Level Of Service Command: total w/137 Intersection Base Future Change Volume: total w/137 Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: total w/137 LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee # 1 3rd St/A Ave A 2.2 0.461 A 3.0 0.572 + 0.729 D/V Trip Generation: pm Trip Distribution: pm # 2 2nd St/A Ave A 2.2 0.517 B 11.5 0.993 + 9.318 D/V Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes # 5 lst St/A Ave A 4.1 0.414 F 78.4 1.457 +74.206 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration # 6 State St/A Ave D 31.7 0.932 E 47.3 1.043 +15.596 D/V # 10 State St/B Ave C 20.1 0.677 C 20.6 0.754 + 0.489 D/V # 11 State St/Foothills Rd B 7.7 0.508 B 7.2 0.601 -0.498 D/V # 15 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 2.0 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 A 1.2 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 24 4th St/A Ave B 8.5 0.513 B 7.4 0.677 -1.145 D/V # 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.3 0.085 A 1.4 0.116 + 0.031 V/C Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR r -.) C J 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Page 3. 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Page 4 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:32 Page 3-1 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:32 Page 4-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Existing + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 3rd St/A Ave Intersection #2 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 80 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.572 Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.993 Lose Time (sec): 8 (Y+R = 4 nec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 3.0 Loss Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 11.5 Optimal Cycle: 35 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T R I II II II I I II II II Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include I Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I I I II II I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:30-17:30 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Base Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Initial Bse: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Added Vol: 11 1 0 0 1 0 0 49 10 0 64 0 Added Vol: 11 8 21 0 8 0 0 38 11 20 54 0 PasserByVol: 12 0 6 0 0 0 0 152 6 12 206 0 PasserByVol: 59 0 32 9 0 12 0 113 32 59 147 0 Initial Fut: 42 9 22 14 9 25 19 1312 39 35 995 20 Initial Fut: 77 9 71 22 12 42 78 1132 66 111 859 22 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 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 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: 43 9 23 14 9 26 20 1355 40 36 1028 21 PHF Volume: 82 10 76 23 13 45 83 1208 70 118 917 23 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 43 9 23 14 9 26 20 1355 40 36 1028 21 Reduced Vol: 82 10 76 23 13 45 83 1208 70 118 917 23 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 43 9 23 14 9 26 21 1423 42 36 1028 21 Final Vol.: 82 10 76 23 13 45 87 1269 74 118 963 25 11 11 11 1 1 II II II Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.06 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.08 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.57 0.12 0.31 0.29 0.18 0.53 0.03 1.91 0.06 0.73 1.25 0.02 Lanes: 0.49 0.06 0.45 0.28 0.16 0.56 0.12 1.78 0.10 1,00 1.95 0.05 Final Sat. : 871 162 466 419 269 778 45 3057 90 83 2369 48 Final Sat.: 639 78 592 380 215 744 142 2070 121 152 3704 96 II II II I I I I I I I I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.43 0.43 0.43 Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.61 0.61 0.81 0.78 0.26 0.26 Crit Moves: **•• ***" Crit Moves: ••a. a... Green/Cycle: 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Green/Cycle: 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 Volume/Cap: 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.53 0.53 0.53 Volume/Cap: 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.78 0.78 0,78 0.99 0.33 0.33 Delay/Veh: 26.9 26.9 26.9 23.3 23.3 23.3 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 Delay/Veh: 76.4 76.4 76.4 24.9 24.9 24.9 5.2 5.2 5.2 67.4 1.9 1.9 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 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: 26.9 26.9 26.9 23.3 23.3 23.3 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 AdjDel/Veh: 76.4 76.4 76.4 24.9 24.9 24.9 5.2 5.2 5.2 67.4 1.9 1.9 DesignQueue: 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 13 0 0 10 0 DesignQueue: 4 0 3 1 1 2 1 15 1 1 11 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • i III 11111, 03/29/2000:23 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Page 111 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: TOTAL137 OUT Paae 6 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:32 Page 5-1 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:23 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Existing + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 let St/A Ave Intersection #6 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 9D Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.457 Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.043 Loss Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 78.4 Lose Time (eec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 47.3 Optimal Cycle: 18D Level Of Service: F Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II II I I I I II I I II Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 1 1 0 Lanes: 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 II II II I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 « 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Sep 1999 « 16:55-17:55 Base Vol: 16 a 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Base Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 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 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 Bee: 16 a 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Initial Bee: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Added Vol: 54 31 125 0 22 0 0 21 38 95 20 0 Added Vol: 93 0 0 0 0 23 29 0 118 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 66 0 38 0 0 0 0 118 36 68 147 0 PaeeerByVol: 82 7 0 0 10 63 22 0 64 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 136 39 195 52 35 52 35 1209 91 181 780 24 Initial Fut: 732 616 0 0 1193 230 378 0 1163 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 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: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Adj: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 PHF Volume: 151 43 216 58 19 58 39 1342 101 201 866 27 PHF Volume: 795 669 0 0 1295 250 410 0 1263 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 151 43 216 58 39 58 39 1342 101 201 866 27 Reduced Vol: 795 669 0 0 1295 250 410 0 1263 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 151 43 216 58 39 58 39 1409 106 201 909 28 Final Vol. : 874 736 0 0 1360 262 410 0 1427 0 0 0 II II II I I II II II Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.67 0.67 0.85 0.36 0.36 0.85 0.18 0.99 0.99 0.09 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.78 0.22 1.00 0.60 0.40 1.00 1.00 1.86 0.14 1.00 1.94 0.06 Lanes: 1.63 1.37 0.00 0.00 1.68 0.32 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 991 282 1615 409 275 1615 342 3499 263 171 3686 114 Final Sat.: 3001 2528 0 0 3122 602 1805 0 3230 0 0 0 I II II I I I I II II II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.04 0.11 0.40 0.40 1.18 0.25 0.25 Vol/Sat: 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.23 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: ••++ ++•• Crit Moves: +++• .... .... Green/Cycle: 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Green/Cycle: 0.28 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.22 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 1.46 1.46 1.28 1.36 1.36 0.34 0.14 0.50 0.50 1.46 0.31 0.31 Volume/Cap: 1.04 0.42 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 426.5 426 235.9 352.7 353 28.9 1.5 2.3 2.3 400.7 1.7 1.7 Delay/Veh: 67.7 7.0 0.0 0.0 60.3 60.3 89.4 0.0 28.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 Uaer 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: 426.5 426 235.9 352.7 353 28.9 1.5 2.3 2.3 400.7 1.7 1.7 AdjDel/Veh: 67.7 7.0 0.0 0.0 60.3 60.3 89.4 0.0 28.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 DeaignQueue: 7 2 10 3 2 3 0 15 1 2 9 0 DeeignQueue: 53 19 0 D 69 13 26 0 62 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Aaeoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DES ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD 7 .) 1 V, 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Pace 7 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: T0TAL137.0UT Pace 8 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:23 Page 7-1 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:33 Page 8-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Existing + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #10 State St/B Ave Intersection #11 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.754 Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.601 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y.R m 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 20.6 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 (me) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 7.2 Optimal Cycle: 73 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 51 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II II II I I II II II Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-17:00 Base Vol: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Added Vol: 0 29 0 0 23 11 14 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 93 0 0 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 121 0 0 163 0 9 0 10 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 189 0 0 174 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 108 951 0 0 1278 157 361 0 166 0 0 0 Initial Fut. 0 1259 58 115 1760 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 112 988 0 0 1327 163 375 0 172 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1320 61 121 1845 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 112 988 0 0 1327 163 375 0 172 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1320 61 121 1845 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 112 1037 0 0 1393 171 375 0 172 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 0 1386 64 121 1937 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.91 0.09 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3317 407 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat. : 0 3596 166 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.21 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.07 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** .*** **** Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.13 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Volume/Cap: 0.75 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.27 Delay/Veh: 60.6 9.6 0.0 0.0 19.2 19.2 39.7 0.0 31.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 6.8 6.8 45.5 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.1 0.0 47.7 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 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: 60.6 9.6 0.0 0.0 19.2 19.2 39.7 0.0 31.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 6.8 6.8 45.5 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.1 0.0 47.7 DesignQueue: 8 31 0 0 54 7 22 0 10 0 0 0 DesignQueue: 0 33 2 8 26 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR t 03/29/200 :23 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Paae • 03/29/200D ic.11 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Paae 10 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:33 Page 9-1 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:33 Page 10-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Existing + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Unoignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection *15 10th St/Evergreen Rd Intersection #21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd Average Delay (sec/veh) : 2.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - P L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 1 11 11 11 1 I 11 II II Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 D Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Base Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 D 18 0 13 Initial Bee: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Added Vol: 0 0 4 16 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 16 0 0 21 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PanserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0 11 9 23 20 0 0 0 0 23 0 33 Initial Fut: 3 5 4 4 8 18 8 33 6 11 49 8 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Volume: 0 15 12 31 27 0 0 0 0 31 0 45 PHF Volume: 3 6 4 4 9 20 9 37 7 12 54 9 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 15 12 31 27 0 0 0 0 31 0 45 Final Vol.: 3 6 4 4 9 20 9 37 7 12 54 9 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 04 04 04 04 Grade: 04 0% 04 04 I Cycle/Cara: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Cycle/Cars: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Adj Vol.: 0 15 12 34 27 0 0 0 0 34 0 49 Adj Vol. : 4 6 5 S 10 22 10 37 7 13 54 9 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:xxxxx xrrx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3,3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Gp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 27 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 79 xrrx 21 Cnflict Vol: 134 124 40 125 123 59 63 xxxx xxxxx 43 xxxx xxxx, Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1664 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 953 xxxx 1351 Potent Cap. : 885 939 1321 896 940 1293 1599 xxxx xxxxx 1635 xxxx xxxxx Adj Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.98 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.96 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1664 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 933 xxxx 1351 Move Cap. : 853 925 1321 878 926 1293 1599 xxxx xxxxx 1635 xxxx xxxxx 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xrxxx xrrx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.0 xxxx 2.8 Stopped Del: 4.2 3.9 2.7 4.1 3.9 2.8 2.3 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • * '• A * * * * * * * • LOS by Move: * • * * • • A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT 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 1141 xxxxx Shared Cap. : xxxx 1004 xxxxx xxxx 1106 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 3.6 xxxxx xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * • • • • * • * * A * Shared LOS: * A * * A * • * * • • • ApproachDel: 0.0 1.2 0.0 3.3 ApproachDel: 3.6 3.3 0.4 0.4 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DES ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR l I 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: TOTAL137.0UT Page 11 03/29/2000 15:23 Filename: TOTAL137.OUT Page 12 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:33 Page 11-1 total w/137 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:05:33 Page 12-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Existing + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #24 4th St/A Ave Intersection 1133 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.677 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.116 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 7.4 Loes Time (sec) : 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.4 Optimal Cycle: 45 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted I Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include I Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 I I I 11 II I II II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:45-17:45 Base Vol: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Bane Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Hoe: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Initial Bee: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 25 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 76 0 PasoerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaoserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 0 0 218 0 I Initial Fut: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 29 7 15 SS 7 Initial Fut: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1223 19 1 993 83 I User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 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 18 6 9 27 7 1 32 8 17 61 8 PHF Volume: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1263 20 1 1026 86 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 32 8 17 61 8 Reduced Vol: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1263 20 1 1026 86 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.OS 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 32 8 17 61 B Final Vol.: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1327 21 1 1077 90 I II II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 338 338 338 447 447 447 600 600 600 740 740 740 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.09 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 0.00 0.75 0.25 0.21 0.63 0.16 0.02 0.78 0.20 0.20 0.71 0.09 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.97 0.03 0.01 1.84 0.15 Final Sat.: 0 254 85 94 281 73 15 466 117 146 525 69 Final Sat.: 498 402 440 660 122 591 171 3741 59 3 3330 278 I II II II I I II II II 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.12 0.12 0.12 Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.44 0.35 0.35 0.32 0.32 0.32 Crit Moves: ••** •••• •••• ••*• Crit Moves: •••• •••• ApproachV/S: 0.07 0.10 0.07 0.12 Green/Cycle: 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.6 Volume/Cap: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.54 0.54 0.49 0.49 0.49 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 17.1 17,1 17.1 23.1 23.1 23.1 16.1 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.6 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 LOS by Move: * A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 17.1 17.1 17.1 23.1 23.1 23.1 16.1 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 ApproachDel: 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.6 DesignQueue: 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 25 0 0 20 2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.6 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD s • 1 03/29/20000:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 1 03/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT 11111 Page 2 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 1-1 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 2-1 f Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analysis Report Scenario: total w/137 mit Level Of Service Command: total w/137 mit Intersection Base Future Change Volume: total w/137 Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: total w/137 mit LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee # 1 3rd St/A Ave A 2.2 0.461 A 3.0 0.572 • 0.729 D/V Trip Generation: pm Trip Distribution: pm # 2 2nd St/A Ave A 2.2 0.517 8 11.5 0.993 + 9.318 D/V Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes # 5 let St/A Ave B 6.6 0.448 C 16.5 0.769 • 9.867 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration # 6 State St/A Ave D 31.7 0.932 E 47.3 1.043 +15.596 D/V # 10 State St/B Ave C 20.1 0.677 C 20.6 0.754 + 0.489 D/V # 11 State St/Foothills Rd B 7.7 0.508 B 7.2 0.601 -0.498 D/V # 15 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 2.0 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 A 1.2 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 24 4th St/A Ave B 8.5 0.513 0 7.4 0.677 -1.145 D/V # 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.3 0.085 A 1.4 0.116 + 0.031 V/C Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR i" 1 rD c_ CD 03/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 3 03/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 4 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 3-1 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 4-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 3rd St/A Ave Intersection #2 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 80 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.572 Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.993 Loss Time (Dec) : 8 (Y+R e 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.0 Loss Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R m 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 11.5 Optimal Cycle: 35 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I II II II I I II II I I Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:30-17:30 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Base Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Initial Bee: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Added Vol: 11 1 0 0 1 0 0 49 10 0 64 0 Added Vol: 11 8 21 0 8 0 0 38 11 20 54 0 PaseerByVol: 12 0 6 0 0 0 0 152 6 12 206 0 PaseerByVol: 59 0 32 9 0 12 0 113 32 59 147 0 Initial Fut: 42 9 22 14 9 25 19 1312 39 35 995 20 Initial Fut: 77 9 71 22 12 42 78 1132 66 111 859 22 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHI 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 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: 43 9 23 14 9 26 20 1355 40 36 1028 21 PHF Volume: 82 10 76 23 13 45 83 1208 70 118 917 23 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 43 9 23 14 9 26 20 1355 40 36 1028 21 Reduced Vol: 82 10 76 23 13 45 83 1208 70 118 917 23 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 43 9 23 14 9 26 21 1423 42 36 1028 21 Final Vol.: 82 10 76 23 13 45 87 1269 74 118 963 25 I II II II I I II II II Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.06 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.08 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.57 0.12 0.31 0.29 0.18 0.53 0.03 1.91 0.06 0.73 1.25 0.02 Lanes: 0.49 0.06 0.45 0.28 0.16 0.56 0.12 1.78 0.10 1.00 1.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 871 182 466 419 269 778 45 3057 90 83 2369 48 Final Sat.: 639 78 592 380 215 744 142 2070 121 152 3704 96 I I II II I I II II II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.43 0.43 0.43 Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.78 0.26 0.26 Crit Moves: "'• '••• Crit Moves: `.'. .... Green/Cycle: 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Green/Cycle: 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 Volume/Cap: 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.53 0.53 0.53 Volume/Cap: 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.99 0.33 0.33 Delay/Veh: 26.9 26.9 26.9 23.3 23.3 23.3 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 Delay/Veh: 76.4 76.4 76.4 24.9 24.9 24.9 5.2 5.2 5.2 67.4 1.9 1.9 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 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: 26.9 26.9 26.9 23.3 23.3 23.3 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 AdjDel/Veh: 76.4 76.4 76.4 24.9 24.9 24.9 5.2 5.2 5.2 67.4 1.9 1.9 DeeignQueue: 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 13 0 0 10 0 DeeignQueue: 4 0 3 1 1 2 1 15 1 1 11 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR C VD ►y 0 11111 !ill 111/1 03/29/2000 5:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 03/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 6 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 5-1 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project * Block 137 Mitigated Exieting • Project + Block 137 Mitigated PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 let St/A Ave Intersection #6 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.769 Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.043 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R e 4 sec) Average Delay (aec/veh): 16.5 Lose Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 47.3 Optimal Cycle: 68 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound Sant Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Weat Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II I I I I I I I I II II Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 1 1 0 Lanee: 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 II II II I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 « 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Sep 1999 « 16:55-17:S5 Base Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Base Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 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 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 Bee: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Initial Bee: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Added Vol: 54 31 125 0 22 0 0 21 38 95 20 0 Added Vol: 93 0 0 0 0 23 29 0 118 0 0 0 PaseerByVol: 66 0 38 0 0 0 0 118 36 68 147 0 PaseerByVol: 82 7 0 0 10 63 22 0 64 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 136 39 195 52 35 52 35 1209 91 181 780 24 Initial Fut: 732 616 0 0 1193 230 378 0 1163 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 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: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Adj: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 PHF Volume: 151 43 216 58 39 58 39 1342 101 201 866 27 PHF Volume: 795 669 0 0 1295 250 410 0 1263 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 151 43 216 58 39 58 39 1342 101 201 866 27 Reduced Vol: 795 669 0 0 1295 250 410 0 1263 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.30 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 151 43 216 58 39 58 39 1409 106 201 909 28 Final Vol.: 874 736 0 0 1360 262 410 0 1427 0 0 0 I II II II I I I I II II Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.67 0.67 0.85 0.52 0.52 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.78 0.22 1.00 0.60 0.40 1.00 1.00 1.86 0.14 1.00 1.94 0.06 Lanes: 1.63 1.37 0.00 0.00 1.68 0.32 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 991 282 1615 591 397 1615 1805 3499 263 1805 3686 114 Final Sat.: 3001 2528 0 0 3122 602 1905 0 3230 0 0 0 I II II II 1 1 II II II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.04 0.02 0.40 0.40 0.11 0.25 0.25 Vol/Sat: 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.23 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: ++** ••++ +*++ Crit Moves: •++• ++++ +*+* Green/Cycle: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.05 0.52 0.52 0.14 0.61 0.61 Green/Cycle: 0.28 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.22 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.77 0.77 0.67 0.5D 0.50 0.18 0.40 0,77 0.77 0.77 0.40 0.40 Volume/Cap: 1.04 0.42 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 35.0 35.0 29.2 26.0 26.0 22.8 32.8 14.3 14.3 36.9 6.8 6.8 Delay/Veh: 67.7 7.0 0.0 0.0 60.3 60.3 89.4 0.0 28.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 Utter 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: 35.0 35.0 29.2 26.0 26.0 22.8 32.8 14.3 14.3 36.9 6.8 6.8 AdjDel/Veh: 67.7 7.0 0.0 0.0 60.3 60.3 89.4 0.0 28.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 DeeignQueue: 6 2 9 2 2 2 2 38 3 9 19 1 DeeignQueue: 53 19 0 0 69 13 26 0 62 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR (.:1) rD L 1 01/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 7 01/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 8 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 7-1 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 8-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #10 State St/B Ave Intersection #11 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.754 Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.601 Lose Time (Dec) : 12 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 20.6 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 7.2 Optimal Cycle: 73 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 51 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound Rapt Bound Went Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-17:00 Baas Vol: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Boe: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Added Vol: 0 29 0 0 23 11 14 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 93 0 0 11B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 121 0 0 163 0 9 0 10 0 0 0 PaoserByVol: 0 189 0 0 174 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 108 951 0 0 1278 157 361 0 166 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 1259 58 115 1760 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Weer Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 112 988 0 0 1327 163 375 0 172 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1320 61 121 1845 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 112 988 0 0 1327 163 375 0 172 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1320 61 121 1845 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 112 1037 0 0 1393 171 375 0 172 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 1386 64 121 1937 0 0 0 0 71 0 29 I II II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.91 0.09 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3317 407 1605 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat.: 0 3596 166 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.21 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.07 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: **** **t* tt** Crit Moves: "" **** *+** Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.13 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Volume/Cap: 0.75 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.27 Delay/Veh: 60.6 9.6 0.0 0.0 19.2 19.2 39.7 0.0 31.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 6.8 6.8 45.5 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.1 0.0 47.7 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 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: 60.6 9.6 0.0 0.0 19.2 19.2 39.7 0.0 31.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 6.8 6.8 45.5 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.1 0.0 47.7 DesignQueue: B 31 0 0 54 7 22 0 10 0 0 0 DesignQueue: 0 33 2 8 26 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR F.D • s s 03/29/200 :24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 9 03/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Page 10 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 9-1 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06-11 Page 10-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 4(15 10th St/Evergreen Rd Intersection N21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd Average Delay (sec/veh) : 2.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.2 Worst Cape Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 1 II II II I I II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 II 11 11 I 1 11 II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Base Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 e Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 Bee: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Initial Bee: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Added Vol: 0 0 4 16 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 16 0 0 21 0 PaseerByVol: 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 11 9 23 20 0 0 0 0 23 0 33 Initial Fut: 3 5 4 4 8 18 8 33 6 11 49 B User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 PHF Volume: 0 15 12 31 27 0 0 0 0 31 0 45 PHF Volume: 3 6 4 4 9 20 9 37 7 12 54 9 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 15 12 31 27 0 0 0 0 31 0 45 Final Vol. : 3 6 4 4 9 20 9 37 7 12 54 9 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 04 04 0% 0% Grade: 0% 0% 04 0% 4 Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx % Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Yx+cx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxrx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx XYYx XXXX xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx YYYY xxxx Adj Vol.: 0 15 12 34 27 0 0 0 0 34 0 49 Adj Vol.: 4 6 5 5 10 22 10 37 7 13 54 9 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx XYYx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 YYYX xxxxx Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Gp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx XYYx YYYYX 27 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 79 xxxx 21 Cnflict Vol: 134 124 40 125 123 59 63 xxxx xxxxx 43 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: XXXX xxxx xxxxx 1664 xxxx xxxxx xxrx XXXX XXXXA 953 xxxx 1351 Potent Cap. : 885 939 1321 896 940 1293 1599 xxxx xxxxx 1635 xxxx xxxxx Adj Cap: xxxx xXYx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.98 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.96 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : xxxx YYYY XYYYY 1664 xxxx xxxxx xxrx xxxx xxxxx 933 xxxx 1351 Move Cap.: 853 925 1321 878 926 1293 1599 xxxx xxxxx 1635 YYYY xxxxx I II II II I I II II II 1 Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.0 xxxx 2.8 Stopped Del: 4.2 3.9 2.7 4.1 3.9 2.8 2.3 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxx LOS by Move: * * • A * * * * ` * * * LOS by Move: * * * • * A A • Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT 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 1141 xxxxx Shared Cap.: xxrx 1004 xxxxx xxxx 1106 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxr xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xYYYY XYYYY 3,3 YYxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 3.6 xxxxx xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ` * * * * * * * * * A * Shared LOS: * A * * A • • • * • ' • ApproachDel: 0.0 1.2 0.0 3.3 ApproachDel: 3.6 3.3 0.4 0.4 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Asooc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling A000c. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR L 02/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Paae 11 02/29/2000 15:24 Filename: MIT.OUT Pane 12 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 11-1 total w/137 mit Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:11 Page 12-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing * Project + Block 137 Mitigated Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #24 4th St/A Ave Intersection #33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (sec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.677 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.116 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 7.4 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.4 Optimal Cycle: 45 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 I II II II I II II I I I Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:45-17:45 Base Vol: 0 16 S 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Base Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 j Initial Bee: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Initial Bee: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 25 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 76 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaeserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 0 0 218 0 Initial Fut: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 29 7 15 55 7 Initial Fut: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1223 19 1 993 83 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 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 18 6 9 27 7 1 32 8 17 61 8 PHF Volume: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1263 20 1 1026 86 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 32 a 17 61 8 Reduced Vol: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1263 20 1 1026 86 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 Final Vol. : 0 18 6 9 27 7 1 32 6 17 61 8 Final Vol.: 26 21 23 114 21 102 76 1327 21 1 1077 90 I I I II II I I II I I II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 338 338 338 447 447 447 600 600 600 740 740 740 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.09 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 0.00 0.75 0.25 0.21 0.63 0.16 0.02 0.78 0.20 0.20 0.71 0.09 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.97 0.03 0.01 1.84 0.15 Final Sat.: 0 254 85 94 281 73 15 468 117 146 525 69 Final Sat. : 498 402 440 660 122 591 171 3741 59 3 3330 278 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.12 0.12 0.12 Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.44 0.35 0.35 0.32 0.32 0.32 Crit Moves: ++*+ **+* **** ++++ Crit Moves: **** **** ApproachV/S: 0.07 0.10 0.07 0.12 Green/Cycle: 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.6 Volume/Cap: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.54 0.54 0.49 0.49 0.49 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 17.1 17.1 17.1 23.1 23.1 23.1 16.1 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.6 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 LOS by Move: • A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 17.1 17.1 17.1 23.1 23.1 23.1 16.1 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 ApproachDel: 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.6 DeeignQueue: 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 25 0 0 20 2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.6 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR C.) F • 11111 4 I i i 01/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.OUT Pace 1 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.OUT Page 2 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:47 Page 1-1 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:47 Page 2-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment I Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 Base I 2017 Base PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analysis Report Scenario: 2017 Level Of Service Command: 2017 Intersection Base Future Change Volume: 2017 Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: 2017 LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee # 1 3rd St/A Ave A 4.3 0.762 A 4.3 0.762 + 0.000 D/V Trip Generation: pm Trip Distribution: pm # 2 2nd St/A Ave B 8.7 0.937 B 8.7 0.937 + 0.000 D/V Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes # 5 lst St/A Ave B 10.7 0.707 B 10.7 0.707 + 0.000 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration # 6 State St/A Ave F 63.1 1.111 F 63.1 1.111 + 0.000 D/V # 10 State St/B Ave C 22.8 0.778 C 22.8 0.778 + 0.000 D/V # 11 State St/Foothills Rd B 8.6 0.628 B 8.6 0.628 + 0.000 D/V # 15 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 1.7 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 A 1.5 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 24 4th St/A Ave E 50.7 1.404 E 50.7 1.404 + 0.000 D/V # 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.5 0.118 A 1.5 0.118 + 0.000 V/C Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OP. d t'.D I. A. CA L . 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.OUT Page 3, 01/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.OUT Pave 4 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:47 Page 3-1 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06.47 Page 4-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 Base 2017 Base PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 3rd St/A Ave Intersection #2 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.762 Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.937 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 4.3 Loss Time (sec): 8 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 8.7 Optimal Cycle: 56 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 118 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Weet Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T R I II II 11 1 1 11 11 11 Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 II II II I I 11 11 11 Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:30-17:30 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Base Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 28 12 23 20 12 37 28 1622 34 34 1059 29 Initial Bee: 10 1 26 19 6 44 114 1432 34 47 961 32 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 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 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 28 12 23 20 12 37 28 1622 34 34 1059 29 Initial Fut: 10 1 26 19 6 44 114 1432 34 47 961 32 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 29 12 25 22 12 38 29 1707 35 35 1114 31 PHF Volume: 11 2 28 20 6 46 120 1508 35 49 1011 34 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 29 12 25 22 12 38 29 1707 35 35 1114 31 Reduced Vol: 11 2 28 20 6 46 120 1508 35 49 1011 34 PCB Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 29 12 25 22 12 38 31 1793 37 35 1114 31 Final Vol.: 11 2 28 20 6 46 126 1583 37 49 1062 36 I I I II I I 1 I II I I II Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.05 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.09 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.44 0.18 0.38 0.30 0.17 0.53 0.03 1.93 0.04 0.76 1.21 0.03 Lanes: 0.27 0.05 0.68 0.28 0.08 0.64 0.14 1.82 0.04 1.00 1.93 0.07 Final Sat. : 596 247 514 438 239 757 48 2782 57 72 2294 64 Final Sat.: 367 67 935 419 126 964 156 1964 46 171 3675 125 II I I II I I I I 11 I I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.49 0.49 0.49 Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.29 0.29 0.29 Crit Moves: .... +"• Crit Moves: .... Green/Cycle: 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Green/Cycle: 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Volume/Cap: 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.57 0.57 0.57 Volume/Cap: 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.33 0.34 0.34 Delay/Veh: 44.3 44.3 44.3 46.1 46.1 46.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.7 1.7 1.7 Delay/Veh: 35.3 35.3 35.3 85.7 85.7 85.7 10.0 10.0 10.0 1.3 0.8 0.8 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 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: 44.3 44.3 44.3 46.1 46.1 46.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.7 1.7 1.7 AdjDel/Veh: 35.3 35.3 35.3 85.7 85.7 85.7 10.0 10.0 10.0 1.3 0.8 0.8 DesignQueue: 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 16 0 0 10 0 DeeignQueue: 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 13 0 0 8 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR l !.."4 • 11111 I , S 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.0UT Pace 5 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.0UT Page 6 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:47 Page 5-1 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:47 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment . 2017 Base 2017 Base PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 1st St/A Ave Intersection 46 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.707 Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.111 Lose Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 10.7 Lose Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 63.1 Optimal Cycle: 59 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II II II 1 II II II 1 Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lanes: 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I II I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 « 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Sep 1999 « 16:55-17:55 Base Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Base Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Initial Bee: 23 12 47 76 19 76 51 1562 25 26 895 35 Initial Bee: 685 749 0 0 1455 177 402 0 1207 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O D 0 0 PaeeerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaaserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 23 12 47 76 19 76 51 1562 25 26 895 35 Initial Fut: 685 749 0 0 1455 177 402 0 1207 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 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: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 25 12 49 80 20 80 54 1644 26 28 942 37 PHF Volume: 721 788 0 0 1532 186 423 0 1270 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 25 12 49 80 20 80 54 1644 26 28 942 37 Reduced Vol: 721 788 0 0 1532 186 423 0 1270 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.90 Final Vol. : 25 12 49 80 20 80 54 1727 27 28 989 39 Final Vol.: 793 867 0 0 1608 196 423 0 1435 0 0 0 1 II II II I I II II II Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0,99 0.99 Adjustment: 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.29 0.14 0.57 0.45 0.11 0.44 1.00 1.97 0.03 1.00 1.92 0.08 Lanes: 1.43 1.57 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 390 197 763 589 147 589 1805 3742 58 1805 3619 143 Final Sat.: 2668 2918 0 0 3319 405 1805 0 3230 0 0 0 II I I II I I I I II II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.03 0.46 0.46 0.02 0.27 0.27 Vol/Sat: 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.23 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: •at• •*•• •**• Crit Moves: **** **** •••• Green/Cycle: 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.07 0.65 0.65 0.02 0.61 0.61 Green/Cycle: 0.27 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.21 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.71 0.71 0.71 0,45 0.71 0,71 0.71 0.45 0.45 Volume/Cap: 1.11 0.42 0,00 0.00 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 24.1 24.1 24.1 31.7 31.7 31.7 32.5 8.3 8.3 60.6 7.3 7.3 Delay/Veh: 96.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 86.4 86.4 117.6 0.0 33.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 liner DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 24.1 24.1 24.1 31.7 31.7 31.7 32.5 8.3 8.3 60.6 7,3 7.3 AdjDel/Veh: 96.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 86.4 86.4 117.6 0.0 33.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 DemignQueue: 1 0 2 3 1 3 3 34 1 1 21 1 DesignQueue: 49 22 0 0 81 10 28 0 65 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR r•D I 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.OUT Page 7 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename. 2017.OUT Page 8 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:48 Page 7-1 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:48 Page 8-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 Bane 2017 Base PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #10 State St/B Ave Intersection #11 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.778 Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.628 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y.R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 22.8 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (YrR . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 8.6 Optimal Cycle: 79 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 54 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - P. L - T - R L - T - R II II I I I I II II II Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-L7:00 Base Vol: 1D8 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Baae Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Initial Bee: 133 985 0 0 1343 180 416 0 192 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 1202 71 141 1806 0 0 0 0 84 0 34 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaseerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaseerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 133 985 0 0 1343 180 416 0 192 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 1202 71 141 1806 0 0 0 0 84 0 34 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9S 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 140 1037 0 0 1414 189 438 0 202 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1265 75 149 1901 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 Reduct Vol: 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 140 1037 0 0 1414 189 438 0 202 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1265 75 149 1901 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 140 1089 0 0 1485 189 438 0 202 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 1328 79 149 1996 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.89 0.11 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3800 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat. : 0 3551 211 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 II II II 1 1 II II II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.12 0.24 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.08 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: •**• ar•• •.r• CIit Moves: *`•• •rr. **r* Green/Cycle: 0.10 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.15 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 Volume/Cap: 0.78 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.23 0.78 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.29 Delay/Veh: 59.5 11.9 0.0 0.0 23.1 14.9 38.0 0.0 29.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 8.6 8.6 43.5 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.5 0.0 46.7 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 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: 59.5 11,9 0.0 0.0 23.1 14.9 38.0 0.0 29.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 8.6 8.6 43.5 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.5 0.0 46.7 DesignQueue: 10 36 0 0 64 8 25 0 11 0 0 0 DesignQueue: 0 36 2 10 29 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 TraffiX 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc, Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CO� r 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.0UT Page 9 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.OUT Page 10 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:48 Page 9-1 I 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:48 Page 10-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 Base 2017 Base PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #15 10th St/Evergreen Rd Intersection #21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd Average Delay (sec/veh): 1.7 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.5 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II 1 Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 I II II II I I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Base Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bse: 0 16 7 10 29 0 0 0 0 26 0 19 Initial Bee: 4 7 6 6 12 20 7 25 9 16 41 12 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 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 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 16 7 10 29 0 0 0 0 26 0 19 Initial Fut: 4 7 6 6 12 20 7 25 9 16 41 12 Veer Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 17 8 11 31 0 0 0 0 28 0 20 PHF Volume: 5 8 6 6 12 22 8 26 9 17 43 12 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 17 8 11 31 0 0 0 0 28 0 20 Final Vol. : 5 8 6 6 12 22 8 26 9 17 43 12 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 04 0'% 0% 0% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Cycle/Cars: xxxx xxxx YYYx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Cycle/Cars: xxxx XYXx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx % Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx XXYx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xXXY xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trek/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Adj Vol.: 0 17 8 12 31 0 0 0 0 30 0 22 Adj Vol.: 5 8 7 7 14 24 8 26 9 19 43 12 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:xrrrr xxxx xvvvx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xrrrr 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 r*Yx xxxxx Critical Gp.vvvvx xxxx YYYYY 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxrxr 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Op: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5.0 XYYY XXXXX I II II II I I II 11 II I Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xY*X* 25 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xYYY+ 62 xxxx 21 Cnflict Vol: 121 111 31 111 109 49 55 xxxx xxxxx 35 xxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1669 xxxx YYYYX XXXX XXXX xrrrx 974 xxxx 1352 Potent Cap.: 901 954 1336 913 956 1307 1613 xxxx xxxxx 1649 xxxx xrr*r Adj Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx **rYX 0.99 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.96 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 xxxx rrrYY 1.00 xxxx YYYYX Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1669 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx YYYYx 967 xxxx 1352 Move Cap.: 863 938 1336 890 940 1307 1613 xxxx xxxxx 1649 xxxx xxxxx I II II II I I II II II 1 Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:*X*rx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.8 xxxx 2.7 Stopped Del: 4.2 3.9 2.7 4.1 3.9 2.8 2.2 xv== rrrxY 2.2 YYYY xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * A * * * * * * * * LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RI LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx r*rrx xxxx 1098 xxxxx Shared Cap.: xxxx 1017 YYYYx xxxx 1096 YYYYX XXXX XXXX XXXXX xxxx XXXX XXXXX Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx YYYYx xxxxx 3.4 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 3.6 XXXXX xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxxx x*** xxxxx XrrXX xxxx xvvvx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * A * Shared LOS: * A * * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 0.0 0.6 0.0 3.4 ApproachDel: 3.6 3.3 0.4 0.6 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR C� i ` I--+ 03/29/200D 15:25 Filename: 2017.OUT Page 11 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017.OUT Page 12 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:48 Page 11-1 I 2017 Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:06:48 Page 12-1 I Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment I Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 Base 1 2017 Base PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #124 4th St/A Ave Intersection #133 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (eec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.404 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.118 Loss Time (eec) : 8 (Y.R m 4 sec) Average Delay (eec/veh) : 50.7 Loss Time (sec) : 0 (YtR = 4 sec) Average Delay (eec/veh): 1.5 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T R L T R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:45-17:45 Base Vol: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Base Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 0 23 7 12 35 9 1 13 10 22 44 10 Initial Bee: 37 29 32 161 29 145 108 1469 28 1 1021 121 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 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 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 23 7 12 35 9 1 13 10 22 44 10 Initial Fut: 37 29 32 161 29 145 108 1469 28 1 1021 121 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 14 11 23 46 11 PHF Volume: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1546 29 2 1074 128 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 14 11 23 46 11 Reduced Vol: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1546 29 2 1074 128 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 25 B 12 37 9 2 14 11 23 46 11 Final Vol.: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1623 31 2 1074 128 I II II II I I II II I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 432 432 432 551 551 551 473 473 473 679 679 679 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.06 1.00 1.00 0.06 0.98 0.98 Lanes: 0.00 0.76 0.24 0.21 0.64 0.15 0.07 0.52 0.41 0.29 0.57 0.14 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.96 0.04 0.05 1.74 0.21 Final Sat.: 0 327 105 114 352 85 35 245 193 195 390 33 Final Sat.: 458 374 410 605 111 544 114 3729 71 6 3239 386 I II I I II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.12 Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.28 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.44 0.44 0.33 0.33 0.33 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** ApproachV/S: 0.08 0.11 0.06 0.12 Green/Cycle: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.6 Volume/Cap: 0.42 0.42 0.42 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 0.61 0.61 0.47 0.47 0.47 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 21.0 21.0 21.0 332.5 333 332.5 372.3 4.6 4.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.6 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 LOS by Move: • A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 21.0 21.0 21.0 332.5 333 332.5 372.3 4.6 4.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 ApproachDel: 1.3 1.5 1.2 1.6 DesignQueue: 2 1 1 7 1 6 2 26 0 0 17 2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.3 1.5 1.2 1.6 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed Co DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD rD CD ID 11111 , 11111 03/29/2000 5:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 03/29/2000 15:2S Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT • Page 2 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 1S:07:15 Page 1-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 2-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelo ment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project l► � 2017 + Project biA0440i107 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analysis Report Scenario: 2017 w/proj Level Of Service Command: 2017 w/proj Intersection Base Future Change Volume: 2017 w/proj Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: 2017 LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee # 1 3rd St/A Ave A 4.3 0.762 B 7.0 0.875 + 2.672 D/V Trip Generation: pm Trip Distribution: pm # 2 2nd St/A Ave B 8.7 0.937 E 46.8 1.120 +38.141 D/V Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes # 5 1st St/A Ave B 10.7 0.707 D 39.5 1.044 +28.873 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration # 6 State St/A Ave F 63.1 1.111 F 95.0 1.197 +31.903 D/V # 10 State St/B Ave C 22.8 0.778 C 23.3 0.808 + 0.444 D/V # 11 State St/Foothills Rd B 8.6 0.628 B 8.5 0.671 -0.062 D/V # 1S 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 1.9 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 A 1.4 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 24 4th St/A Ave E 50.7 1.404 E 47.0 1.404 -3.681 D/V # 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.5 0.118 A 1.6 0.137 + 0.019 V/C Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR C) r: Ts.) F-I u i 01/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 3 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 4 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 3-1 1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 4-. 1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project • Block 137 1 2017 + Project �1ck',7'` PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 3rd St/A Ave Intersection #2 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.875 Cycle (sec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.120 Loss Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 7.0 Lose Time (sec): 6 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 46.8 Optimal Cycle: 85 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 160 Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound Eaet Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 1 II II II I 1 II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I I II I I I I II II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:30-17:30 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Base Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 26 12 23 20 12 37 28 1622 34 34 1059 29 Initial Bse: 10 1 26 19 6 44 114 1432 34 47 961 32 Added Vol: 11 1 0 0 1 0 0 27 10 0 43 0 Added Vol: 0 5 21 0 4 0 0 27 0 20 43 0 PaseerByVol: 12 0 6 0 0 0 0 67 6 12 122 0 PasoerByVol: 59 0 32 0 0 0 0 41 32 59 75 0 Initial Fut: 51 13 29 20 13 37 28 1716 50 46 1224 29 Initial Fut: 69 6 79 19 10 44 114 1500 66 126 1079 32 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.30 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 53 13 31 22 13 38 29 1806 52 48 1288 31 PHF Volume: 73 7 83 20 10 46 120 1579 69 132 1135 34 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 53 13 31 22 13 38 29 1806 52 48 1288 31 Reduced Vol: 73 7 83 20 10 46 120 1579 69 132 1135 ,34 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 53 13 31 22 13 38 31 1897 55 48 1288 31 Final Vol.: 73 7 83 20 10 46 126 1658 72 132 1192 36 II 1 1 11 1 I 11 11 11 1 Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.05 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.08 1.00 1.00 Lance: 0.55 0.13 0.32 0.30 0.18 0.52 0.03 1.91 0.06 0.84 1.13 0.03 Lanes: 0.45 0.04 0.51 0.26 0.13 0.61 0.13 1.79 0.08 1.00 1.94 0.06 Final Sat. : 732 180 428 413 244 714 43 2617 76 80 2148 52 Final Sat.: 593 57 675 344 172 792 140 1848 80 152 3689 111 1 1 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.60 0.60 0.60 Vol/Sat: 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.87 0.32 0.32 Crit Moves: **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 Green/Cycle: 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Volume/Cap: 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.87 0.87 0.67 0.72 0.72 0.72 Volume/Cap: 1.12 1.12 1.12 0.53 0.53 0.53 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.08 0.40 0.40 Delay/Veh: 59.7 59.7 59.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 6.1 6.1 6.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 Delay/Veh: 132.2 132 132.2 27.3 27.3 27.3 66.1 66.1 66.1 101.4 1.7 1.7 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 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: 59.7 59.7 59.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 6.1 6.1 6.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 AdjDel/Veh: 132.2 132 132.2 27.3 27.3 27.3 66.1 66.1 66.1 101.4 1.7 1.7 DeeignQueue: 2 1 1 1 1 2 0 19 1 0 13 0 DesignQueue: 3 0 4 1 0 2 1 19 1 1 13 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD rD r,ti r..D S • S 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Pace 5 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Pace 6 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 5-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment ' 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project A/0,044147, PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 let St/A Ave Intersection #6 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.044 Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.197 Lose Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 39.5 Lose Time (sec): 12 (Y+R • 4 nec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 95.0 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: D Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Righta: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lanes: 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 II II II I I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 « 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Sep 1999 « 16:55-17:55 Base Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Base Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Initial Bee: 23 12 47 76 19 76 51 1562 25 26 895 35 Initial Bee: 685 749 0 0 1455 177 402 0 1207 0 0 0 Added Vol: 43 23 84 0 15 0 0 21 27 53 20 0 Added Vol: 59 0 0 0 0 14 21 0 84 0 0 0 Summer/Fall: 64 0 34 0 0 0 0 39 34 64 70 0 PasserByVol: 72 0 0 0 0 62 21 0 52 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 130 35 165 76 34 76 51 1622 86 143 985 35 Initial Fut: 816 749 0 0 1455 253 444 0 1343 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 D.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 137 37 173 80 36 80 54 1708 90 151 1037 37 PHF Volume: 859 788 0 0 1532 266 468 0 1413 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 137 37 173 80 36 80 54 1708 90 151 1037 37 Reduced Vol: 859 788 0 0 1532 266 468 0 1413 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 137 37 173 80 36 80 54 1793 95 151 1089 39 Final Vol.: 945 867 0 0 1608 280 468 0 1597 0 0 0 I II II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.95 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.39 0.11 0.50 0.41 0.18 0.41 1.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 1.93 0.07 Lanes: 1.56 1.44 0.00 0.00 1.70 0.30 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat. : 430 116 542 384 173 384 1805 3573 189 1805 3669 131 Final Sat.: 2884 2645 0 0 3172 552 1805 0 3230 0 0 0 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.30 0.3D Vol/Sat: 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.26 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: •••• ••+• •••• Crit Moves: •••• •••• •••• Green/Cycle: 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.05 0.48 0.48 0.08 0.51 0.51 Green/Cycle: 0.27 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.22 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.58 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.58 0.58 Volume/Cap: 1.20 0.47 0.00 0.00 1.20 1.20 1.20 0.00 1.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 75.0 75.0 75.0 25.2 25.2 25.2 38.0 45.8 45.8 104.2 12.0 12.0 Delay/Veh: 143.4 7.3 0.0 C.0 135 135.1 163.7 0.0 46.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 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: 75.0 75.0 75.0 25.2 25.2 25.2 38.0 45.8 45.8 104.2 12.0 12.0 AdjDel/Veh: 143.4 7.3 0.0 0.0 135 135.1 163.7 0.0 46.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 5 1 6 3 1 3 3 54 3 7 29 1 DesignQueue: 58 22 0 0 83 14 30 0 71 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Aneoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I",D CO 1 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 7 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 8 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 7-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 8-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtownd^Redevelopment 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project ~fi 4/(L PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #10 State St/B Ave Intersection #11 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.808 Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.671 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 23.3 Lose Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 8.5 Optimal Cycle: 87 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 59 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II II II I I II II II Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I II II II 1 1 II II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-17:00 Base Vol: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Initial Bee: 133 985 0 0 1343 180 416 0 192 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 1202 71 141 1806 0 0 0 0 84 0 34 Added Vol: 0 21 0 0 14 7 10 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 59 0 0 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 21 0 0 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 72 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 133 1027 0 0 1419 187 426 0 192 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 1333 71 141 1942 0 0 0 0 84 0 34 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 140 1081 0 0 1494 196 448 0 202 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1403 75 149 2044 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 140 1081 0 0 1494 196 448 0 202 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1403 75 149 2044 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 140 1135 0 0 1569 196 448 0 202 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 1473 79 149 2146 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 I II II II I I I I I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3800 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat.: 0 3571 191 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 II II II 1 I II II II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.12 0.25 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.08 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: •••• •••• •"• Crit Moves: •••• •••a •••• Green/Cycle: 0.10 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.14 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Volume/Cap: 0.81 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.24 0.81 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.31 Delay/Veh: 63.1 11.9 0.0 0.0 23.5 14.5 40.0 0.0 29.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 8.3 8.3 45.4 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.4 0.0 47.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 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: 63.1 11.9 0.0 0.0 23.5 14.5 40.0 0.0 29.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 8.3 8.3 45.4 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.4 0.0 47.3 DesignQueue: 10 38 0 0 67 8 26 0 11 0 0 0 DesignQueue: 0 38 2 10 31 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling ABOoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD r�I . O • 0 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROS.OUT Page 9 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 10 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 9-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 10-1 Lake Oewego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oewego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project 4/1.14a415t1. 1 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Unaignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Unaignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #15 10th St/Evergreen Rd Intersection #21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.9 Worst Came Level Of Service: A Average Delay (eec/veh) : 1.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound Eaet Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound Eaet Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 1 II II II 1 1 II II II I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 J II II II I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Base Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 0 16 7 10 29 0 0 0 0 26 0 19 Initial Bee: 4 7 6 6 12 20 7 25 9 16 41 12 Added Vol: 0 0 3 10 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 14 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 9 0 0 14 0 PaeaerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaaserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 16 10 20 29 0 0 0 0 30 0 33 Initial Fut: 4 7 6 6 12 24 10 34 9 16 55 12 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 17 11 21 31 0 0 0 0 32 0 35 PHF Volume: 5 B 6 6 12 26 11 36 9 17 58 12 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 17 11 21 31 0 0 0 0 32 0 35 Final Vol.: 5 8 6 6 12 26 11 36 9 17 58 12 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 04 09, 06 04 Grade: 06 04 04 04 4 Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Tick/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx XYYY xYYY xxxx XXXX Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Adj Vol.: 0 17 11 23 31 0 0 0 0 35 0 38 Adj Vol.: 5 8 7 7 14 28 12 36 9 19 58 12 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx XXXX YYYYX 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Gp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx I II II II I I II II II Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 28 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 74 xxxx 22 Cnflict Vol: 151 138 40 139 136 64 70 xxxx xxxxx 45 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1663 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 959 xxxx 1349 Potent Cap.: 866 923 1321 880 925 1285 1587 xxxx xxxxx 1632 xxxx xxxxx Adj Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.99 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.00 XXXX XXxXX 1.00 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx YYYYY 1663 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 945 xxxx 1349 Move Cap.: 825 905 1321 856 907 1285 1587 xxxx xxxxx 1632 xxxx xxxxx I II II II I I II II II Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.9 xxxx 2.7 Stopped Del: 4.4 4.0 2.7 4.2 4.0 2.9 2.3 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxx LOS by Move: * • • A * * * • * • • * LOS by Move: • • * * * * A * * A • * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT 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 1120 xxxxx Shared Cap.: xxxx 985 xxxxx xxxx 1084 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xx*Yx 3.7 xxxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx XxXXX XXXXX xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * • * • * • • * • A • Shared LOS: * A * • A * * • • * • • ApproachDel: 0.0 0.9 0.0 3.3 ApproachDel: 3.7 3.4 0.5 0.5 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licenoed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD r.D L11 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 11. 03/29/2000 15:25 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 12 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 11-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:07:15 Page 12-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown �.Redevelopment 9 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project yntoy'V147 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM A-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection ff24 4th St/A Ave Intersection #33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (sec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.404 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.137 Loss Time (sec): 8 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 47.0 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 1.6 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T R L T R L T R L T R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1I 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1I 0 0 0 0 It 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 I 11 11 11 I I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:45-17:45 Base Vol: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Base Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bce: 0 23 7 12 35 9 1 13 10 22 44 10 Initial Bee: 37 29 32 161 29 145 108 1469 28 1 1021 121 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 18 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 54 0 PanoerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 0 0 134 0 Initial Fut: 0 23 7 12 35 9 1 25 10 22 62 10 Initial Fut: 37 29 32 161 29 145 108 1580 28 1 1209 121 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9S 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 26 11 23 6S 11 PHF Volume: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1663 29 2 1272 128 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 26 11 23 65 11 Reduced Vol: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1663 29 2 1272 128 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 26 11 23 65 11 Final Vol.: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1746 31 2 1272 128 I II II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 364 364 364 475 475 475 565 565 565 725 725 725 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.06 1.00 1.00 0.06 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.00 0.76 0.24 0.21 0.64 0.15 0.05 0.67 0.28 0.23 0.66 0.11 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.97 0.03 0.05 1.77 0.18 Final Sat.: 0 276 88 98 303 74 29 377 159 168 476 81 Final Sat.: 458 374 410 605 111 544 114 3734 66 5 3339 336 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.14 0.14 0.14 Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.28 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.47 0.47 0.38 0.38 0.38 Crit Moves: '•`'` +++' '... ...+ Crit Moves: '+•' "'+ ApproachV/S: 0.09 0.12 0.07 0.14 Green/Cycle: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.7 Volume/Cap: 0.42 0.42 0.42 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 0.66 0.66 0.53 0.53 0.53 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 21.0 21.0 21.0 332.5 333 332.5 372.3 4.9 4.9 4.1 4.1 4.1 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.1 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 LOS by Move: A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 21.0 21.0 21.0 332.5 333 332.5 372.3 4.9 4.9 4.1 4.1 4.1 ApproachDel: 1.4 1.6 1.3 1.7 DesignQueue: 2 1 1 7 1 6 2 29 1 0 20 2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.4 1.6 1.3 1.7 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Annoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR TraffiX 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD IV • S S S S S 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 1 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 2 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 1-1 1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 2-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment I Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project + Block 137 I 2017 + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analyeie Report Scenario: 2017 w/proj Level Of Service Command: 2017 w/proj Intersection Base Future Change Volume: 2017 w/proj Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: 2017 LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee # 1 3rd St/A Ave A 4.3 0.762 B 7.7 0.896 + 3.341 D/V Trip Generation: pm Trip Distribution: pm # 2 2nd St/A Ave B 8.7 0.937 E 58.4 1.238 +49.705 D/V Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes # 5 let St/A Ave B 10.7 0.707 F 67.6 1.137 +56.914 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration # 6 State St/A Ave F 63.1 1.111 F 102.3 1.212 +39.223 D/V # 10 State St/B Ave C 22.8 0.778 C 23.4 0.813 + 0.587 D/V # 11 State St/Foothills Rd B 8.6 0.628 B 8.5 0.682 -0,057 D/V # 15 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 2.0 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 A 1.4 0.000 + 0.000 v/c # 24 4th St/A Ave E 50.7 1.404 E 46.5 1.404 -4.139 D/V # 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.5 0.118 A 1.6 0.143 + 0.025 V/C • Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR l l ., 1j L I 01/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 3, 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename. 2017PROJ.OUT Page 4 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 3-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 4-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 3rd St/A Ave Intersection #2 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.896 Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.238 Loss Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 7.7 Loss Time (sec): 8 (Y+R . 4 sac) Average Delay (eec/veh) : 58.4 Optimal Cycle: 94 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E .++ Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T R L T R I II II II 1 1 II II II Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min, Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Lanee: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 II II 11 1 I II 11 II Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:30-17:30 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Bane Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 28 12 23 20 12 37 28 1622 34 34 1059 29 Initial Bee: 10 1 26 19 6 44 114 1432 34 47 961 32 Added Vol: 11 1 0 0 1 0 0 49 10 0 64 0 Added Vol: 11 8 21 0 8 0 0 38 11 20 54 0 PasserByVol: 12 0 6 0 0 0 0 67 6 12 122 0 PaseerByVol: 59 0 32 0 0 0 0 41 32 59 75 0 Initial Put: 51 13 29 20 13 37 28 1738 50 46 1245 29 Initial Fut: 80 9 79 19 14 44 114 1511 77 126 1090 32 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 53 13 31 22 13 38 29 1830 52 48 1310 31 PHF Volume: 84 10 83 20 15 46 120 1591 81 132 1147 34 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 53 13 31 22 13 38 29 1830 52 48 1310 31 Reduced Vol: 84 10 83 20 15 46 120 1591 81 132 1147 34 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol.: 53 13 31 22 13 38 31 1921 55 48 1310 31 Final Vol. : 84 10 83 20 15 46 126 1670 85 132 1204 36 II II I I I I II I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.05 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.07 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.55 0.13 0.32 0.30 0.18 0.52 0.03 1.92 0.05 0.83 1.14 0.03 Lanes: 0.47 0.06 0.47 0.25 0.18 0.57 0.13 1.78 0.09 1.00 1.94 0.36 Final Sat. : 732 180 428 409 242 706 42 2582 74 79 2163 51 Final Sat.: 621 74 614 327 245 752 139 1837 93 133 3690 110 I II II II I I I I I I II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.61 0.61 0.61 Vol/Sat: 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.33 0.33 Crit Moves: •*" •••• Crit Moves: "'+ Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.83 0.83 0.63 0.83 0.83 0.83 Green/Cycle: 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.30 Volume/Cap: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.73 0.73 0.73 Volume/Cap: 1.24 1.24 1.24 0.56 0.56 0.56 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.24 0.41 0.41 Delay/Veh: 64.6 64.6 64.6 35.4 35.4 35.4 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.1 3.1 3.1 Delay/Veh: 205.9 206 205.9 28.1 28.1 28.1 73.3 73.3 73.3 199.2 1.7 1.7 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 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: 64.6 64.6 64.6 35.4 35.4 35.4 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.1 3.1 3.1 AdjDel/Veh: 205.9 206 205.9 28.1 28.1 28.1 73.3 73.3 73.3 199.2 1.7 1.7 DesignQueue: 2 1 1 1 1 2 0 19 1 0 13 0 DesignQueue: 4 0 4 1 1 2 1 19 1 1 13 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Q rD 4W O • S 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 5 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 6 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 5-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 4(5 let St/A Ave Intersection 316 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.137 Cycle (nec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.212 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 67.6 Lose Time (sec): 12 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 102.3 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lanes: 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 I II II 1I 1 I II 1I II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 « 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Sep 1999 « 16:55-17:55 Base Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Base Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Initial Bee: 23 12 47 76 19 76 51 1562 25 26 895 35 Initial Bee: 685 749 0 0 1455 177 402 0 1207 0 0 0 Added Vol: 54 31 125 0 22 0 0 21 38 95 20 0 Added Vol: 93 0 0 0 0 23 29 0 116 0 0 O Summer/Fall: 64 0 34 0 0 0 0 39 34 64 70 0 PasserByVol: 72 0 0 0 0 62 21 0 52 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 141 43 206 76 41 76 51 1622 97 185 985 35 Initial Fut: 850 749 0 0 1455 262 452 0 1377 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 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: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 149 45 217 BO 43 80 54 1708 102 195 1037 37 PHF Volume: 895 788 0 0 1532 276 476 0 1449 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 149 45 217 80 43 80 54 1708 102 195 1037 37 Reduced Vol: 895 788 0 0 1532 276 476 0 1449 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 MLF Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 149 45 217 80 43 80 54 1793 107 195 1089 39 Final Vol.: 984 867 0 0 1608 290 476 0 1637 0 0 0 1 II II II 1 1 II II II 1 Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.95 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.36 0.11 0.53 0.40 0.21 0.39 1.00 1.89 0.11 1.00 1.93 0.07 Lanes: 1.59 1.41 0.00 0.00 1.69 0.31 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat. : 400 121 583 356 192 356 1805 3550 212 1805 3669 131 Final Sat. : 2939 2590 0 0 3155 569 1805 0 3230 0 0 0 1 II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analyois Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.03 0.51 0.51 0.11 0.30 0.30 Vol/Sat: 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.2G 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.05 0.44 0.44 0.10 0.49 0.49 Green/Cycle: 0.28 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 D.22 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 1.14 1.14 1.14 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.61 1.14 1.14 1.14 0.61 0.61 Volume/Cap: 1.21 0.48 0.00 0.00 1.21 1.21 1.21 0.00 1.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 112.4 112 112.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 39.5 88.2 88.2 140.6 13.1 13.1 Delay/Veh: 153.4 7.4 0.0 0.0 146 145.6 173.6 0.0 50.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 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: 112.4 112 112.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 39.5 88.2 88.2 140.6 13.1 13.1 AdjDel/Veh: 153.4 7.4 0.0 0.0 146 145.6 173.6 0.0 50.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 5 2 8 3 1 3 3 57 3 9 30 1 DesignQueue: 61 22 0 0 84 15 31 0 73 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DES ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffir. 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD t D r: GO 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Pace 7 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Pace 8 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 7-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 8-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project 4VBAyeictnit PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 410 State St/B Ave Intersection 411 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.813 Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.682 Lose Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 23.4 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 8.5 Optimal Cycle: 89 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 61 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II II II I I II II II Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I I II II I I I I II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-17:00 Base Vol: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Initial Bee: 133 985 0 0 1343 180 416 0 192 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 1202 71 141 1806 0 0 0 0 84 0 34 Added Vol: 0 29 0 0 23 11 14 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 93 0 0 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 21 0 0 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaseerByVol: 0 72 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 133 1035 0 0 1428 191 430 0 192 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 1367 71 141 1976 0 0 0 0 84 0 34 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0 95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 140 1090 0 0 1503 201 452 0 202 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1439 75 149 2080 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 140 1090 0 0 1503 201 452 0 202 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1439 75 149 2080 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 PCS Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 140 1144 0 0 1578 201 452 0 202 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 1511 79 149 2184 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 D.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3800 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat. : 0 3575 187 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 II 11 11 1 1 I I II II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.12 0.25 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.08 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: "*** **** **** Crit Moves: **"* **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.10 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.14 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Volume/Cap: 0.81 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.24 0.81 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.00 0.31 Delay/Veh: 63.8 11.9 0.0 0.0 23.7 14.6 40.2 0.0 29.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 8.3 8.3 45.9 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.3 0.0 47.4 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 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: 63.8 11.9 0.0 0.0 23.7 14.6 40.2 0.0 29.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 8.3 8.3 45.9 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.3 0.0 47.4 DesignQueue: 10 38 0 0 67 8 26 0 11 0 0 0 DesignQueue: 0 39 2 10 31 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CD T Gi . . . S 0 S 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 9 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ.OUT Page 10 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 9-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 10-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Uneignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Uneignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #15 10th St/Evergreen Rd Intersection 021 3rd St/Evergreen Rd Average Delay (sec/veh): 2.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.4 Woret Cane Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound Eaet Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 199E « Base Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 0 16 7 10 29 0 0 0 0 26 0 19 Initial Bee: 4 7 6 6 12 20 7 25 9 16 41 12 Added Vol: 0 0 4 16 0 0 0 0 0 S 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 16 0 0 21 0 PaeeerByVol: 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 16 11 26 29 0 0 0 0 31 0 39 Initial Fut: 4 7 6 6 12 24 10 41 9 16 62 12 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 17 12 28 31 0 0 0 0 33 0 41 PHF Volume: 5 8 6 6 12 26 11 43 9 17 65 12 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 0 17 12 28 31 0 0 0 0 33 0 41 Final Vol. : 5 9 6 6 12 26 11 43 9 17 65 12 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 016 04 0% 0% Grade: 0ti 0• 0• 0♦ Cycle/Cara: xxxx xxx' xxxx xxxx YYYX YYYY YYYX xxxx 4 Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx lk Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCS: xxxx YYYY xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: rrr* xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx YYYY xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx 'TM YYYX xxxx xxxX xxxx xxxx Adj Vol. : 0 17 12 30 31 0 0 0 0 36 0 45 Adj Vol.: 5 8 7 7 14 28 12 43 9 19 65 12 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:xxxxx rrrr xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Cp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 29 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxX 81 xxxx 23 Cnflict Vol: 166 153 48 154 151 71 77 xxxx xxxxx 52 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1661 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx XYYYY 950 xxxx 1348 Potent Cap.: 849 907 1310 863 909 1274 1575 xxxx xxxxx 1619 xxxx xxxxx Adj Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.98 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : xxxx xxxx x*x*x 1661 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 933 xxxx 1348 Move Cap.: 808 889 1310 839 891 1274 1575 xxxx xxxxx 1619 xxxx xxxxx 11 1 1 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.0 xxxx 2.8 Stopped Del: 4.5 4.1 2.8 4.3 4.1 2.9 2.3 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • • * A * * • * * * * * LOS by Move: • • • • • A • • A • • Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx YYYX YYYYY xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xXYYY xxxx 1125 xxxxx Shared Cap.. xxxx 969 YYYY* xxxx 1069 xxxxx xxxx xxxx XTYTX xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:Y*T*r YYY xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:* xxx 3.7 xxxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx XYYfx Shared LOS: * * * * * • * * • * A * Shared LOS: • A * * A * • * • ApproachDel: 0.0 1.1 0.0 3.3 ApproachDel: 3.7 3.4 0.4 0.4 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Annoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR r Ir-A 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017P4OJ..OUT Page 11 03/29/2000 15:26 Filename: 2017PROJ-OUT Page 12 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 11-1 2017 w/proj Wed Mar 29, 2000 15:08:31 Page 12-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oowego Downtown Redevelopment 2017 + Project + Block 137 2017 + Project * Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 424 4th St/A Ave Intersection 433 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.404 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.143 Lose Time (sec) : 8 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 46.5 Lose Time (sec) : 0 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 1.6 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound Eaet Bound Went Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T R L T R L T R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 D Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 I I I I I II I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:45-17:45 Bane Vol: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Bane Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 0 23 7 12 35 9 1 13 10 22 44 10 Initial Bee: 37 29 32 161 29 145 108 1469 28 1 1021 121 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 25 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 76 0 PaeserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaaeerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 0 0 134 0 Initial Fut: 0 23 7 12 35 9 1 33 10 22 69 10 Initial Fut: 37 29 32 161 29 145 108 1601 28 1 1231 121 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 Goer 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: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 35 11 23 72 11 PHF Volume: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1685 29 2 1295 128 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 25 a 12 37 9 2 35 11 23 72 11 Reduced Vol: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1685 29 2 1295 128 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 35 11 23 72 11 Final Vol. : 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1769 31 2 1295 128 I II II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 338 338 338 447 447 447 600 600 600 740 740 740 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.06 1.00 1.00 0.06 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.00 0.76 0.24 0.21 0.64 0.15 0.04 0.73 0.23 0.22 0.68 0.10 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.97 0.03 0.04 1.78 0.18 Final Sat. : 0 256 82 92 285 69 25 438 138 161 503 77 Final Sat.: 458 374 410 605 111 544 114 3735 65 5 3346 331 I II II II I I II II II 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.14 0.14 0.14 Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.28 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.47 0.47 0.39 0.39 0.39 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moven: **** **** ApproachV/S: 0.10 0.13 0.08 0.14 Green/Cycle: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.7 Volume/Cap: 0.42 0.42 0.42 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 0.67 0.67 0.54 0.54 0.54 Delay Adj: 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 21.0 21.0 21.0 332.5 333 332.5 372.3 5.0 5.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.7 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 LOS by Move: * A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 21.0 21.0 21.0 332.5 333 332.5 372.3 5.0 5.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 ApproachDel: 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.7 DeeignQueue: 2 1 1 7 1 6 2 29 1 0 21 2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.7 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Aeooc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR r t -,,, • • • MITIG8 - total w/137 mit Fri Mar 31, 2000 11:48:20 Page 1-1 • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Existing + Project + Block 137 Mitigated PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 2nd St/A Ave ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.891 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 17.3 Optimal Cycle: 100 Level Of Service: C ******************************************************************************** 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: Permitted Permitted Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 << 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 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: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Added Vol: 11 8 21 0 8 0 0 38 11 20 54 0 PasserByVol: 59 0 32 9 0 12 0 113 32 59 147 0 Initial Fut: 77 9 71 22 12 42 78 1132 66 111 859 22 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: 82 10 76 23 13 45 83 1208 70 118 917 23 • Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 82 10 76 23 13 45 83 1208 70 118 917 23 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 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol. : 82 10 76 23 13 45 87 1269 74 118 963 25 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.88 0.99 0.99 0.36 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.49 0.06 0.45 0.28 0.16 0.56 0.12 1.78 0.10 1.00 1.95 0.05 Final Sat. : 623 76 578 380 215 744 201 3338 195 692 3704 96 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.43 0.38 0.38 0.17 0.26 0.26 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.76 0.61 0.61 0.40 0.29 0.29 Volume/Cap: 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.57 0.62 0.62 0.43 0.89 0.89 Delay/Veh: 49.9 49.9 49.9 23.3 23.3 23.3 5.2 7.4 7.4 13.2 26.3 26.3 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: 49.9 49.9 49.9 23.3 23.3 23.3 5.2 7.4 7.4 13.2 26.3 26.3 Designoueue: 4 0 3 1 1 2 3 27 2 5 37 1 ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 4111 MITIGB - 2017 w/proj Fri Mar 31, 2000 11:49:55 Page 1-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment • 2017 + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection A5 1st St/A Ave ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.919 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 20.7 Optimal Cycle: 112 Level Of Service: C ******************************************************************************** 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: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I II II II I Volume Module: >> Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 << 17:00-18:00 Base Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bse: 23 12 47 76 19 76 51 1562 25 26 895 35 Added Vol: 54 31 125 0 22 0 0 21 38 95 20 0 Summer/Fall: 64 0 34 0 0 0 0 39 34 64 70 0 Initial Fut: 141 43 206 76 41 76 51 1622 97 165 985 35 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 : 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 149 45 217 80 43 80 54 1708 102 195 1037 37 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Reduced Vol: 149 45 217 80 43 80 54 1708 102 195 1037 37 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol. : 149 45 217 80 43 80 54 1793 107 195 1089 39 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.61 0.88 0.88 0.23 0.90 0.90 0.95 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.17 0.83 1.00 0.35 0.65 1.00 1.89 0.11 1.00 1.93 0.07 Final Sat. : 1159 287 1385 437 598 1112 1805 3550 212 1805 3669 131 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.51 0.51 0.11 0.30 0.30 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.12 0.61 0.61 Volume/Cap: 0.65 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.36 0.36 0.49 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.49 0.49 Delay/Veh: 29.4 34.0 34.0 76.1 23.9 23.9 33.8 19.2 19.2 58.2 7.7 7.7 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: 29.4 34.0 34.0 76.1 23.9 23.9 33.8 19.2 19.2 58.2 7.7 7.7 DesignQueue: 6 2 9 3 2 3 3 46 3 9 23 1 ******************************************************************************** Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 4111 DKS Associates Traffic Counts • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates 0235 •I 0 . n 3 . INTERSECTION TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY REPORT A AVENUE AT STATE STREET ,2 t0 c Cf ♦ T= 1.1% P=.953 ' ' N 11327 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 9/21/99 O , 1936 DAY QF•*EEK: Tue • 144R 1183 0 TIME STARTED: 16:00 TTIME ENDED: 18:00 H 4-701 4-1 1 L► 41-0 ♦ 327 -I L0 T= 1.6% T= 0% 0 -► 4-0 P=.789 P=0. 981 0 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ r T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 4-10" P=PHF BY APPROACH 1308-* 1 mpl3 557 609 1 Peak Hour 12164 16:55-17:55 Traffic Smithy - T= 1.6% P=. 982 11167 TEV=3802 I (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO 1 -► J 'J 1 L► it I f► r L ALL 16: 00-16:05 58 0 26 13 75 0 36 46 0 0 0 0 254 16 :05-16:10 51 0 21 19 90 0 53 38 0 0 0 0 272 16 : 10-16:15 59 0 31 19 78 0 35 53 0 0 0 0 275 16 : 15-16 :20 68 0 27 11 77 0 42 75 0 0 0 0 300 16 : 20-16:25 71 0 19 16 84 0 46 47 0 0 0 0 283 16 :25-16:30 50 0 30 16 86 0 44 48 0 0 0 0 274 16 :30-16:35 64 0 31 15 72 0 40 55 0 0 0 0 277 16 :35-16:40 68 0 31 21 74 0 54 41 0 0 0 0 289 16:40-16:45 65 0 20 16 82 0 37 39 0 0 0 0 259 16 :45-16:50 62 0 31 15 87 0 32 59 0 0 0 0 286 16 : 50-16:55 70 0 26 17 101 0 45 61 0 0 0 0 320 16 :55-17:00 70 0 15 22 100 0 37 47 0 0 0 0 291 17:00-17:05 72 0 30 16 91 0 49 47 0 0 0 0 305 • 17:05-17:10 74 0 26 11 108 0 54 48 0 0 0 0 321 17:10-17:15 87 0 28 9 93 0 33 58 0 0 0 0 308 17:15-17:20 96 0 33 7 84 0 36 66 0 0 0 0 322 17:20-17:25 123 0 26 13 114 0 43 59 0 0 0 0 378 17:25-17:30 101 0 35 8 93 0 47 41 0 0 0 0 325 17:30-17:35 90 0 33 10 92 0 41 62 0 0 0 0 328 17:35-17:40 72 0 27 15 107 0 58 47 1 0 0 0 327 17:40-17:45 57 0 25 12 102 0 35 34 0 0 0 0 265 17:45-17:50 62 0 24 10 95 0 48 50 0 0 0 0 289 17:50-17:55 77 0 25 11 104 0 76 50 0 0 0 0 343 17:55-18:00 78 0 12 8 95 0 47 39 0 0 0 0 279 Total Survey 1745 0 632 330 2184 0 1068 1210 1 0 0 0 7170 PHF .77 0 .86 .73 .97 0 .88 .83 .25 0 0 0 .921 % Trucks 1.5 0 1.9 2.4 .9 0 .7 2.4 0 0 0 0 1.4 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 11 0 0 5 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 756 0 308 200 1006 0 501 609 0 0 0 0 3380 16:15-17:15 821 0 314 185 1055 0 513 625 0 0 0 0 3513 16:30-17:30 952 0 332 170 1099 0 507 621 0 0 0 0 3681 • 16:45-17:45 974 0 335 155 1172 0 510 629 1 0 0 0 3776 17:00-18 :00 989 0 324 130 1178 0 567 601 1 0 0 0 3790 i r ' 'i I-i INTERSEC:11ON TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HOUR REPORT A AVENUE AT STATE STREET • T= .6% P=. 967 N 11308 • DATE OF COUNT: 9/21/99 0 I925 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 130 1178 0 TIME STAR'ThD: 16 :00 T TIME ENDED: 18 : 00 III H 4-697 4-1 I L . 4-0 A iA 324 J L0 T= 1.2% T= 0% 0 —► 4-0 P=.792 P=0 . 989 0 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME .3 I • r► T=%'TRUCKS BY APPROACH P=PHF BY APPROACH 1313-1. 1 —► mpl3 567 601 1 Peak Hour 12167 • 17 : 00-18 :00 Traffic Smithy T= 1.5% P=. 942 1169 TEV=3790 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • • � FROM - TO ; —► 3 4J 1 L . 41 I r' _r ALL ALL VEHICLES 17:00-17 :15 233 0 84 36 292 0 136 153 0 0 0 0 934 17:15-17 :30 320 0 94 28 291 0 126 166 0 0 0 0 1025 17 :30-17 :45 219 0 85 37 301 0 134 143 1 0 0 0 920 17 :45-18 :00 217 0 61 29 294 0 171 139 0 0 0 0 911 LIGHT 'TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 17 :00-17 :15 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 9 17 :15-17 :30 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 17 :30-17 :45 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 8 17:45-18 :00 3 0 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 9 MEDIUM 'TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 17:00-17 : 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 111 17:15-17 : 30 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 17:45-18 :00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 17:00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :30-17 :45 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 :45-18 :00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 • BICYCLES 17:00-17 : 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 :45-18 :00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 PEDESTRIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 17 :00-17 :15 0 1 0 0 1 17: 15-17 :30 0 4 2 0 6 17:30-17 :45 0 1 1 0 2 17:45-18 :00 0 0 3 2 5 , Peak Hour by Movement PHF .77 0 . 86 .88 . 98 0 . 83 .91 . 25 0 0 0 . 924 % Trucks all) 1.3 0 . 9 .8 .6 0 .7 2 .2 0 0 0 0 1 .1 % Trucks (M+H) .3 0 0 . 8 .1 0 .4 . 3 0 0 0 0 .2 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16 :00-17:00 756 0 308 200 1006 0 501 609 0 0 0 0 3380 16 : 15-17:15 821 0 314 185 1055 0 513 625 0 0 0 0 3513 16 :30-17 :30 952 0 332 170 1099 0 507 621 0 0 0 0 3681 16 :45-17 :45 974 0 335 155 1172 0 510 629 1 0 0 0 3776 17:00-18 : 00 989 0 324 130 1178 0 567 601 1 0 0 0 3790 0 0233 INTERSECT V TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAR' REPORT STREET AT EVERGREEN ROAL 0(.3 0 - A T= 2.2% P=.675 N I27 '. A DATE OF COUNT: 08/10/99 O �i ; 124 DAY OF -MEEK: Tue R 0 20 7 TIME STARTED: 16:00 • T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-0 ti I 4 i-31 A i • 0 J L13 T= 0% T= 1. 9% 0 —► 4-0 P=0. P=.704 . 0 118 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • t T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 41 I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 0 —► 12 —► DMCU 0 11 5 Peak Hour 138 A 16:50-17:50 Traffic Smithy T= 2.7% P=. 571 I16 TEV=74 I (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO - —► 3 .J 1 L► . I 1-0. r 4_ L ALL 16 :00-16 :05 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 2 0 0 8 16 : 05-16 :10 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 9 16 : 10-16 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 5 8 16 : 15-16 :20 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 16 :20-16 :25 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 6 16:25-16:30 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 16 :30-16:35 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 4 16:35-16 :40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 4 16 :40-16:45 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 6 16 :45-16:50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 16:50-16:55 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 6 16 :55-17:00 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 7 17:00-17:05 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 40 17:05-17:10 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 6 17:10-17:15 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 6 17:15-17:20 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 6 17:20-17:25 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 4 0 0 0 4 13 17:25-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 5 17:30-17:35 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 7 17:35-17:40 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 5 17:40-17:45 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 5 17:45-17:50 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 17:50-17:55 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 4 17: 55-18:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 4 Total Survey 0 0 0 0 36 10 0 27 10 32 0 20 135 PHF 0 0 0 0 .63 .44 0 .46 .63 .56 0 .54 .74 % Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 3 .7 0 0 0 5 2.2 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 0 0 0 0 19 4 0 16 6 14 0 7 66 16: 15-17:15 0 0 0 0 16 5 0 14 5 13 0 5 58 16 :30-17:30 0 0 0 0 18 6 0 14 4 17 0 10 69 16:45-17:45 0 0 0 0 19 7 0 12 4 18 0 12 72 • 17:00-18 :00 0 0 0 0 17 6 0 11 4 18 0 13 69 02. 39 9 I INTERSECT' T TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HOT-""?. REPORT -OTH STREET AT EVERGREEN ROAI ♦ T= 0% P=. 928 N 126 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 08/10/99 0 I24 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 0 19 7 TIME STARTED: 16 :00 T TIME ENDED: 18 : 00 AIH 4-0 4-1I L► i-3 0 • i • 0 J L12 T= 0% T= 0% 0 —► 4-0 P=0 . P=.681 0 18 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ r T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 41 I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 0 —► 11 —► DMCU 0 12 4 Peak Hour 137 ♦ 16 :45-17:45 Traffic Smithy T= 0% P=. 666 I16 TEV=72 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • ♦ A FROM - TO —► J 4_1 Lo. 4-1I' r► r L ALL ALL VEHICLES 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 3 2 2 0 1 14 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 2 0 5 0 3 17 17 :15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 5 2 0 5 1 6 0 5 24 17 :30-17:45 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 2 1 5 0 3 17 LIGHT 'TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MEDIUM 'TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16 :45-17 : 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17 : 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 17:15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAITFR) 16 :45-17 : 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :00-17 : 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 17 :15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 PRT)ESThIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16 :45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 17 :00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 17 :15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour by Movement PHF 0 0 0 0 .95 .58 0 .6 . 5 .75 0 .6 .75 % Trucks (all) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Trucks (M+H) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Hourly Totals 16 :00-17 :00 0 0 0 0 19 4 0 16 6 14 0 7 66 16 :15-17 :15 0 0 0 0 16 5 0 14 5 13 0 5 58 16 :30-17 :30 0 0 0 0 18 6 0 14 4 17 0 10 69 16 :45-17 :45 0 0 0 0 19 7 0 12 4 18 0 12 72 17 :00-18 : 00 0 0 0 0 17 6 0 11 4 18 0 13 69 III r • t+ a LJ INTERSECT N TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY' REPORT , 1ST STREET AT A AVENUE 2 OS 3 V A T= 1% P=. 769 N 1117 • DATE OF COUNT: 07/28/99 0 167 DAY OF. VEEK: Wed R 52 13 52 ' TIME' STARTED: 16 :00 • TIMET ENDED: 18:00 H 4-6 81 4-I I L. 4-655 • A 35 -1i L24 T= 2.2% T= 1.5% 1070-10 4-613 P=.855 P=.925 17 8 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ V.8 T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 41 I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 1122-0- 1154-* DJFE 16 8 32 Peak Hour I48 i 17:00-18:00 Traffic Smithy i T= .9% P=.736 56 TEV=1950 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ ♦ • FROM - TO - -► 3 .4.1 1 L► 41 I r r L ALL 16:00-16 :05 1 65 3 4 2 4 0 3 2 3 58 1 146 16:05-16 :10 1 63 2 2 1 0 2 2 4 2 63 3 145 16:10-16:15 0 77 2 2 2 3 2 0 1 1 48 1 139 16:15-16:20 1 76 2 1 0 4 4 1 4 2 54 4 153 16:20-16 :25 1 76 4 5 0 4 2 0 0 2 55 2 151 16 :25-16:30 1 72 6 6 4 0 1 1 2 2 50 3 148 16 :30-16 :35 1 69 1 7 0 2 3 1 4 3 63 2 156 16 :35-16:40 1 82 3 3 0 2 1 0 3 3 58 0 156 16:40-16:45 0 95 5 4 1 4 2 1 1 1 46 2 162 16 :45-16:50 0 81 1 2 2 1 1 0 5 2 59 3 157 16:50-16 :55 0 98 3 5 3 1 1 0 3 0 56 1 171 16:55-17:00 1 73 3 5 0 2 0 1 3 0 51 2 141 17:00-17:05 1 87 0 6 6 1 1 1 2 3 63 3 174 17:05-17:10 1 76 2 6 1 4 2 0 4 0 46 2 144 411 17:10-17:15 0 81 5 2 1 2 1 0 2 1 43 0 138 17:15-17:20 1 102 3 5 2 3 3 3 4 1 68 3 198 17:20-17:25 3 83 3 3 0 6 2 1 3 1 38 4 147 17:25-17:30 1 81 3 2 0 4 0 0 2 2 46 2 143 17:30-17:35 0 86 2 5 0 10 0 0 3 1 43 1 151 17:35-17:40 2 79 0 2 0 8 2 0 1 3 58 2 157 17:40-17:45 0 94 1 6 2 5 2 1 2 2 42 0 157 17:45-17:50 3 119 4 9 1 3 2 0 4 2 60 2 209 17:50-17:55 1 100 6 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 54 2 169 17:55-18 :00 4 82 6 6 0 1 1 2 4 2 52 3 163 Total Survey 25 1997 70 98 28 79 35 18 64 39 1274 48 3775 PHF .53 .85 .55 .76 .41 .57 .67 .5 . 8 . 64 .92 .67 .901 % Trucks 0 2.3 1.4 1 0 1.3 0 0 1. 6 0 1. 5 2.1 1. 8 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 8 927 35 46 15 27 19 10 32 21 661 24 1825 16:15-17:15 8 966 35 52 18 27 19 6 33 19 644 24 1851 16:30-17:30 10 1008 32 50 16 32 17 8 36 17 637 24 1887 16:45-17:45 10 1021 26 49 17 47 15 7 34 16 613 23 1878 • 17:00-18:00 17 1070 35 52 13 52 16 8 32 18 613 24 1950 ._ 11 INTERSECTT T TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HO1TR REPORT 1ST STREET AT A AVENUE A T= 0% P=.769 N 1117 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 07/28/99 0 167 DAY OF WEEK: Wed R 52 13 52 TIME STARTED: 16 :00 T TIME ENDED: 18 : 00 H 4-681 43 I L . 4-655 410 • A 35 J + L24 T= 1 . 9% T= .8% 1070-0. 4-613 P=. 863 P=. 925 17 118 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME �4-1I ♦ r►I T=%'TRUCKS BY APPROACH P=PHF BY APPROACH 1122-0. 1154-0- DJFE 16 8 32 Peak Hour 148 17: 00-18: 00 Traffic Smithy T= 0% P=. 777 I56 TEV=1950 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO 1, —► -' 4J 1 L► 41 I r► ; ` L ALL ALL VEHICT IFS 17:00-17:15 2 244 7 14 8 7 4 1 8 4 152 5 456 17:15-17:30 5 266 9 10 2 13 5 4 9 4 152 9 488 17:30-17:45 2 259 3 13 2 23 4 1 6 6 143 3 465 17:45-18 :00 8 301 16 15 1 9 3 2 9 4 166 7 541 LIGHT 'TRUCKS (SINGLF UNIT 2 AXLES) 17 :00-17 :15 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 17 :15-17:30 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 17 :30-17:45 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 17 :45-18 :00 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 1 17 :00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 041/ 17:45-18 :00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACl'OR TRAILER) 17 :00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:45-18 : 00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 BICYCLES 17:00-17 : 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:45-18 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEDESTRIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 17 :00-17 :15 0 1 0 0 17 :15-17 :30 0 1 0 0 1 17:30-17 :45 0 2 0 0 1 17:45-18 : 00 0 - Peak Hour by Movement PHF . 53 . 89 .55 . 87 .41 . 57 .8 . 5 . 89 .75 . 92 .67 . 901 % Trucks (all) 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 8 0 1.3 % Trucks (M+H) 0 . 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 1 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17 :00 8 927 35 46 15 27 19 10 32 21 661 24 1825 16 :15-17 : 15 8 966 35 52 18 27 19 6 33 1.9 644 24 1851 16 :30-17:30 10 1008 32 50 16 32 17 8 36 17 637 24 1887 16 :45-17 :45 10 1021 26 49 17 47 15 7 34 16 613 23 1878 17:00-18 :00 17 1070 35 52 13 52 16 8 32 18 613 24 1950 411 1- 0 - '.t 4 I INTERSECi._JN TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAF REPORT 2ND STREET AT A AVENUE _ , 20,E S • T= 0% P=.734 N 147 : • DATE OP COUNT: 07/29/99 O % 1101 DAY OF'WEEK: Thu S R T 30 4 13 TIME STARTED: 16:00 TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-695 41 I L. 4-712 ♦ + • 78 J L22 T= 1. 9% T= 2.2% 981 -* 4-658 P=. 923 P=. 936 VOLUME=TOTAL ENTRY 23 ; ♦ r ;32 TRUCKS BY APPROACH �4-1 ► P=PHF BY APPROACH 1082-► 1012-► GTDN 7 1 18 Peak Hour 59 16:05-17:05 Traffic Smithy • - 1 T= 1.9% P=.541 126 TEV=1867 I (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ ♦ • FROM - TO 1 -► J .J 1 L. 41 f► j L ALL 16 : 00-16 :05 4 67 3 3 0 3 1 0 1 2 71 2 157 16 : 05-16 :10 1 70 1 2 2 4 0 0 1 2 70 3 156 16 :10-16 :15 4 86 6 1 1 1 0 0 3 1 61 1 165 16:15-16 :20 3 79 4 4 0 1 0 0 3 1 45 0 140 16 :20-16:25 5 86 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 4 163 16 :25-16:30 2 76 3 2 0 0 2 1 2 4 40 0 132 16 :30-16:35 2 83 12 1 0 1 1 0 3 4 46 2 155 16 :35-16:40 2 79 4 6 0 1 1 0 2 5 56 5 161 16 :40-16:45 1 63 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 59 1 135 16 :45-16:50 0 99 9 3 0 1 0 0 1 2 57 1 173 16 :50-16:55 0 83 6 0 1 2 1 0 1 0 65 3 162 16 :55-17:00 1 86 9 3 0 0 2 0 0 3 59 0 163 17:00-17:05 2 91 7 3 0 2 0 0 2 8 45 2 162 0 17:05-17:10 1 59 7 5 0 3 0 0 2 3 56 2 138 17:10-17:15 0 98 8 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 28 0 140 17:15-17:20 4 72 14 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 60 4 160 17:20-17:25 0 93 8 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 36 2 144 17:25-17:30 1 91 9 3 0 1 0 0 1 2 35 3 146 17:30-17:35 1 85 9 3 0 0 0 0 3 2 34 0 137 17:35-17:40 1 77 3 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 51 0 136 17:40-17:45 3 74 9 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 53 1 145 17:45-17:50 4 71 7 4 0 0 0 0 1 2 32 1 122 17:50-17:55 1 50 9 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 53 1 119 17:55-18:00 4 55 3 7 0 1 1 0 4 3 51 1 130 Total Survey 47 1873 167 67 4 24 13 3 36 50 1218 39 3541 PHF .48 .92 75 .63 .33 .54 .44 .25 .64 .62 .91 .69 .937 % Trucks 0 2 1.2 0 0 0 7.7 0 0 0 2.1 7.7 2 Stopped Buses 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 36 0 0 5 0 0 12 0 0 29 0 Hourly Totals 16 :00-17:00 25 957 74 30 4 14 8 1 17 26 684 22 1862 16 :15-17:15 19 982 86 35 1 11 7 1 18 33 611 20 1824 16 :30-17:30 14 997 99 32 1 13 8 1 15 32 602 25 1839 S16 :45-17:45 14 1008 98 29 1 12 7 2 14 24 579 18 1806 17:00-18 :00 22 916 93 37 0 10 5 2 19 24 534 17 1679 INTERSECT' - TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HOTTR REPORT 2ND STREET AT A AVENUE • T= 0% P=.705 N i T I48 DATE OF COUNT: 07/29/99 4111 0 97 DAY OF WEEK: Thu R 30 4 14 TIME STARTED: 16 :00 T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H a-722 a- I L► 4-732 • • 74 -I + L22 T= 2 .7% T= 3% 957 -► 4-684 P=. 901 P=. 859 25 26 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME .1 I r► • + T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH P=PHF BY APPROACH 1056-0- 988 -► GTDN 8 1 17 Peak Hour 155 16:00-17 : 00 Traffic Smithy I' T= 3 .8% P=.812 I26 TEV=1862 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND TIUTHI BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦a A • FROM - TO -► 3 �► a3 I 1-* j a— L ALL ♦ ALL VEHICT,FS 16 :00-16 :15 9 223 10 6 3 8 1 0 5 5 202 6 478 16 :15-16 :30 10 241 18 8 0 1 2 1 5 5 140 4 435 16 :30-16 :45 5 225 22 10 0 2 2 0 5 11 161 8 451 16 :45-17 :00 1 268 24 6 1 3 3 0 2 5 181 4 498 LIGHT 'TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16 :00-16 :15 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 1 17 16 :15-16 :30 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 6 16 :30-16 :45 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 12 16 :45-17 :00 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16 :00-16 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 16 :15-16 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 16 :45-17 : 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY 'TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16:00-16 :15 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 16:15-16 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 16 :00-16 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 :15-16 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 :45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEDESTRIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16 :00-16 :15 3 0 3 10 16 16 :15-16 :30 11 11 4 3 199 16 :30-16 :45 1 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 2 5 7 Peak Hour by Movement PHF . 63 . 89 .77 .75 .33 .44 .67 .25 .85 . 59 . 85 . 69 . 934 % Trucks (all) 0 2 .8 1.4 0 0 0 12 .5 0 0 0 2 . 9 9 . 1 2 . 7 % Trucks (M+H) 0 .1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 9 0 .4 Stopped Buses 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16 : 00-17 : 00 25 957 74 30 4 14 8 1 17 26 684 22 1862 16 : 15-17 : 15 19 982 86 35 1 11 7 1 18 33 611 20 1824 16 : 30-17 : 30 14 997 99 32 1 13 8 1 15 32 602 25 1839 16:45-17:45 14 1008 98 29 1 12 7 2 14 24 579 18 1806 17:00-18 :00 22 916 93 37 0 10 5 2 19 24 534 17 1679 T" 11 INTERSEC1. .N TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMPS REPORT 3RD STREET AT A AVENUE : , #20S Z A T= 0% P=.691 N 147 A DATE E, COUNT: 08/03/99 O • 147 DAY OF'WEEK: Tue III 25 8 14 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-7 6 9 4-I L. 4-7 6 8 19 J L20 T= 2 .1% T= 1. 9% 1111—► 4-725 P=. 951 P=.868 23 23 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ r T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH �l �-► P=PHF BY APPROACH 1153—► 1141—► GTDR 19 8 16 Peak Hour 154 A 16:30-17:30 Traffic Smithy - T= 1.3% P=. 826 I43 TEV=2011 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO ; —► J 4J I L► 41 I r► r L ALL 16 :00-16 :05 0 60 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 59 1 129 16 :05-16 :10 0 86 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 49 3 142 16 :10-16 :15 6 83 1 5 0 1 1 1 2 3 80 1 184 16 :15-16 :20 1 79 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 2 65 1 152 16 :20-16 :25 2 81 2 3 1 1 1 1 0 0 56 1 149 16 :25-16 :30 2 64 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 42 2 122 16 :30-16 :35 3 95 2 0 0 2 3 2 1 0 59 1 168 16 :35-16 :40 5 92 1 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 50 0 155 16 :40-16 :45 1 79 0 2 2 1 0 1 1 4 64 1 156 16 :45-16 :50 0 100 1 3 1 0 1 0 1 0 66 1 174 16 :50-16 :55 3 92 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 81 1 183 16 :55-17 :00 1 88 2 6 0 0 2 1 1 1 46 2 150 17:00-17 :05 3 100 2 2 0 3 3 0 2 2 62 3 182 0 17:05-17:10 5 88 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 5 67 4 177 17 :10-17 :15 0 86 0 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 51 1 149 17:15-17 :20 1 113 5 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 65 2 193 17 :20-17 :25 0 83 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 3 64 2 160 17:25-17 :30 1 95 4 2 1 2 2 0 3 2 50 2 164 17 :30-17 :35 2 97 2 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 58 0 165 17 :35-17:40 0 84 1 1 0 0 1 0 4 4 43 4 142 17:40-17 :45 2 94 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 64 1 166 17 :45-17 :50 1 77 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 59 1 144 17 :50-17 :55 2 82 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 63 2 158 17 :55-18 :00 2 87 0 4 0 1 3 0 1 2 51 2 153 Total Survey 43 2085 29 49 12 24 36 12 30 44 1414 39 3817 PHF .64 .95 .47 .63 .67 .5 .79 .5 .8 . 72 . 86 .56 .968 Trucks 0 2.2 3 .4 0 0 0 0 0 3 .3 0 2 2.6 2 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 11 0 0 1 0 0 7 0 0 13 0 Hourly Totals 16 :00-17:00 24 999 13 26 6 9 14 9 12 20 717 15 1864 16 :15-17 :15 26 1044 12 25 8 14 17 9 13 22 709 18 1917 16 :30-17:30 23 1111 19 25 8 14 19 8 16 23 725 20 2011 S16 :45-17:45 18 1120 20 25 6 12 18 4 19 23 717 23 2005 17 :00-18 :00 19 1086 16 23 6 15 22 3 18 24 697 24 1953 i f ■ INTERSECTI - TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HOUR REPORT 3RD STREET AT A AVENUE • T= 0% P=.783 N I47 • DATE OF COUNT: 08/03/99 1111 0 + I47 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 25 8 14 TIME STARTED: 16 :00 T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H A-769 A-I I L► i-768 • • 19 -I + L20 T= 2% T= 2 .2% 1111—► A-725 P=. 951 P= .955 23 23 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ r T=%'TRUCKS BY APPROACH 4-1I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 115 3—► 1141-0- G'UJR 19 8 16 Peak Hour 154 • 16 :30-17:30 Traffic Smithy T= 0% P=.826 T43 TEV=2011 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • • • FROM - TO 1 —► 0 43 ,1 4 41 t r' ,( •_ L• ALL ALL VEHICT,RS 16 :30-16 :45 9 266 3 4 2 3 5 4 3 5 173 2 479 16 :45-17 : 00 4 280 4 10 1 0 3 1 3 4 193 4 507 17 :00-17 :15 8 274 2 5 3 7 6 2 5 8 180 8 508 17 :15-17 :30 2 291 10 6 2 4 5 1 5 6 179 6 517 LIGHT 'TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16 :30-16 :45 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 8 16 :45-17 : 00 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 9 17:00-17 :15 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 13 17: 15-17 :30 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 5 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16 :30-16 :45 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16 :45-17:00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 • 17:00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 HEAVY 'TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17: 00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 16 :45-17 :00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 17:00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 PEDESTRIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16:30-16 :45 2 0 1 5 8 16 :45-17 :00 1 0 3 1 5 17:00-17 :15 2 0 0 1 3 17:15-17 :30 2 1 1 1 5 Peak Hour by Movement PHF .64 . 95 .47 .63 .67 .5 .79 .5 .8 .72 . 94 .63 .972 % Trucks (all) 0 2 .1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 .2 5 2 % Trucks (M+-H) 0 .3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .3 0 .2 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16 :00-17:00 24 999 13 26 6 9 14 9 12 20 717 15 1864 16:15-17:15 26 1044 12 25 8 14 17 9 13 22 709 18 1917 16 :30-17 :30 23 1111 19 25 8 14 19 8 16 23 725 20 2011 16 :45-17:45 18 1120 20 25 6 12 18 4 19 23 717 23 2005 17:00-18 : 00 19 1086 16 23 6 15 22 3 18 24 697 24 1953 411 0 :1 6 INTERSECT_,N TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAF REPORT c 4TH STREET AT A AVENUE : .- 2 �'S LS 3 • T= 4.6% P=. 806 N I229 , • DATE DF.,COUNT: 08/03/99 0 + I177 DAY OF WEEK: The • R 99 20 110'' 10 TIME STARTED: 16 :00 "P TIME ENDED: 18:00 H -823 4-1 I L. 4-783 A + • 74 -I L83 T= 1 .36 T= 1.69.- 1006-► 4-699 P=.931 P=.877 19 4, 1 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • ,f1 T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 4-1I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 1099-* 1138-► ERWS 25 20 22 Peak Hour 140 16 :45-17:45 Traffic Smithy - T= .86- P=.761 167 TEV=2178 I (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • • • FROM - TO ; -► i 4-i I L . 41 I r► r ' L ALL 16:00-16 :05 1 71 4 7 5 9 1 4 2 0 52 5 161 16:05-16 :10 1 58 4 5 0 10 3 1 4 0 54 10 150 16:10-16:15 2 67 7 8 1 6 1 2 0 2 54 5 155 16:15-16 :20 1 77 3 4 1 10 1 0 1 0 63 13 174 16:20-16:25 2 65 4 7 0 3 0 3 3 3 63 6 159 16:25-16:30 0 89 6 4 1 7 3 1 2 1 57 6 177 16:30-16:35 0 69 3 9 0 7 1 2 0 0 38 7 136 16:35-16:40 2 73 5 11 1 12 1 2 1 0 58 12 178 16:40-16:45 1 75 11 7 1 11 0 1 0 0 37 4 148 16:45-16:50 2 76 10 8 1 12 0 2 0 0 67 8 186 16:50-16:55 0 95 7 4 1 6 4 0 3 1 54 13 188 16:55-17:00 3 76 6 8 1 9 1 1 3 0 72 8 188 17:00-17:05 2 84 7 10 2 8 1 1 2 0 51 3 171• 17:05-17:10 1 92 7 6 1 12 2 2 4 0 55 10 192 17:10-17:15 0 65 11 13 4 15 1 2 3 0 68 8 190 17:15-17:20 5 77 6 10 0 6 2 3 3 0 55 4 171 17:20-17:25 0 101 3 6 2 10 3 1 1 0 56 4 187 17:25-17:30 2 84 6 6 5 5 4 2 1 0 68 13 196 17:30-17:35 3 92 4 4 2 5 2 2 1 0 46 5 166 17:35-17:40 1 92 5 11 1 6 1 3 1 0 58 5 184 17:40-17:45 0 72 2 13 0 16 4 1 0 0 49 2 159 17:45-17:50 0 73 9 8 1 11 3 1 0 0 56 8 170 17:50-17:55 2 67 3 7 5 9 1 2 1 0 56 3 156 17:55-18 :00 3 80 1 6 2 12 3 0 2 2 61 4 176 Total Survey 34 1870 134 182 38 217 43 39 38 9 1348 166 4118 PHF .68 .91 .74 .85 .56 .79 .69 .71 .55 .25 .91 .72 .968 Trucks 0 1.3 .7 4 .4 0 5.5 0 0 2.6 0 1 . 8 0 1.7 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 20 0 0 13 0 0 10 0 0 7 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 15 891 70 82 13 102 16 19 19 7 669 97 2000 16 :15-17 :15 14 936 80 91 14 112 15 17 22 5 683 98 2087 16 :30-17:30 18 967 82 98 19 113 20 19 21 1 679 94 2131 • 16 :45-17:45 19 1006 74 99 20 110 25 20 22 1 699 83 2178 17:00-18 :00 19 979 64 100 25 115 27 20 19 2 679 69 2118 02 47 INTERSECTT ' TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HC`T'?. REPORT 4TH STREET AT A AVENUE ♦ T= 4 . 8% P=. 806 N 1229 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 08/03/99 O I177 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 99 20 110 TIME STARTED: 16 :00 T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-8 2 3 4- L . (-7 8 3 III ♦ A 74 J L83 T= 1 .3% T= 1.7% 1006—► 4-699 P=.967 P=. 877 19 1 1 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • ♦ * T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 4� I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 1099—► 1138-0- ERWS 25 20 22 Peak Hour 140 16 :45-17:45 Traffic Smithy T= 1.5% ♦P=. 837 I67 TEV=2178 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD A ♦ � FROM - TO —► 4J 1 L . 1l I r► _ • ALL ALL VEHICLES 16 :45-17:00 5 247 23 20 3 27 5 3 6 1 193 29 562 17: 00-17:15 3 241 25 29 7 35 4 5 9 0 174 21 553 17:15-17:30 7 262 15 22 7 21 9 6 5 0 179 21 554 17:30-17:45 4 256 11 28 3 27 7 6 2 0 153 12 509 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16 :45-17 :00 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 7 17:00-17 :15 0 3 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 11 17:15-17:30 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 8 17:30-17 :45 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 7 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16 :45-17 : 00 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 II 17 :00-17 : 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY 'TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17 :30 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 17 :30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 16 :45-17 : 00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 17 :00-17 : 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :15-17 :30 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 17 :30-17 :45 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 PEDESTRIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16 :45-17:00 4 1 3 1 9 17 :00-17 :15 1 4 1 0 6 17:15-17 :30 4 2 0 1 7 17 :30-17 :45 0 0 1 0 1 Peak Hour by Movement PHF .68 . 96 . 74 .85 .71 .79 . 69 .83 .61 . 25 . 91 . 72 . 968 % Trucks (all) 0 1 .3 1.4 5. 1 0 5.5 0 0 4 . 5 0 1 . 9 0 1.8 % Trucks (M+H) 0 .3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 3 0 .3 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16 : 00-17 :00 15 891 70 82 13 102 16 19 19 7 669 97 2000 16 :15-17:15 14 936 80 91 14 112 15 17 22 5 683 98 2087 16 :30-17:30 18 967 82 98 19 113 20 19 21 1 679 94 2131 16:45-17 :45 19 1006 74 99 20 110 25 20 22 1 699 83 2178 17: 00-18 : 00 19 979 64 100 25 115 27 20 19 2 679 69 2118 r- , 0 2 ,13 , INTERSEC1 N TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAF REPORT STATE STREET AT B AVENUE o2 0Sp r I ♦ T= 1.4% P=. 935 N 11238 . ♦ DATE OF. COUNT: 08/03/99 0 11139 DAY ( FTEEK: Tue • 146R 1092 0 TIME STARTED: 16:00 TTIME ENDED: 18:00 H -254 4-1 1 L. 4-0 338 J L0 T= 1% T= 0% 0 —► <-0 P=. 851 P=0. 156 r0 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ i T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH <l I 14' P=PHF BY APPROACH 494 —► 0 — BKPA 108 801 0 Peak Hour 11248 16:50-17 :50 Traffic Smithy - T= 2.4% P=.920 1909 TEV=2641 I (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ ♦ A FROM - TO ; —► 3 43 1, La. 4- I (► r < L ALL 16:00-16 :05 11 0 10 10 77 0 12 62 0 0 0 0 182 16:05-16 :10 17 0 15 13 76 0 17 64 0 0 0 0 202 16:10-16 :15 12 0 21 17 84 0 13 51 0 0 0 0 198 16:15-16 :20 15 0 23 20 89 0 10 77 0 0 0 0 234 16 :20-16 :25 16 0 18 11 83 0 14 50 0 0 0 0 192 16:25-16 :30 11 0 18 15 90 0 12 63 0 0 0 0 209 16:30-16 :35 11 0 14 19 92 0 14 69 0 0 0 0 219 16:35-16 :40 15 0 13 15 85 0 10 53 0 0 0 0 191 16:40-16:45 13 0 21 23 83 0 8 47 0 0 0 0 195 16:45-16:50 11 0 21 19 85 0 8 71 0 0 0 0 215 16:50-16:55 16 0 25 12 93 0 8 64 0 0 0 0 218 16:55-17:00 14 0 26 13 94 0 14 64 0 0 0 0 225 17:00-17:05 14 0 34 9 73 0 17 65 0 0 0 0 212 • 17:05-17:10 15 0 30 15 101 0 7 80 0 0 0 0 248 17:10-17:15 16 0 34 7 82 0 7 63 0 0 0 0 209 17:15-17 :20 11 0 39 5 91 0 5 70 0 0 0 0 221 17:20-17:25 7 0 33 14 84 0 10 77 0 0 0 0 225 17:25-17:30 13 0 29 7 92 0 8 66 0 0 0 0 215 17:30-17:35 14 0 14 14 108 0 4 68 0 0 0 0 222 17:35-17:40 12 0 21 17 93 0 11 58 0 0 0 0 212 17:40-17:45 12 0 30 18 74 0 11 46 0 0 0 0 191 17:45-17:50 12 0 23 15 107 0 6 80 0 0 0 0 243 17:50-17 :55 15 0 17 25 92 0 15 48 0 0 0 0 212 17:55-18: 00 12 0 16 14 92 0 6 59 0 0 0 0 199 Total Survey 315 0 545 347 2120 0 247 1515 0 0 0 0 5089 PHF .87 0 .8 .73 .93 0 .69 .94 0 0 0 0 .963 Trucks 1 .3 0 .9 3 .7 1 0 4 .5 2 0 0 0 0 1.7 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 5 0 0 12 0 0 8 0 0 10 0 Hourly Totals 16 :00-17:00 162 0 225 187 1031 0 140 735 0 0 0 0 2480 16 :15-17 :15 167 0 277 178 1050 0 129 766 0 0 0 0 2567 16 :30-17:30 156 0 319 158 1055 0 116 789 0 0 0 0 2593 • 16:45-17:45 155 0 336 150 1070 0 110 792 0 0 0 0 2613 17:00-18 :00 153 0 320 160 1089 0 107 780 0 0 0 0 2609 i INTERSECT? - TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HOT REPORT STATh STREET AT B AVENUE • T= 1.5% P=. 941 N 11220 • DATE OF COUNT: 08/03/99 0 I1128 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 150 1070 0 TIME STARTED: 16 : 00 T TIME ENDED: 18 : 00 H i-260 4- L . —0 III • • 336 J L0 T= .8% T= 0% 0 —► 4-0 P=. 858 P=0 . 155 1 r0 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • T=o'1'RUCKS BY APPROACH P=PHF BY APPROACH 491 —► 4_, 1.1: 0 —► BKPA 110 792 0 Peak Hour 11225 • 16 :45-17:45 Traffic Smithy T= 20 P=. 943 I902 TEV=2613 (503) 641-6333 n EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • _ L• FROM - TO ; —► 3 4J 1 Li, „ • `► r ALL ALL VEHICLES 16 :45-17:00 41 0 72 44 272 0 30 199 0 0 0 0 658 17: 00-17:15 45 0 98 31 256 0 31 208 0 0 0 0 669 17:15-17 :30 31 0 101 26 267 0 23 213 0 0 0 0 661 17:30-17 :45 38 0 65 49 275 0 26 172 0 0 0 0 625 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16 :45-17:00 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 17:00-17:15 0 0 1 3 3 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 14 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 17:30-17:45 2 0 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 7 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16 :45-17 : 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 17 :00-17 :15 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 17 :15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 B I CYCT DES 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 17 :30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 • PETESTRIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16 :45-17:00 0 3 0 40 3 10 17 :00-17:15 0 17 :15-17:30 0 C 0 0 5 17:30-17 :45 0 3 1 1- Peak Hour by Movement PHF .86 0 . 83 .77 .97 0 .89 . 93 0 0 0 0 . 976 Trucks (all) 1. 3 0 .6 4 1 .1 0 4 . 5 1.6 0 0 0 0 1 . 5 Trucks (M+H) 0 0 0 .7 .2 0 1. 8 .4 0 0 0 0 .3 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16 :00-17 : 00 162 0 225 187 1031 0 140 735 0 0 0 0 2480 16 : 15-17:15 167 0 277 178 1050 0 129 766 0 0 0 0 2567 16 :30-17:30 156 0 319 158 1055 0 116 789 0 0 0 0 2593 16 :45-17:45 155 0 336 150 1070 0 110 792 0 0 0 0 2613 17 :00-18 :00 153 0 320 160 1089 0 107 780 0 0 0 0 2609 INTERSECT_,N TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAR REPORT n STATE STREET AT A AVENUE : , oc Dgc( A T= .81- P=. 922 11233 • DATE .OEE,,. COUNT: 08/04/99 • 1834 DAY CP1 EEK: Wed • R T 137 1095 1 TIME STARTED: 16:00 TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-629 4-I 1 L. A-0 ♦ • 265 J L0 T= 1.8% T= 0% 1 —► 4-0 P=.898 P=0. 971 0 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME 4-1 ♦ 14. T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH P=PHF BY APPROACH 1237—► 2 —► BKPB 492 569 0 Peak Hour 2066 ♦ 16:50-17:50 Traffic Smithy - T= 2% P=.933 I1061 TEV=3531 1 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO ; —► J ,J I 4041 I r► ,` L ALL 16 :00-16:05 56 0 20 15 84 0 34 49 0 0 0 0 258 16 :05-16:10 60 0 18 24 76 0 40 47 0 0 0 0 265 16 :10-16 :15 66 0 20 12 79 0 40 41 0 0 0 0 258 16 :15-16 :20 56 0 22 16 63 0 42 51 0 0 0 0 250 16:20-16 :25 69 0 24 15 102 0 46 44 0 0 0 0 300 16:25-16:30 52 0 25 19 84 0 26 45 0 0 0 0 251 16 :30-16 :35 44 0 23 25 80 0 49 60 0 0 0 0 281 16:35-16 :40 55 0 20 15 95 0 32 51 0 0 0 0 268 16:40-16 :45 62 0 28 15 79 0 41 44 0 0 0 0 269 16:45-16 :50 73 0 19 8 98 0 45 47 0 0 0 0 290 16:50-16 :55 71 0 20 15 114 0 45 39 0 0 0 0 304 16:55-17:00 71 0 27 16 79 0 42 48 0 0 0 0 283 17:00-17:05 64 0 21 16 93 0 46 61 0 0 0 0 301 41, 17:05-17:10 67 0 14 18 106 0 36 51 0 0 0 0 292 17:10-17:15 77 0 29 8 93 0 35 48 0 0 0 0 290 17:15-17:20 94 0 19 18 71 0 44 61 0 0 0 0 307 17:20-17:25 79 0 23 10 107 0 40 43 0 0 0 0 302 17:25-17:30 89 1 26 6 81 0 31 40 0 0 0 0 274 17:30-17:35 91 0 15 8 83 1 42 39 0 0 0 0 279 17:35-17:40 84 0 23 4 81 0 48 39 0 0 0 0 279 17:40-17:45 100 0 31 10 95 0 29 46 0 0 0 0 311 17:45-17:50 84 0 17 8 92 0 54 54 0 0 0 0 309 17:50-17:55 64 0 17 9 109 0 30 35 0 0 0 0 264 17:55-18:00 76 0 18 17 97 0 35 31 0 0 0 0 274 Total Survey 1704 1 519 327 2141 1 952 1114 0 0 0 0 6759 PHF .88 .25 . 93 .69 . 94 .25 . 92 .89 0 0 0 0 .981 % Trucks 1.7 0 2.1 2.8 .5 0 1.7 2 .3 0 0 0 0 1. 5 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 735 0 266 195 1033 0 482 566 0 0 0 0 3277 16 :15-17:15 761 0 272 186 1086 0 485 589 0 0 0 0 3379 16 :30-17:30 846 1 269 170 1096 0 486 593 0 0 0 0 3461 4, 16 :45-17:45 960 1 267 137 1101 1 483 562 0 0 0 0 3512 17:00-18:00 969 1 253 132 1108 1 470 548 0 0 0 0 3482 0 1 I INTERSECTT ' TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HOT'R REPORT STATE STREET AT A AVENUE ♦ T= . 6% P=. 927 N I1239 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 08/04/99 0 + I829 DAY OF WEEK: Wed R 137 1101 1 TIME STARTED: 16 :00 T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-620 4-I 1 L► 4-0 ill• • 267 -I L0 T= 1. 6% T= 0% 1 —► 4-0 P=. 892 P=0 . 960 i0 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ I' T=%'TRUCKS BY APPROACH .3 I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 1228—► 2 —► BKPB 483 562 0 Peak Hour i2061 ♦ 16 :45-17:45 Traffic Smithy T= 2 . 3% P=. 943 I1045 TEV=3512 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO -► 4J 1 4 41 1 r► j L ALL ALL VEHICLES 16 :45-17:00 215 0 66 39 291 0 132 134 0 0 0 0 877 17 :00-17:15 208 0 64 42 292 0 117 160 0 0 0 0 883 17 :15-17:30 262 1 68 34 259 0 115 144 0 0 0 0 883 17 :30-17:45 275 0 69 22 259 1 119 124 0 0 0 0 869 LIGHT 'TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16 :45-17:00 4 0 3 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 13 17:00-17:15 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 7 17: 15-17:30 3 0 1 2 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 12 17 :30-17:45 2 0 2 0 1 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 11 MEDIUM 'TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:00-17 : 15 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:15-17 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0410 17:30-17 :45 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 HEAVY 'TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16 :45-17:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 :30-17 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 BICYCLES 16 :45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17: 00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 17: 15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17: 30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 PEDESTRIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16 :45-17:00 0 3 0 0 3 17:00-17 :15 0 2 0 2 4 17 :15-17 :30 0 0 0 2 2 17 :30-17 :45 0 3 0 2 5 Peak Hour by Movement PHF . 87 .25 . 97 . 82 . 94 .25 . 91 .88 0 0 0 0 . 994 % Trucks (all) 1 .4 0 2 .6 1.5 .5 0 2 .5 2 . 1 0 0 0 0 1 . 5 % Trucks (M+H) . 1 0 .4 0 .2 0 .4 .4 0 0 0 0 .2 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16 : 00-17: 00 735 0 266 195 1033 0 482 566 0 0 0 0 3277 16 : 15-17:15 761 0 272 186 1086 0 485 589 0 0 0 0 3379 16 : 30-17 :30 846 1 269 170 1096 0 486 593 0 0 0 0 3461 16 :45-17 :45 960 1 267 137 1101 1 483 562 0 0 0 0 3512 17: 00-18 :00 969 1 253 132 1108 1 470 548 0 0 0 0 3482 I INTERSECT _J TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAF REPORT Si'ATE STREET AT FOOTHILLS ROAD 2-0110 S.-3 ♦ T= 1.2% P=. 887 N 11583 ' ♦ DATE OF- COUNT: 07/29/99 0 : 11005 DAY OF=WEEK: Thu R 0 1468 115 TIME'STARTED: 16:00. TH 4-0 4] 1 L► 4-96 TIME ENDED: 18 :00 0 -I L28 T= 0% T= 2 .4% 0 -* 4-0 P=0 . P=.888 0 68 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ r T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 4-1I 1► P=PHF BY APPROACH 0 -► 173 -► LTFA 0 977 58 Peak Hour I1536 ♦ 16 :00-17:00 Traffic Smithy - i T= 1.7% P=.859 I1035 TEV=2714 I (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO 1 -► 3 4J 1 4 4i l r r 4_ L ALL 16 :00-16 :05 0 0 0 0 117 8 0 99 6 4 0 1 235 16:05-16:10 0 0 0 0 110 7 0 102 5 17 0 0 241 16:10-16 :15 0 0 0 0 131 8 0 78 11 3 0 1 232 16:15-16:20 0 0 0 0 101 8 0 91 3 1 0 4 208 16:20-16:25 0 0 0 0 100 7 0 65 4 8 0 5 189 16:25-16 :30 0 0 0 0 134 16 0 64 3 3 0 3 223 16:30-16:35 0 0 0 0 145 7 0 82 4 4 0 3 245 16:35-16:40 0 0 0 0 130 14 0 66 2 6 0 1 219 16:40-16:45 0 0 0 0 107 13 0 78 4 5 0 4 211 16:45-16:50 0 0 0 0 142 10 0 89 4 3 0 1 249 16 :50-16:55 0 0 0 0 119 9 0 76 4 11 0 3 222 16:55-17:00 0 0 0 0 132 8 0 87 8 3 0 2 240 17:00-17:05 0 0 0 0 83 9 0 87 6 9 0 4 198 17: 05-17:10 0 0 0 0 99 7 0 69 4 9 0 0 188 • 17: 10-17:15 0 0 0 0 130 14 0 75 2 5 0 0 226 17: 15-17:20 0 0 0 0 130 8 0 77 5 2 0 6 228 17 :20-17:25 0 0 0 0 106 12 0 80 9 7 0 5 219 17:25-17:30 0 0 0 0 132 10 0 84 6 2 0 4 238 17:30-17:35 0 0 0 0 119 7 0 58 6 10 0 4 204 17:35-17:40 0 0 0 0 107 6 0 70 6 7 0 0 196 17:40-17:45 0 0 0 0 112 10 0 85 2 3 0 7 219 17:45-17:50 0 0 0 0 105 14 0 78 9 5 0 7 218 17:50-17:55 0 0 0 0 62 5 0 69 7 7 0 4 154 17:55-18:00 0 0 0 0 100 6 0 86 6 2 0 1 201 Total Survey 0 0 0 0 2753 223 0 1895 126 136 0 70 5203 PHF 0 0 0 0 .9 .78 0 .88 .66 .71 0 .58 .954 % Trucks 0 0 0 0 1.1 2.2 0 1.7 1.6 2 .2 0 2. 9 1.4 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 15 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 0 0 0 0 1468 115 0 977 58 68 0 28 2714 16:15-17:15 0 0 0 0 1422 122 0 929 48 67 0 30 2618 16 :30-17:30 0 0 0 0 1455 121 0 950 58 66 0 33 2683 ill16:45-17:45 0 0 0 0 1411 110 0 937 62 71 0 36 2627 17 :00-18:00 0 0 0 0 1285 108 0 918 68 68 0 42 2489 r T INTERSECTT" -T TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HOTTR REPORT ATE STREET AT FOOTHILLS ROAT • T= 1 .5% P=. 942 N 11583 DATE OF COUNT: 07/29/99 111110 O I1005 DAY OF WEEK: Thu R 0 1468 115 TIME STARTED: 16 :00 T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-0 41 I L . 4-96 0 -Ii L28 T= 095 T= 5.26 0 —► 4-0 P=0. P=.923 0 8 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • ;68 T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 41 I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 0 —► 173 —► LTFA 0 977 58 Peak Hour - 1,1536 16 :00-17:00 ( Traffic Smithy T= 2 .5% P=. 859 11035 TEV=2714 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • • FROM - TO —► Lip.4J 1 � 41 I r' j '_ L ALL , ALL VEHICLES 16 :00-16 :15 0 0 0 0 358 23 0 279 22 24 0 2 708 16 :15-16 :30 0 0 0 0 335 31 0 220 10 12 0 12 620 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 382 34 0 226 10 15 0 8 675 16 :45-17 : 00 0 0 0 0 393 27 0 252 16 17 0 6 711 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16 :00-16 : 15 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 7 1 1 0 0 13 16 :15-16 :30 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 9 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 11 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 7 MEDIUM 'TRUCKS (SINGT,R UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16 :00-16 :15 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 16 :15-16 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 3'. 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 HEAVY !'RUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16 :00-16 :15 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 5 16 :15-16 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 16 :45-17 : 00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 B I CYCT,FS 16 :00-16 :15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 :15-16 :30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 16 :30-16 :45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 :45-17 :00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 PEDESTRIANS CROSSWALK USEAGE ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16 :00-16 :15 4 0 6 0 10 16 :15-16 :30 4 0 5 1 10 16 :30-16 :45 2 0 1 4 7 16 :45-17 :00 10 0 2 0 12 Peak Hour by Movement PHF 0 0 0 0 . 93 . 85 0 . 88 . 66 . 71 0 .58 . 954 Trucks (all) 0 0 0 0 1 .3 4 .3 0 2 . 5 3 .4 4 .4 0 7.1 2 % Trucks (M+H) 0 0 0 0 . 1 3 .5 0 .6 0 2 . 9 0 3 .6 .6 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16 :00-17 :00 0 0 0 0 1468 115 0 977 58 68 0 28 2714 16 :15-17 :15 0 0 0 0 1422 122 0 929 48 67 0 30 2618 16 :30-17:30 0 0 0 0 1455 121 0 950 58 66 0 33 2683 16 :45-17 :45 0 0 0 0 1411 110 0 937 62 71 0 36 2627 17:00-18 : 00 0 0 0 0 1285 108 0 918 68 68 0 42 2489 41 0 „5 ,1 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY Page : 1 08 : 58 : 57 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD . SUITE 111 • PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 *** Special Speed Study (#203) *** *****************************************************,*************************** Site ID : 7EVE47 Data Starts : 00 : 00 on 08/02/99 Info 1 : EVERGREEN Data Ends : 23 : 00 on 08/02/99 Info 2 : W OF 4TH Adj . Factor : 1 . 0000 ******************************************************************************** Lane #1 Info : EASTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******************************************************************************** ************************** Lane 1 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39-9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 08/02/99 00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mon 01:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 S O4:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 05:00 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 06:00 1 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 07:00 4 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 08:00 7 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 09:00 12 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 10:00 14 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 11:00 11 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 12:00 10 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 13:00 7 11 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 14:00 9 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 15:00 8 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 16:00 6 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 17:00 9 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 18:00 11 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 19:00 5 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 20:00 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 21:00 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 22:00 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 23:00 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Daily Total #1 126 129 35 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 293 Percent 43% 44% 12% 1% 0% 0t 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Cum. Percent 43% 87% 98% 100% Average Hour 5 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 Avg Speed: 17.8mph 10% Speed: 8.0mph 50% Speed: 21.1mph 85% Speed: 24.6mph S (t .- _ ,_ ,) J I 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY Page: 2 08 :58 : 57 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD E ,,5,L<e H 12-1 SUITE 111 _ , • PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 w o p 4ti-t 46- (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 ******************************************************************************** Lane #9 Info : WESTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******************************************************************************** ************************** Lane 9 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 08/02/99 00:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Mon 01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 05:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 06:00 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 07:00 13 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 08:00 7 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 09:00 14 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 10:00 8 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 • 11:00 17 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 12:00 9 12 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 13:00 17 8 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 14:00 15 7 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 15:00 10 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 16:00 17 9 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 17:00 24 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 18:00 17 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 19:00 6 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 20:00 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 21:00 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 22:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Daily Total 19 189 109 32 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 338 Percent 56% 32% 9% 2t 0% 0t 0% 0% 0t 0t 0t 0% 0% 0% 0% 0t 0t Cum. Percent 55% 88t 97% 100% Average Hour 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 Avg Speed: 16.2mph 10% Speed: 6.2mph 50% Speed: 14.6mph 85% Speed: 24.3mph • ri r vI.. JU 1 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY Page : 1 )8 : 58 : 40 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD . SUITE 111 :.. • PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 *** Special Speed Study (#203) *** ******************************************************************************** Site ID : 7EVE47 Data Starts : 00 : 00 on 08/03/99 Info 1 : EVERGREEN Data Ends : 23 : 00 on 08/03/99 Info 2 : W OF 4TH Adj . Factor : 1 . 000% ******************************************************************************** Lane #1 Info : EASTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******************************************************************************** ************************** Lane 1 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 07 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- SS- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 08/03/99 00:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Tue 01:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 S 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 06:00 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 07:00 8 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 08:00 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 09:00 9 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 10:00 8 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 11:00 5 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 12:00 11 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 13:00 12 11 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 14:00 10 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 15:00 10 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 16:00 7 13 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 17:00 15 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 18:00 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 19:00 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 20:00 1 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 21:00 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 22:00 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Daily Total #1 125 128 29 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 285 Percent 44% 45% 10% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Cum. Percent 43% 88% 98% 100% Average Hour 5 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 Avg Speed: 17.6mph 10% Speed: 7.9mph 50% Speed: 21.1mph 85% Speed: 24.3mph S on 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY Page : 2 0 8 : 5 8 :4 0 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD �c S�� ..-1 2 SUITE 111 PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 Lc) o t 1 1110 (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 ******************************************************************************** Lane #9 Info : WESTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******************************************************************************** ************************** Lane 9 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 #2 #3 #4 M5 M6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 08/03/99 00:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Tue 01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 06:0D 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 07:0D 10 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 08:00 14 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 09:00 13 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 10:00 13 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 24 11:00 18 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 11111 12:00 16 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 13:00 33 13 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 14:00 21 20 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 15:00 22 7 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 16:0D 11 16 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 17:00 18 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 1B:00 10 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 19:00 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 20:00 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 21:00 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 22:00 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 23:00 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Daily Total #9 222 129 42 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 396 Percent 56% 33% 11% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Ot Ot 0t 04 0t Ot 0% 0% Cum. Percent 56% 88% 99% 100% Average Hour 9 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 Avg Speed: 16.0mph 10% Speed: 5.6mph 50% Speed: 15.4mph 85% Speed: 24.0mph • {`1 `-- 0 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY . .. Page: 1 )8 : 58 : 16 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD SUITE 111 4 ti • PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 *** Special Speed Study (#203) *** k****************************************************'*************************** Site ID : 7EVE47 Data Starts : 00 : 00 on 08/04/99 Info 1 : EVERGREEN Data Ends : 23 : 00 on 08/04/99 Info 2 : W OF 4TH Adj . Factor : 1 . 000% ******************************************************************************** Lane #1 Info : EASTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******************************************************************************** k************************* Lane 1 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 98/04/99 00:00 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Wed 01:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 06:00 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 07:00 8 8 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 08:00 5 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 09:00 10 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 10:00 8 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 11:00 7 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 12:00 9 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 13:00 20 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 14:00 10 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 15:00 9 11 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 16:00 8 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 17:00 10 14 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 18:00 8 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 19:00 7 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 20:00 3 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 21:00 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 22:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 23:00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Daily Total #1 128 140 34 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 307 Percent 42% 46% 11% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0t 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Cum. Percent 41% 87% 98% 99% 99% 99% 99% 99% 99% 100% Average Hour 5 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 Avg Speed: 18.1mph 10% Speed: 8.0mph 50% Speed: 21.1mph 85% Speed: 24.5mph IP 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY - Page : 2 08 :58 : 16 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD - SUITE 111 Elkcejn e-e 1-1 • PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 (A) p L, --• (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 *************, ****************************************************************** Lane #9 Info : WESTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******************************************************************************** ************************** Lane 9 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 08/04/99 00:00 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Wed 01:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 02:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 06:00 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 07:00 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 08:00 9 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 09:00 13 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 10:00 10 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 • 11:00 12 7 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 12:00 21 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 13:00 11 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 14:00 15 14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 15:00 2D 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 16:00 20 16 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 17:00 27 18 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 18:00 20 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 19:00 9 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 20:00 7 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 21:00 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 22:00 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 23:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Daily Total #9 210 131 34 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 381 Percent 55% 34% 9% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% Ok 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Cum. Percent 55% 89% 98% 99% 100% Average Hour 8 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Avg Speed: 16.2mph 10% Speed: 5.9mph 50% Speed: 15.3mph 85% Speed: 24.0mph • ,! ►..(lu 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY Page: 1 D8 : 58 : 07 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD SUITE 111 • PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 *** Special Speed Study (#203) *** *****************************************************,*************************** Site ID : 7EVE47 Data Starts : 00 : 00 on 08/05/99 Info 1 : EVERGREEN Data Ends : 23 : 00 on 08/05/99 Info 2 : W OF 4TH Adj . Factor : 1 . 000°s ******************************************************************************** Lane #1 Info : EASTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******** * *********************************************************************** ************************** Lane 1 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 18/05/99 00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Thu 01:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 05:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 06:00 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 07:00 6 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 08:00 10 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 09:00 13 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 10:00 16 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 11:00 9 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 12:00 17 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 13:00 17 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 14:00 16 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 15:00 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 16:00 10 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 17:00 9 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 18:00 8 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 19:00 6 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 20:00 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 21:00 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 22:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 23:00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Daily Total #1 151 105 15 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 275 Percent 55% 38% 5% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0t 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0t 0% Cum. Percent 54% 93% 98% 99% 100% Average Hour 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 Avg Speed: 16.0mph 10% Speed: 7.0mph 50% Speed: 13.8mph 8St Speed: 23.5mph • , ,; 1Ave ■ 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY Page : 2 08 : 58 : 07 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD SUITE 111 - .l E v e_.5 12."4.-1 PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 (A..) crJ, (j/� Sf • (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 V ******************************************************************************** Lane #9 Info : WESTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******************************************************************************** ************************** Lane 9 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 N2 #3 #4 N5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 06/05/99 00:00 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Thu 01:00 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 02:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 03:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 04:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 05:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 06:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 07:00 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 06:00 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 09:00 20 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 10:00 11 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 11:00 14 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 • 12:00 13 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 13:00 20 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 14:00 18 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 15:00 11 10 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 16:00 21 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 17:00 22 14 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 18:00 15 12 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 19:00 8 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 20:00 6 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 21:00 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7, 22:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 23:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Daily Total #9 207 112 25 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 346 Percent 60% 32% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0t 0% 0% 0% Cum. Percent 59% 92% 99% 99% 100% Average Hour 8 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 Avg Speed: 15.4mph 10% Speed: 5.7mph 50% Speed: 14.3mph 85% Speed: 23.5mph • r, ' . . E, ., 08/09/99 TRAFFIC SMITHY • - Page : 1 08 : 57 : 56 1225 NW MURRAY BLVD - SUITE 111 4 •' PORTLAND, OREGON 97229 (503) 641-6333 FAX (503) 643-8866 *** Special Speed Study (#203) *** *****************************************************4************************** Site ID : 7EVE47 Data Starts : 00 : 00 on 08/06/99 Info 1 : EVERGREEN Data Ends : 23 : 00 on 08/06/99 Info 2 : W OF 4TH Adj . Factor : 1 . 0000 ******************************************************************************** Lane #1 Info : EASTBOUND Modes : SPEED Sensors : Axle-Axle Sensor Spacing: 6 . 0 ' ******************************************************************************** ************************** Lane 1 Special Speed Study ************************** #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- Date Time 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total 08/06/99 00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 Fri 01:00 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S 04:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 05:00 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 06:00 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 07:00 6 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 08:00 4 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 09:00 12 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 10:00 12 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 11:00 14 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 12:00 10 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 13:00 10 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 14:00 11 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 15:00 13 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 16:00 12 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 17:00 9 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 18:00 6 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 19:00 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 20:00 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 21:00 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 22:00 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 23:00 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Daily Total #1 144 106 22 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 275 Percent 52% 39% 8% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Cum. Percent 52% 90% 98% 100% Average Hour 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 Avg Speed: 16.4mph 10% Speed: 7.3mph 50% Speed: 14.0mph 85% Speed: 23.9mph el Observed Vehicle Queues on A Avenue Approaching State Street (8/25/99) 700 i I 2nd Street 600 t i • Overall Queue Length 500 i Frequency 90th percentile: 600 feet • 'w 400 : I = 85th percentile: 500 feet 5C4i percentile: 325 feet a 0 1st Suee' _ c 300 �. -.. - I . -- mmilf gm: . S a) J • I IL O - pp I I I I�`. 1 1 1 1 I1 11 ,1 1 i 1 1p, .-� . 1 l I 1 1 i p� . i i 1 i i i p i li, . . I 11 I ;II 1 p 1 1 1 , i i S S S O O 8 E S t8p O O S O S S p8 d O 8 O O O O S O O O O O 8 S () () c) c.) (�") - V- # '[t 6 (cc (cc U c tg O O I O OO O N C' (D 00 O N N N N rM (O (D (p co (O (O (o (G (D (O (D (D (D (O (D f: f: r•- f: t` n n A A A A A n r A ti Time Recorded r--‘ 1 ' Queue Chart; AVENU-1.xls Page 1 DKSociates, Inc. . J;� 'CJ l 1 y e. 0 re `p,4-k LAP - I E 1:f"2 b — ii=lie#�OD�S�� Location- Ev4x (;, , E/U g/3 _ - / _ / i� D ,' to SrES-} tn11 Start Day Map#( �r IP Cross Street: S Nil L� W T F S b b End Day Grid# ^ Type of Survey: %004"0 VIA/ Survey By ,�y S M T W Z F S Ho Site Evaluation Yes - No Counter Speed Greater Than 20 Miles per Hour ? l /I Type (f, k All vehicles pass over road tube at a perpendicular? El No. 2 4 Road tube crosses no more than two lanes? / Observation Do you anticipate peak hour queuing over road tube? ❑ I Date -3/ 2aielti Equipment Setup Lenght of Tube 110 ' Time Date .. 1// Time //` / 0 offset/Delay Status Observed I (Counter TT2 a j� `:F 2I, II i Remarks: Bat Level Observation p,0' / !Date Equipment Pickup Time Dote 3)�1 (16 Time I O4 Cr Status ID Remarks: Bat Level b TT2 � Comparison TT2 Sketch Layout ( q/l No. North TT2 Total ' Counter Total Comparison --- - > `�' m J — ca I O tFoE-� o cf) J N 4-III ,....A v (..._) Q--- : = o -- z r, O cr a. ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/19/96 Location: 150 Ft . West Of 3rd Street Day of Week: TUESDAY Traffic Smithy Direction: EAST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW SPEED Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00 :00-01 :00 01 :00-02 :00 02 : 00-03 :00 03 :00-04 :00 04 :00-05 :00 05 : 00-06 : 00 06 : 00-07:00 07 : 00-08 :00 08 : 00-09 : 00 09 :00-10 : 00 10 :00-11 :00 11:00-12 : 00 11 1 3 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 12 : 00-13 : 00 12 1 4 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 13 :00-14 :00 18 1 6 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 14 :00-15 :00 16 1 6 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 15 :00-16 :00 16 3 3 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 16 :00-17:00 21 2 6 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 -- 17 :00-18 :00 26 1 7 16 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 -- 18 :00-19 :00 9 2 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 19 :00-20 :00 9 0 1 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 20 :00-21: 00 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 21 :00-22 :00 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 22 :00-23 :00 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 23 :00-24 : 00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- TOTAL 12 40 65 25 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 8 28 45 17 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 8 36 B1 98 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 146 99 — AM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total PM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total 8th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total Observations Over Posted Speed % i Observations +10mph Over % Pace ( - MPH) % \ _Q P50- P70- P85- 25 P90- f D CD • 110 111 N • • S ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/20/96 Location: 150 Ft. West Of 3rd Street Day of Week: WEDNESDAY Traffic Smithy Direction: EAST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW 1 SPEED ' % Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00:00-01:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 01:00-02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 02:00-03 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 03 :00-04 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 04:00-05:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 05:00-06:00 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 06:00-07:00 6 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 07:00-08:00 11 2 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 08:00-09:00 12 0 4 4 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 09:00-10:00 17 1 5 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 10:00-11:00 12 0 3 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 11:00-12 :00 8 1 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 12:00-13 :00 12 0 5 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 13 :00-14:00 14 1 5 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 14:00-15:00 16 2 3 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 15:00-16:00 16 0 3 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 16:00-17:00 20 0 7 4 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 -- 17:00-18:00 27 1 6 14 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 -- 18:00-19:00 11 1 2 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 19:00-20:00 5 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 20:00-21:00 10 2 3 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 21:00-22 :00 6 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 22:00-23 :00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 23 :00-24:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- TOTAL 13 55 72 54 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 6 27 36 27 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 6 34 70 97 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 207 97 — AM Peak Hour ( 9 :00-10 :00) 17 8.21% of Daily Total PM Peak Hour (17:00-18 : 00) 27 13 .04% of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour (14 :00-15:00 ) 16 7.73% of Daily Total ```(((�� 8th Highest Hour (10 :00-11:00 ) 12 5.8% of Daily Total Observations Over Posted Speed % Observations +10mph Over % II ( Pace ( - MPH) % �_'wv` vV' `" P50- P70- P85- 26 P90- 1 O , ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/21/96 Location: 150 Ft . West Of 3rd Street Day of Week: THURSDAY Traffic Smithy Direction: EAST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service 11 Posted Speed: UNKNOW . 1 SPEED 1 % 1 Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00:00-01:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 01 :00-02 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 02 : 00-03 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 03 : 00-04 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 04 :00-05 : 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 05 :00-06 : 00 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 06 :00-07 : 00 5 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 07 :00-08 :00 13 2 3 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 08 :00-09 :00 14 1 4 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 09 :00-10:00 10:00-11:00 11: 00-12 :00 12 :00-13 :00 13 :00-14 :00 14 :00-15 :00 15: 00-16 : 00 16 :00-17 : 00 17 :00-18 :00 18 :00-19 :00 19 :00-20 :00 20 :00-21 :00 21: 00-22 :00 22 : 00-23 :00 23 : 00-24 : 00 TOTAL 5 9 12 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 14 26 34 20 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 14 40 74 94 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 36 97 AM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total PM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total 8th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total �� Observations Over Posted Speed Observations +10mph Over % ( ` Pace ( - MPH) % W C P50- P70- P85- 26 P90- rD 1 i LO 410 • !II 111 S ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/19/96 Location: 150 Ft. West Of 3rd Street Day of Week: TUESDAY 'Traffic Smithy Direction: WEST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW SPEED 1 % Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00:00-01:00 01:00-02 :00 02:00-03 :00 03 :00-04:00 04:00-05:00 05:00-06 :00 06 :00-07:00 07 :00-08 :00 08:00-09 :00 09:00-10:00 10:00-11:00 11:00-12:00 23 2 7 10 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 -- 12:00-13 :00 26 2 4 11 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 -- 13 :00-14:00 34 2 5 17 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 14:00-15 :00 29 2 15 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 -- 15:00-16:00 27 2 10 8 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 16 :00-17:00 24 0 13 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 -- 17:00-18:00 30 2 6 19 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 -- 18:00-19:00 22 1 6 8 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 19:00-20 :00 11 1 2 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 20 :00-21:00 9 0 3 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 21:00-22 :00 5 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 22 :00-23 :00 4 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 1 23 :00-24:00 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- TOTAL 14 73 97 48 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 6 30 40 20 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 6 36 76 95 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 246 98 -- AM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total PM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total \� 8th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total RN Observations Over Posted Speed % 1 CD Observations +10mph Over Cr*;UD Pace ( - MPH) % CD P50- P70- P85- 26 P90- CQ _ l ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY I Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date : 3/20/96 Location: 150 Ft. West Of 3rd Street Day of Week: WEDNESDAY Traffic Smithy Direction: WEST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW 1 SPEED 1 Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00 :00-01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 01:00-02 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 02 :00-03 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 03 : 00-04 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 04 : 00-05 :00 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 05:00-06 :00 3 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 06 :00-07 :00 9 0 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 07:00-08 :00 22 0 2 9 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 -- 08 : 00-09 :00 22 0 4 8 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 -- 09 :00-10 :00 11 1 1 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 10 : 00-11:00 13 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 11 :00-12 :00 21 0 10 6 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 12 :00-13 :00 23 0 3 12 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 -- 13 :00-14 :00 31 3 6 12 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 14 : 00-15 :00 24 0 6 6 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 15:00-16 :0C 26 1 11 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 -- 16 :00-17 :00 40 0 6 23 9 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 26 -- 17 :00-18 :00 32 1 8 15 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 18 : 00-19:00 21 0 4 10 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 -- 19 : 00-20: 00 8 1 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 20 :00-21:00 10 1 0 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 21:00-22 :00 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 22 :00-23 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 23 :00-24: 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- TOTAL 10 66 136 91 9 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 % by Group 3 21 43 29 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 3 24 68 96 99 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 319 98 — AM Peak Hour ( 8 :00- 9 : 00) 22 6 . 9% of Daily Total PM Peak Hour (16 :00-17 :00) 40 12 .54% of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour (15 :00-16 :00 ) 26 8 . 15% of Daily Total NI, Highest Hour ( 8 : 00- 9 :00 ) 22 6 . 9% of Daily Total N. Observations Over Posted Speed % Observations +10mph Over % Pace ( - MPH) % P50- P70- P85- 26 P90- 411 • 411 S 411 S ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/21/96 Location: 150 Ft. West Of 3rd Street Day of Week: THURSDAY (Traffic Smithy Direction: WEST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW , SPEED ' % Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00:00-01:00 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 01:00-02 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 02:00-03 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 03 :00-04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 04:00-05:00 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 05:00-06:00 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 06 :00-07:00 8 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 07:00-08:00 24 0 8 12 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 -- 08 :00-09:00 21 1 3 9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 09:00-10:00 10:00-11:00 11:00-12 :00 12:00-13 :00 13 :00-14:00 14:00-15:00 15:00-16:00 16 :00-17:00 17:00-18:00 18 :00-19:00 19:00-20:00 20 :00-21:00 21:00-22:00 22 :00-23 :00 23 :00-24 :00 TOTAL 1 15 26 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 2 26 45 24 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 2 28 72 97 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 58 100 — AM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total PM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total 8th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total Observations Over Posted Speed Observations +10mph Over % 1 Pace ( - MPH) LI Z ;' P50- P70- P85- 26 P90- (w Hi 1 \\�1r1 V L J , . 1.6 -,j- -V -.0 A ,,, � File# _.ZI Pcf/ E0 Z Locoiion y Q a L QC ✓� . t lsrarr ovy Map# Cross Street: t� ...� "' Q g • S�M }�W T r= S ( 5(0 Q Z. GIL _ W 10� End " ay I Grla# Type of Survey s� Survey 3y SMTWTFS C ta . Site Evaluation Yes No Counter � y 1\Q n Type Speed Greater Than 20 Miles per Hour ? All vehicle pass over rood tube at a perpendicular' JO. Z Rood tube crosses no more than two lanes? N E n 'jbservation Do you anticipate peak hour queuing over road tube? ` ' ® ; Date 3 j o%tri Equipment Setup Lenght of Tube y'Q 4 } l Time +I Date Time offset/Delay 'Status (Observed 1 (Counter 11TT2 'Za E"\et foZ 1 11 II Remarks: Bat Level Observation . "U 3 . Date Equipment Pickup Time Date --2l?I 1c6kkiTime \ '-1-1' Status Remarks: 1 • Bat Level •L‘ti --omparison TT2 Sketch Layout No. No TT2 Total ,, ',counter Total >, i . 0LE Comparison a) e l N ' ...) . . , alit ci- z _..", 1--- C:'1 o .} f-.i-, ") S S III ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/19/96 Location: West Of Alley Between 8th And 9th Day of Week: TUESDAY (Traffic Smithy Direction: EAST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW 1 SPEED ' t Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00:00-01:00 01:00-02:00 02:00-03 :00 03 :00-04:00 04:00-05:00 05:00-06:00 06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 09:00-10:00 10:00-11:00 11:00-12:00 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 12 :00-13 :00 9 1 1 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 13 :00-14:00 6 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 14:00-15:00 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 15:00-16 :00 11 2 1 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 16 :00-17:00 11 3 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 17:00-18 :00 11 3 1 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 18 :00-19 :00 8 0 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 19 :00-20 :00 4 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 20 :00-21:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 21:00-22 :00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 22:00-23 :00 3 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 23 :00-24:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- TOTAL 12 18 21 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 19 28 33 17 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 19 47 80 97 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 73 87 — AM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total PM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( ) t of Daily Total 1 8th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total Observations Over Posted Speed t Observations +10mph Over t 7 .- Pace ( - MPH) % CO P50- P70- P85- 25 P90- l Q V\ 1 ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date : 3/20/96 Location: West Of Alley Between 8th And 9th Day of Week: WEDNESDAY Traffic Smithy Direction: EAST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW 1 - SPEED 1 1 Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00:00-01 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 01:00-02 :00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 02 :00-03 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 03 :00-04 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 -- -- 04 :00-05 :00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 05 :00-06 :00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 06 :00-07 : 00 4 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 07 :00-08 : 00 9 1 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 08 :00-09 : 00 10 1 0 3 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 09 : 00-10 : 00 4 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 10 :00-11 : 00 12 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 11:00-12 : 00 7 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 12 :00-13 : 00 8 3 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 13 :00-14 : 00 15 3 3 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 14 :00-15 :00 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 15:00-16 : 00 7 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 16 :00-17 :00 7 1 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 17:00-18 :00 13 3 4 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 18 :00-19 :00 10 2 1 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 19 :00-20:00 5 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 20 :00-21:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 21:00-22 :00 4 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 22 : 00-23 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 23 :00-24 : 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- TOTAL 20 22 37 28 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 18 20 34 25 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 18 38 72 97 99 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Tiaffic 121 90 — AM Peak Hour (10 :00-11 : 00) 12 9 . 92% of Daily Total PM Peak Hour (13 : 00-14 : 00) 15 12 .4% of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( 8 :00- 9 : 00 ) 10 8 .26% of Daily Total 8th Highest Hour (11 : 00-12 : 00 ) 7 5 .79% of Daily Total Observations Over Posted Speed % t Observations +10mph Over % Pace ( - MPH) P50- P70- P85- 26 P90- 1 O • S III \A • • III ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/21/96 Location: West Of Alley Between 8th And 9th Day of Week: THURSDAY Traffic Smithy Direction: EAST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW 1 SPEED 1 % Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00:00-01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 01:00-02:00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 02 :00-03 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 03 :00-04 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 04 :00-05:00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 05:00-06:00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 06 :00-07 :00 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 07:00-08 :00 8 2 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 08 :00-09 :00 14 0 6 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 09:00-10:00 3 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 10:00-11:00 11:00-12:00 12 :00-13 :00 13 :00-14:00 14 :00-15:00 15:00-16:00 16:00-17:00 17:00-18 :00 18:00-19 :00 19:00-20 :00 20 :00-21:00 21:00-22 :00 22 :00-23 :00 23 :00-24 :00 TOTAL 3 8 12 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 10 27 40 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 10 37 77 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 30 100 — AM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total PM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total 8th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total .� Observations Over Posted Speed % Observations +10mph Over % 1 Pace ( - MPH) % ` Ci P50- P70- P85- 25 P90- W ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/19/96 Location: West Of Alley Between 8th And 9th Day of Week: TUESDAY Traffic Smithy Direction: WEST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW 1 SPEED ' 96 Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00 :00-01:00 01:00-02 :00 02 :00-03 :00 03 :00-04 :00 04 :00-05:00 05:00-06 :00 06 :00-07 :00 07:00-08 :00 08 : 00-09 : 00 09 : 00-10 :00 10 : 00-11:00 11 : 00-12 :00 12 2 3 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 12 : 00-13 : 00 16 0 3 8 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 13 : 00-14:00 17 1 2 4 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 14 : 00-15 : 00 20 4 1 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 15 : 00-16 :00 26 1 11 8 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 16 : 00-17 :00 23 2 3 9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 17 : 00-18 :00 29 4 8 8 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 18 : 00-19 :00 15 1 4 6 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 19 :00-20 :00 8 1 1 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 20 :00-21 :00 7 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 21:00-22 :00 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 22 : 00-23 : 00 3 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 23 :00-24 :00 4 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- TOTAL 16 39 63 48 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 9 22 35 27 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 9 31 66 93 99 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 182 97 — AM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total PM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total 8th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total Observations Over Posted Speed % Observations +10mph Over % I Pace ( - MPH) % 1 P50- P70- P85- 27 P90- �(w� i • 410 S • ( N, S III S ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/20/96 'Location: West Of AlleyBetween 8th And 9th Dayof Week: WEDNESDAY Traffic Smith Direction: WEST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW 1 SPEED Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00:00-01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 01:00-02 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 02 :00-03 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 03 :00-04:00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 -- -- 04:00-05:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 05:00-06:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 06:00-07:00 5 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 07:00-08 :00 19 0 2 4 8 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 08 :00-09:00 19 1 4 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 09:00-10:00 18 2 3 6 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 10 :00-11 :00 18 1 3 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 11:00-12:00 27 3 3 7 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 -- 12 :00-13 : 00 24 2 2 12 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 -- 13 :00-14 : 00 20 0 3 8 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 14:00-15:00 10 0 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 15:00-16:00 18 1 6 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 16:00-17 :00 16 3 5 3 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 17:00-18 :00 34 4 5 16 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 -- 18:00-19:00 8 2 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 19:00-20:00 8 2 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 20:00-21:00 5 0 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 21:00-22 :00 11 3 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 22:00-23 :00 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 23 :00-24:00 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- TOTAL 25 47 98 66 15 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 10 18 38 26 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 10 28 67 93 98 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 266 �I 95 --- AM Peak Hour (11:00-12 : 00) 27 10. 15% of Daily Total PM Peak Hour (17 :00-18: 00) 34 12 .78% of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour (13 : 00-14:00 ) 20 7.52% of Daily Total 8th Highest Hour (10 : 00-11:00 ) 18 6.77% of Daily Total Observations Over Posted Speed % Observations +10mph Over % t Pace ( - MPH) % \ 1 P50- P70- P85- 27 P90- ROADWAY SPEED SURVEY Roadway: EVERGREEN ROAD Date: 3/21/96 Location: West Of Alley Between 8th And 9th Day of Week: THURSDAY Traffic Smithy Direction: WEST BOUND Weather Condition: Non Rain Traffic Survey Service Posted Speed: UNKNOW SPEED 1 % Time Volume <16 16- 20- 24- 28- 32- 36- 40- 44- 48- 52- 56- >60 P85 Over of Day 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Posted 00 :00-01 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 01 :00-02 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 02 :00-03 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 03 :00-04 :00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 04 :00-05: 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 05 :00-06 :00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- - - 06 :00-07 :00 7 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 07 : 00-08 :00 15 2 1 6 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 08 :00-09 : 00 12 1 4 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 09 :00-10 :00 12 1 0 4 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 10 :00-11 :00 11:00-12 :00 12 :00-13 :00 13 :00-14 :00 14 :00-15 : 00 15 :00-16 : 00 16 :00-17 : 00 17 :00-18 :00 18 :00-19 : 00 19 :00-20 : 00 20 :00-21 : 00 21:00-22 :00 22 :00-23 :00 23 :00-24 :00 TOTAL 4 6 19 16 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % by Group 9 13 40 34 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Equal or Less 9 21 62 96 98 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Daily Traffic 47 100 — AM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total PM Peak Hour ( ) % of Daily Total P85=85th Percentile 4th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total 8th Highest Hour ( ) % of Daily Total Observations Over Posted Speed Observations +10mph Over Pace ( - MPH) % l 1 P50- P70- P85- 27 P90- 7- -,..i Q `:' III III III -- DKS Associates Traffic Generation • • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates r' r '73 - J I I • C.. .j0 Vehicle Trip Calculator Project: Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment 41110 Block 136 AM Peak Hour Tnps PM Peak Hour Trips !Description IITE Code !Quantity I Units I Daily Rate Daily Trips In 1 Out 1 Total I In I Out 1 Total Townhouses 230 41.0 DU 7.4 305 4 21 25 19 10 29 Shopping Center 820 8.0 KSF 73.4I 587 8 5 14 26 28 54 General Office 710 8.0 KSF 23.9 191 22 3 25 3 13 16 Total Trips 1,083 _ 34 29 64 48 51 99 Less Pass-By 34% Shopping -9 -10 -18 Net Trios 39 42 81 Block 137 1 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trios p ,Description I T E Code I uanuty i nits j Daiy Rate Daily Ttipsl _ In I Out I -Total } In I Out I Totai I Shopping Center 820 47.3 KSF 73.4 3,472 50 32 82 153 156 319 Shopping Center(Existing) 820 -42.5 KSF 73-4 (3.120) -45 -29 -74 -137 -149 -286 Supermarket 850 17.8 KSF 111.5 1,979 87 91 178 114 109 223 (Total Trips 2,332 92 94 186 130 126 255 (Less Pass-By 36% Supermarket -41 -39 -80 34% Shopping -5 -6 -11 Net Trips 83 81 164 Block 138 I AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips 'Description IITE Code (Quantity I Units 1 Daly Rate' Daily Trips In 1 Out I Total I In 1 Out 1 Total General Office 710 40.1 KSF 16.4 658 79 11 90 15 77 92 S4ikpup:N Center 820 33.9 KSF 73.4 2,488 36 23 59 110 119 228 Quality Restaurant 831 6.0 KSF 12.5, 75 3 3 6 30 15 45 (Total Trips 3,221 118 37 155 155 211 365 III !Less Pass-By 34% Shopping -37 -40 -78 44% Restaurant 13 -7 -20 Net Trips 104 16-4 268 Total for Blocks 136,137&138 AM Peak Hour Trips 1 PM Peak Hour Trios !Description IITE Code !Quantity I Units I Daly Rate Daily Trips In 1 Out 1 Total 1 In I Out I Total General Office 710 47.1 KSF 18.0 849 101 14 115 18 90 108 Shopping Center 820 41.9 KSF 73.4 3,428 50 32 81 151 164 315 Townhouses 230 41 DU 7.4 305 4 21 25 19 10 29 Quality Restaurant 831 6.0 KSF 12.5 75 3 3 6 30 15 45 Supermarket 850 17.8 KSF 111.5 1,979 87 91 178 114 109 223 (Total Proiect Trios 6,636 1 245 I 161 I 405 I 332 I 388 I 720 I !Total Pass-By Trips I I I I I -108 I -101 I -207 I !Net New Vehicle Trips Added to Pdiacent Streets I 4i,I 1-'4 1 245 1 161 1 405 1 226 1 286 1 513 I •Trip Generation based on ITS regression equation when more than 20 data points are available. • MS Associates,Inc. 3t23/00 Page 1 m t t- A 'Vehicle Trip Calculator I 1 IProject: Medical Office Building at 2nd Street and C Avenue I I • AM Peak Hour reps PM Peak Hour Trips Description IITE Code Quantity I Units Daily Rate Deity Trips In Out 1I Total in Out Total Clinic 720 16.0 KSF 34.2 547 33 10 43 20 46 66 Total Trips 547 33 10 43 20 46 66 • III I I I I I I ! I I I I II I I I I II I I I I I i I I I I 411 DKS Asaodsbs,Inc. 3/22/00 MI.,1,, 7 DKS Associates Project Site Plans 41110 • Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates • • • 2 r—- . In c.,,-) SECOND STREET C-31 -, . . . - iLit. .:,..,......m.:,............:4,..-2.... 1:44.. Aik_ ,:____ , . a.,,,... ....._,...,..„......, . . .L.... „ II. ::. •- --;11:'' ".: AM.,.,1,-1 il: ;-,i_..,,:k.,)14. ...ii.j)ik.s;)''ii,T,'-i). ...p .V..:..,,,i .: Immer.,!111111111."-r-----. ikt:".111'11:11iIriiirTiir11.6-1PilizniQ. -- -- AraNCI-ilECT \ ' . '1'. ..-11,'f .".r.71 , l ' It.,Rillt Ill! . k,,,,.. ' itriil No..—-eisd SWF 121 fONIEVEtT OLCG. 141,1,15-0 G "--- ) 1370 911G111114UPG MAD 1700 SO.r. an'..7 gni T.'41=617yint•ve-.4.-015.--kria ---itr-...4.,,, . ifitiew...10..N.I.,-..,•••,i- --,,,...]! ICMIA.41 MOON 97223 litn r iri lummit-mminn-7vosurluIsmelsii.••-iii .":mora-;"IMP 01..'11.r.,...EN.c-t,,,., :, ,!.. •, , 601763-1044 lac 101M-16U - rig111111111111111O111111111.riliNtY '' ' •• 0 APGONICIVICIOATLIVE1 • -PA- • • .--. - is.• -.0.1,-.....AND 1. r.-7'''.,.1 ':' II' 4 . 4 1 ,-4 . . ,.-.. 4-iiiii'Arii-gx-tiii.. ktiv-siw, iwtivaiiiatt, ,.- 2 ....... —,r.c! ittor Al.--11)' "•—• .41 ,, . : 'T ... ... IIMPV!i... --• .., , - '"., LE la - --..: ..' rI.1. Verii,tf- 41,,FY l'cl. t5":FA' IN r-ii-- ,;i1P, '1!'.',I, trA AL i A). • ) — 1.,,,,, A ... • .,,. ,.. , .g :.,- •,' A ......i•":iiq:'•:--";61111.-i), ,rii '-__ ,Iii ,..,., • ..,, .-k.,k.,:„,, iihr..,.., ...r, ..? •:,,iq •.:-4-1: ,riti'.• ','"p . 1111 Ill If tkitilW4Vil '''',11 --- ',1i:' .11 y. 74.. 1,1.d, .i7ili: 'it-. ,,,:,.- kw 411°` li • • • . •,-;,d ,.0 , i. , ...',-..„-,.. .... :r.•_,;:., ...,:-.,,-_, „„..2.11.. , , . , • 0 ,41113, ....._., -.4.4,,„.. ,......_.---.• „„ ,, oir ,.. •,.‘ :71 . ,,, I (Y 4 . ,A.%'10 r'' .—""" 42, lir _ . ut• '--' 'rallIP'1. ' '1 , 0. -..,-..- .0.141.0t,, ,, :wi akign ;74'uti, 004 1 /, IR! .:-.. : • .,,. . hi...,_,,,,_:.1.. .. . . ,,., .. ill I '1 ,„ . f 0 A sidui . . ill ,,,...... ,11.,.... . ......,..,,,,,, .... •mi - -1 41 ilifia,mem, ' .,.1,aiiiikylliiiv gini Agiiy Ally maga. ROI,,. , . ....:...,. . alp', 4 - la wril.1.19 lily ..-411/l1-1:01.11.1.11111 JAW Ifiv:,%-144N,Wobric,,,,,,.:10;;;f.itiosi ..,.. ,._........,, ! ..,. .0.,,.. .,2.1 1., 9 ------•!,,-- ,,,.-=.;. -.-.,,17----,,---7,...---,ii- ,v1-1,...7 r,,i, witoil..., _.....• ,-a . =,.....,.... - =- . ..f......:24,„*.... , 4- . . -. - - -- . -. ..: i :.,,•fi •,:,....,• ...yilt. •••••.,,i : .1110k•ii) • •. •. .1,-, g ... .„ , „. ..,. .:.,. „ ..,,,, -,,,,. 4,, 7,1i 1 IMIW all!• -:.7-7 7.-,i;- ,.' '• '',..'1'1,!:.... -'... f'i!'t! .411: 4.r: 1 'n" -1.....7 ..--.-..ii ..':.' --1 ----Nig . . twit \"--- .-- ra.022,170AV2111111§ . Ili . 111441,111112101!" WI% N'AV Ammin-t —-/ .-. ..• \- 117 AMY MI. -- -Ip ir THIRD STREET 33•70 tU111:31 6•IT WIDII -- , AI UN1T6 TOTAL • C/1 CON1C—T— TUAL SIT'E PLAN "E" , e,Loc.K.136 r"1.61=‘........=.1 LAICIL DrawStS0, OR PRIMARY TEAM REVIEW DOCUMENTS [E3311Z(OK litny LAM OSWESK) mr_mDE v t L oF)m MN I MOJECT GRAMOR,OREGON ID !PIM 41111 . • • L , • r.. ......J , --. C....) 1 (-----\ i . 1 ,......., I oca I 1..-\ I " ) I _,...-... / \. , .,... ,,1 k - t--\ , 1,--- , ks - ) 0 /)." I 1\ III •• 1 Ili — . l.., ..• ..1°' 00 , , , . . / EN _ _ _ ... . , ....„.....-_.n .. - „...„ ..„... .i. IL. E .., _ •A• ''. :4. •: ., "kt = — 41. = , 0 b. . • 0 ) — \ \4 r :...-...". --1— 4 I 0 Tiasi cir_trri 1 0 a o o a .0.:„../......A ./"./..s I.,...< 0<,...,. , , .4, *. 17* f- V.I.C, i..,:g• .1•i.1,, -i% '7,1'03 .10- i.0. i b••,.• ••••""...Ati. . le ir 7. • • • j 1 = .0,.../_.... ,...„.• --. eg,../...; IS"..../•••.: 't • • —.--—- • 0 0 000001I •1 0 V.. 0 0 0 e!*:•—• _. ..__ .........- ...... C °••••.0./ ,.. a—vt.- ••',.,../....1, 0 0 !..1.:- -..-— • • • • • • 10,.0•••....' ..,.... r f . , ......, -4.0•,r 1 , ____ ' • . • . , i .. ... . _ r -*- , . . _ • • .21t, ' - ' 0 — , ..--- ,--":, • ____ 4>: 0,...---1.... / •I , ..„..........\\\ a). 1,......„_.-- tv ...--- 4.)::.• - ey•a°1.-.."` •••• 0---,...-— i a = a . a • a `f ra .;. e T' e3 • 13 -.1:. cis: a ''a aft:\•A ' --...-. ..%:\ c I ' ell t g•. ;,,,,,5i\ , L (........„........... .., ...„.._:. ..!...o.pra.„_4,ap.i, ....., ;1`v, ....,,,...; .:.•,.._.,,,,..._....,_...41.2,..„.4.. .401:1 1111il ' ' • ' • * ' • -..-s-a- * 111 % '40 •* *s , ' ' ‘.....3......./k,...AN.-A... A 3 ...,./k. . ._ _,,,. , _ A _A_A_ 44 _....411 JUL• ,t,g4'...*ys t• .,/4 .V4 \ alerallalli• .4.111N4o. ,, .01/k.- ...._ ,fr: .......•.... n '\---) II IL] * . 1* A A .4. ,, ;k -- • • M I I PAM I Fil=FA • ib, ...e''..' 1ED 40,...:atA LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 137 SITE PLAN SERA ARCHITECTS l•C '001 123 MAI SECOND AVE. Cl7200 FORTIAND SCAIE•60'• I' DATE: 1023122 92131I , RI. 503 228 6444 141 503 224 69 i 3 Eum. __.1 ( • I - . ( • ) ( . ) , • . • i , • \,_„ _.-,!...... r..... -----N. 7-- - __ ...„.,., ..... •,.. . . etti .4 ,, • tac ft _________,. ,....,,, .0...----- ./.„ k.ip. .......,r, 4;§- II..7.A.ii. :::: i,,,, . .,: ..../• „...,, , ...., •I,,t.0 . 04, gi. , 0 4111144SW' I i 4,k .6. z. 1111,- , ___. ....,.....• . ak NI* - ., wiz. Awl, • ' 4 i, • • •Oil 4... r''--; FA. 'WA. Fin, ' \ \--i—r .,--(., .dihr • t 0 I A• . I 1!,1; : f IIII . T•,'V' 4 .r ;'r I M I d •I &='•' ink IbT 6T..ill 4.., . Y1 0 l'ilx.41;r: A 1..1 .111 III I [I u III le......7 WA . 1p 1,..... ,.... Pr \ gt 0 ippr 1,/1... 1(1:: • L 4,,. . .... 0- , '4,•tv •„„ • .46. lir ..- • i 1 w 04 r e 15,; L• ..„„, A. .11 .1...-.11-.. 11111.111, 4.1. c..... ...„.....-__. ...,,. , %.• , ..W. El' .•.,,/,.... lir it 0 • ' 0.° ArE .- ....;,.....-""• " tir '4) W , g...1. 20-...-• 41 1'111'1 4 •\ 't 171-1 El 111.11; 1.11 . ....—...--..).... 1 '4:: ii;•4.• • • ,,,,. 'S'‘,° sr V !.,..0''. -• 1 0 Tr1> • Ab4 ',:-. 4 ' PO.** • Afr vi.f.: ! .- -,,, ..... A. .a..,..-. ...s.'„ • 4k A olv"." . -T - , ''....T r.• 1 iiVrwAk411401"..4.44.;- - ''.1.`1Z ;.,?. , -., • , 01,1 "74 0 , ./AC 4)... ..4\ , A.'. _...., a ..., ''..... — . mg -10 fill., .4 k / 'ili 71 • 111W. N"\ ; - 1 it ... .. • •ilt,. .-1. o 1>L4.( (..----) % . *,... • A- • I 1. fi 11' . I I hil / AtIP . 111 11 1 1 —11 ! • , 01 I It---3! i. IC I .! .7 ft.t?" • 4;:taii;,,..> 4.;4111C0 / 10\ /I fl in I,i •>-*,-,9ei r. •:_tehft.,..,:qt,......e.„.4, _ _ ,er ,4,4-e...*- / 4 • 4 ... (E) ,.--11111A k LAKE OSWEGO BLOCK 138 SITE PLAN A ARC-PRECIS PC NW SECOND AVE /IOC) OE 97209 SCALE.60....1' DAR: 1025.99 991311 1 $03.22411.6444 303.226.6913 owalwaptilo cow. J .-.. ,....) 0 • • i 0r 00 DKS Associates • Evergreen Road NTM Plan fa Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates • • r49 DKS Associates 921 S.W. Washington Street, Suite 612 Portland, OR 97205 PH: (503)243-3500 FX: (503)243-1934 MEMORANDUM TO: Mark Schoening, P.E. City of Lake Oswego FROM: Carl D. Springer, P.E. Scott Mansur g DATE: March 21,2000 SUBJECT: Evergreen Road Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan P99325 The following memo summarizes the evaluation of the need for alternative neighborhood traffic calming measures in response to the pending development to be constructed on blocks 136 and 138 in downtown Lake Oswego. Specifically, the new development may • attract new traffic onto Evergreen Road. If traffic is attracted, what solutions can be implemented to reduce the projected impacts? The study was initiated at the request of the City of Lake Oswego in response to concerns voiced by the Evergreen Neighborhood Association. BACKGROUND Evergreen Road is classified as a two lane local street in the City of Lake Oswego Transportation Master Plan. The primary function of Evergreen Road is to provide east- west road circulation to the adjacent land uses(residential and commercial property). There are two existing speed humps on Evergreen Road. They are located between 9th Street and 10th Street, and 7th Street and 6th Street. These are traffic calming devices that can be effective in reducing average vehicle speeds. Evergreen varies in pavement width and fronting improvements. From 1s` Street to 4th Street curb, gutter, and sidewalk exists. From 4th Street to 10th Street no frontage improvements exist except for curb and gutter along the Evergreen Townhouses. There are unpaved shoulders with a much narrower width. The fronting land uses are commercial and high density residential between 1s` Street and 4th Street, and single family residential from there to the west end. Evergreen Road carries approximately 40 to 75 vehicles during the PM peak hour(400 to 700 vehicles daily). Existing PMtraffic volumes are shown in Figure 1.An hourly • Y peak X:IPROJECTS119991P99325(LO Evergreen NTM)tNTMmemo.doc DKS Associates (11r) NOT 11. TO SCALE I, aaPI ~ 1� Is S 6. y 41 F5i s` k w AnV+G'Y r -- �F&V ow- Block 131 �O :mom �y N x • t7________&) to �►. tls fj��o qi1i~ 2s • :4 1 7.../Cre . 61"'# "3".1_,) LEGEND Figure 1 ® . study Intersection EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ._ J1 DKS Associates • MEMORANDUM Evergreen NTM March 21, 2000 Page 3 volume and speed survey was conducted on Evergreen Road west of 4th Street for five consecutive days beginning August 2, 1999. The average 85h percentile speed was 24 miles per hour in both the eastbound and westbound direction. By definition, 15 percent of the vehicles surveyed were traveling faster than the 85th percentile speed and 85 percent of the vehicles were traveling slower than the 85th percentile speed. The existing traffic condition during peak hours is Level of Service A or better at all intersections on Evergreen Road. The city's minimum performance standard is Level of Service E. Table 1 below shows the results of the capacity analysis. Level of service (LOS)is used as a measure of effectiveness for intersection operation. It is similar to a "report card" rating based upon average vehicle delay. Level of service A, B and C indicate conditions where vehicles can move freely. Level of service D and E are progressively worse. Level of service F represents conditions where traffic volumes exceed the capacity of a specific movement,in the case of unsignalized intersections,or an entire intersection, in the case of signalized control,resulting in long queues and delays. Table 1: Intersection Conditions— 1999 (PM Peak Hour) Intersection Most Delayed Level of Service Volume-to- Minor Street (Major/Minor Capacity Ratio Approach Approach) (seconds) STOP Sign Controlled Intersections 3rd Street/Evergreen Road 3.4 A/A -- 6t Street/Evergreen Road(All-Way 1.3 A 0.09 STOP) 10th Street/Evergreen Road 3.3 A/A -- A/A= The level of service for left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street at unsignalized intersections. Several existing uses impact the traffic on Evergreen Road. Lady of the Lake School backs to Evergreen Road between 7th and 8th Streets. This school generates traffic on Evergreen Road from parent pick-up/drop-off during the start and end of school. City Hall also backs to Evergreen Road between 3rd and 4th Streets and Millenium Park is has finished construction on the east end of Evergreen Road. The construction of Millenium • Park connected Evergreen Road between 1 and 2"d Streets. X:IPROJECTb119991P99325(LO Evergreen NTM)INTMmemo.doc r DKS Associates MEMORANDUM Evergreen NTM 41/ March 21, 2000 Page 4 FUTURE CONDITIONS Blocks 136 and 138, located north of Evergreen Road between State Street(Highway 43) and 3rd Street are proposed for a re-development project on these two blocks that would essentially remove all existing buildings and uses, and replace them with new structures. The Block 138 project includes about 80,000 square feet of retail, office and restaurant uses in one to two-story buildings. (Refer to the Site Plans attached in the appendix and the detailed use description in the Trip Generation section of this chapter.) On-site head- in parking along the retail storefronts would be supplemented with a multi-story parking structure at the center of the block. On-street parking will be provided along both sides of 1st Street. No on-street parking is planned along State Street,"A"Avenue or Evergreen Road. Vehicle access will be onto 151 Street at two driveways.No direct access onto State Street or Evergreen Road is proposed. Pedestrian connections will be provided onto fronting streets on all four sides of the block via connecting passageways or sidewalks. The city's Millennium Park is under construction immediately to the south across Evergreen Road. The Block 136 project is predominantly townhouses (about 40 units) with a small allocation for supporting neighborhood commercial (about 7,000 square feet) and general office uses (about 7,000 square feet). Vehicle access will be provided to 2nd Street and 3`d Street via site driveways. On-site parking is proposed for residents under each housing unit. Visitor parking will be provided on-site and supplemented with on street parking along the perimeter.No direct vehicle access onto Evergreen Road or"A"Avenue is proposed. The vehicle traffic generation associated with the proposed re-development was evaluated using national data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE). Trip Generation for the proposed project is shown in Table 2. The project will generate 421 vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour and approximately 4,200 vehicle trips during an average weekday. Trip Generation,Sixth Edition, 1997,Institute of Transportation Engineers,Land Use Code 710 (General Office),Code 820(Shopping Center),Code 230(Townhouse),and Code 831 (Quality • Restaurant). X:IPROJEC SI19991P99325(LO Evergreen NTM)WTMmemo.doc •I i_ :.1 DKS Associates MEMORANDUM .111 Evergreen NTM March 21, 2000 Page 5 Table 2: Trip Generation Estimate for Blocks 136 and 138 Daily Vehicle PM Peak Hour Trips Land Use Quantity Trips In Out Total Block 136 Townhouses 40 DU 234 14 7 21 Shopping Center 7 KSF 496 22 24 46 General Office 7 KSF 112 3 13 16 Pass-By Trips to New Uses -7 -8 -15 Block Total Added Trips 32 36 68 Block 138 General Office 40.1 KSF 640 15 77 92 Shopping Center 33.9 KSF 2,399 106 115 221 Quality Restaurant 6 KSF 540 30 15 45 Pass-By Trips to New Uses -36 -39 -95 Block Total Added Trips 115 168 263 Block 136& 138 Total Added Trips 147 204 351 Refer to Appendix for trip generation detailed calculations. Trip generation rates and pass-by data based on Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation,Sixth Edition for all proposed land uses. KSF= 1,000 gross square feet building area. Figure 2 shows the trip distribution for Blocks 136 and 138. The trip distribution estimate for project traffic on Evergreen Road ranged from two to seven percent of the site traffic generation. This acknowledges that a small proportion of site traffic may use Evergreen Road as an alternative route to"A"Avenue. For example, traffic bound for the parking garage on Block 138 may use a few blocks of Evergreen Road to circumvent vehicle queues on"A"Avenue approach State Street. Our observations showed that vehicle queues extend back to 1st Street on average and 2nd Street occasionally today during peak hours. As noted later in the study,traffic growth may cause periodic vehicle queues back to 3rd Street during peak hours. This queue length is less than the conditions experienced prior to the improvements made at State Street and"A"Avenue. It is not expected that this queue will cause traffic bound for southbound State Street would use any portion of Evergreen Road to avoid this queue. • X:•IPROJEC7S119991P99325(LO Evergreen NTiLIWTMmemo.doc ',KS Associates t . NOT Ili) TO SCALE • �0 0 t0 o.r t-0 .JOB^o t0 fJjo,0 52 �1 � 42 116 jo 42 j'16 i"52 \\:........35.1, • ! t� 27f tl� 27� t� • IBA t&iT " 0o B� a.�h pi o'rm 271, QNco • y y ti tel• O/0: ZO/O CO �r 44% • f C ti ^c -� N • ----- --;--64 1 t 30'/0 • • 'd • O� n i to__ . ANEW * • • tea• ? Nock 137 RO u REEN R� .. xs .� o • . ------3—tnt, t • >�w.. Br h o Z h R r 12 d; YI P 1 41% • (1. 14 000 t o 17 4"'14 wo 4.-0 7!t 2 0 O ).EGEND Figure 2 ® - Study Intersection PROJECT ADDED PM PEAK HOUR ----- - New Roadway TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND 44 • Trip Disiribufion Percentage TRIP DISTRIBUTION * • Range on Evergreen Estimated from 2%to 7%(high end shown) �, ._ J3 DKS Associates MEMORANDUM Evergreen NTM March 21, 2000 Page 7 The foregoing analysis has shown that the added traffic volumes associated with the proposed redevelopment will be relatively minor to Evergreen Road, relative to the road's carrying capacity. Approximately two to seven percent of the project traffic is expected to use Evergreen Road for site access. During the peak hour, this could be as high as 29 additional vehicles on Evergreen Road(or as low as 8 vehicles). As noted in the previous analysis,this is the high end of the range estimated to be from two to seven percent of site traffic. The combined volume of 103 vehicles during an hour is consistent with the upper end that is suitable for local streets. The equivalent daily volume is roughly ten times the peak hour volume, or 1,030 vehicles. The city's Transportation System Plan identifies the desired upper limit of a local street such as Evergreen Road to be 1,000 vehicles daily. On a capacity basis, this volume appears to be near the limits for a local street. However,the magnitude of the change may be perceived by residents as a substantial impact compared to their current experience. When compared to the low existing volumes,this amount of additional traffic may seem very substantial on a percentage basis, an increase of 39 percent(current two-way volume of 74 vehicle at 6th Street). As a condition of approval,the city may opt to plan and implement for additional neighborhood traffic control devices to reduce the potential for added traffic to Evergreen Road. Figure 3 shows the total traffic volumes (Existing plus Project). ALTERNATIVES Several mitigation options have been reviewed for reducing the neighborhood impacts from generated traffic from the proposed re-development. Attached to this memo is a copy of neighborhood traffic management options. These options were evaluated to determine the following four traffic calming devices that were evaluated: • Speed Humps- are rounded raised areas placed across the road. They are generally 12 to 14 feet long in the direction of travel, 3 to 4 inches high, and parabolic in shape. They are generally spaced 300 to 600 feet apart. The advantages of speed humps are they effectively reduce vehicle speeds, they do not restrict bicycles, and they do not affect intersection operations. The disadvantages to speed humps are they increase noise from braking and accelerating, slow emergency vehicles down, and they do not reduce the volume of traffic. Speed humps cost approximately $3,000 to $5,000 each. • X:IPROJEGTSI/9991P99325(LO Evergreen 1VTil!)WTMnumo.doc DKS Associates NOT TO SCALE It • h w h ti . 4 y ti h ,_ k h h .LLB`,., e ' Block!V 0 • 6p 1s ^ri: c 890 Rar • • p s'44 1111 r L 7 L 8 N H t31 . 1I 52 *II 47 -F22 �i d"IS I1 I l`►' . 26 o re 38 re 761. .--''' 61. (.2 ty LEGEND Figure .3 0 - Study Intersection TOTAL 4-oo - PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume TRAFFIC VOLUMES 000 - Daily Volumes (1999) 000 - Future Volumes DKS Associates MEMORANDUM • Evergreen NTM March 21, 2000 Page 9 • Semi-Diverters- are curb extensions or islands that block one lane of the street. Their purpose is to prevent drivers from entering or exiting certain legs of an intersection. The main advantages of a semi-diverter are to reduce the traffic volumes on a street, no noise impacts, and speed reduction. The main disadvantages are they can reduce the on street parking opposite the device, and minor constraints on emergency vehicles. Construction cost of a semi-diverter ranges from $3,000 to $15,000. • Street Closure (Cul-de-sac)- close one end of a street. The purpose of a street closure is to change the traffic patterns in a general area. Street closures are effective at eliminating cut-through and general traffic volume. The disadvantages to a street closure are response time for emergency vehicles, and they reduce all access to vehicles including local neighborhoods. Street closures cost approximately $20,000. • Chokers (Angle Points)- are curb extensions placed mid block to narrow the roadway to the equivalent of one lane(14 feet). The purpose of chokers are to reduce • traffic speeds by narrowing the roadway so that only one car can pass through at a time. The advantages to chokers are they effectively reduce vehicle speeds and they do not constrain emergency vehicles. The disadvantages are they do not reduce the volume of traffic. Construction cost of a choker ranges from $3,000 to $20,000 a piece. Of the four traffic calming devices evaluated and a meeting with the City of Lake Oswego and representatives of the Evergreen Neighborhood Association, the preferred alternative would be a combination of a semi-diverter and a choker (angle point). Figure 4 on the following page shows the recommended layouts of the traffic calming devises and preferred location. RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the semi-diverter should be installed on the west leg of Evergreen Road (restricting eastbound traffic) at 4th Street in conjunction with the development of block 136. Current 24-hour traffic counts should be collected on Evergreen Road (between 5th and 6th Street), Ellis Avenue, and Lake Bay Court before the implementation of the semi-diverter. This will help determine the future impacts to these roadways after the redevelopment had begun and the semi-diverter is installed. We suggest that Evergreen Road should be monitored at 50% occupancy of block 138, 100% occupancy of block 138, and one year after buildout of the entire site. If the semi-diverter is successful in eliminating generated site traffic, the need for a choker point should be• eliminated. The choker point should be installed at the point monitoring deems necessary. X:IPROJEC7S119991P99325(LO Evergreen NTMANTAftnemo.doc 9 Jvl DKS Associates NOT TO SCALE F- LU W W F- U) 04 0\ F ' 4(:).14) -10' �o, - EVERGREEN ROAD tir 7.--17_,--,_5' d : T / O A 0 -'Stop'sign 0-'Do Not Enter sign 0 -12"White Stop Bar(typ.) 41. 1`--'`— EVERGREEN ROAD 3�e-W w P `6' , i /\ Iae 20' I l 0 Angle Points/Choker Figure 4 TRAFFIC CALMING PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE iii DKS Associates O MEMORANDUM Evergreen NTM March 21, 2000 Page 11 CONCLUSION Traffic growth from development of block 136 and 138 could add 80 to 290 more vehicles daily on Evergreen Road. For the purpose of this study,the highest end range, seven percent,was used to assess possible impacts on Evergreen Road from these developments. It is expected that the actual impacts and added traffic volumes will be less than this level. With the additional traffic, the need for alternative neighborhood traffic calming measures was evaluated. The implementation of a temporary semi-diverter is recommended on Evergreen Road at 4th Street(see Figure 3) before the occupancy of block 136. This semi-diverter would eliminate traffic leaving the proposed site and heading west on Evergreen Road past 4th Street. This location would stop traffic from entering the single family residence portion of Evergreen Road. 4th Street was the preferred location since it would not only eliminate new traffic from the redevelopment but it would eliminate existing City Hall traffic that uses Evergreen Road. 4th Street between Evergreen Road and A Avenue is expected to have minimal impacts from the redevelopment since traffic is expected to use the first available northbound street(3`d Street). The 4th Street location will also eliminate existing neighborhood traffic that uses 4th to head westbound on Evergreen. All of the redevelopment traffic and City Hall traffic is expected to divert to A Avenue. The second mitigation would be a choker point located on Evergreen Road between 9th and 10th Street (see Figure 3). This mitigation should be installed at the point when substantial eastbound cut-through traffic is observed during monitoring at 50% occupancy of block 138, 100% occupancy of block 138, or one year after buildout of the entire site. Monitoring will determine the affects of the semi-diverter as well as the possible need for a choker. If monitoring shows the temporary semi-diverter is merely relocating the problem to another area, the removal of this temporary device would be recommended. If substantial eastbound cut through traffic is observed and the choker is installed, monitoring should take place to determine if the choker is merely relocating the problem. If this is the case the choker should be removed. Because the street system is not a grid, the hilly topography and curving streets do not provide an intuitive cut through route to avoid the choker located on Evergreen Road between 9th and 10` • The choker would also help reduce the speeds of possible cut-through traffic. If the semi-diverter is successful in eliminating generated traffic, the need for a choker point should be eliminated. With the implementation of the choker, eastbound traffic is expected to divert to A Avenue. • X:I PROJECTS119991P99325(LO Evergreen NTA!)WTMmemo.doc , � J3 • DKS Associates Turn Movement LOS Table Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Transportation Impact Analysis DKS Associates 0305 • S • Turn Movement Level of Service Summary Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection L T R L T R L T R L T R Average Existing 4th SUA Ave B B B C C C B B B B B B B 3rd SUA Ave D D D D D D A A A A A A A 2nd SUA Ave E E E E E E B B B B B B E 1st SUA Ave C C C D D C A A A A A A A State SUA Ave D A D D E • C D State SUB Ave D B B B C • C B State St/Foothills Rd • B B C A " • " D • D B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Short-term Without Project 4th SUA Ave B B B C C C B B B B B B B 3rd St/A Ave D D D D D D A A A A A A A 2nd SUA Ave D D D D D D A A A A A A A 1st SUA Ave C C C D D D A A A A A A B State SUA Ave E B • D D F • D D State SUB Ave E B C C D D C State St/Foothills Rd B B E A • E • E B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Short-term With Project 4th SUA Ave C C C C C C B B B B B B B 3rd SUA Ave D D D D D D A A A A A A A 2nd SUA Ave D D D D D D A A A A A A A 1st SUA Ave F F F D D D A B B F A A F State SUA Ave E B E E F D * E State St/3 Ave E B C C 0 D C State St/Foothills Rd B B E A E E B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Short-term With Project+Block 137 4th SUA Ave C C C C C C C B B B B B B 3rd SUA Ave D D D C C C A A A A A A A 2nd SUA Ave F F F C C C B B B F A A B 1st St/A Ave F F F F F D A A A F A A F State SUA Ave F B F F F D E State St/B Ave F B C C D • D C State St/Foothills Rd B B E A E • E B • 7' 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A • L A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A C r 'i r QI W co cn (n no co A N o) co (n 0) y N W » N o) W y y y N W A Si 01 W y y y N W A 9a52n m m 9enaEP o SaQm m m etR. 35 o ETa9mm a, 4na7. o � a3m m m %= 'ad = 3 c .-. .� s .a 7-GI GI m m m yyyy V (ny m m m yyyy y (//(n m m m yyyy V yy m m m yyyy 3 • mmcyccD yDD mmycn (ncD yDD s myy(ncy D D D co mmccy ( DDDD p a m m w A D D A D g g g m m m D D D D D » o g m m A A D A A n m m m A D A D. A o • 7 7 N O 7 7 c7 O 7 z U 7 7 u 0 0 X 73 77 A 7) 7:I . 70 O A 7J 77 77 7] 7 77 ro 2 aaaa n a a Q a n a a a a a a a a ,* r w 3 m 0 0 n ~ 0 J n 0 (A C 3 3 ti Q DDD • mmmmmc) DDA • mm mmmc) DDD • mmOomo > > > • mmomEc) r z 0 a AAwwwmmm (� D DDwwwmmm0 DDDcoaoa000mo DDDwmCoomo0 -I ry A 0 0 c a DDDw • • mmmo DDD co • • mmmc) ADDw • • o mo > > > c • • omoo 7 DDDm • • Octm DADm • • 000m D AAm • • ommm DDDm • • OC) C)c) r cot o C w D D > > o m o o 0 m D D D A O m o o O m D D > > 0 m o m m m A A D D 0 m o o o o -4 Sr C Cl.• DD wmc) ODm DD • • wm000m DA • • Como mmm A D • • c) m (1 (') C)C) AD • • mm0mwm D A • • mmomwm DD • • om00Dm A D • • omO W DC) r U • D A • • • • m m w > D D • • • • m m w > D D • • • • Ea COD D D D • • • • 0 COD CO .4 G C 7 a A D • • 0 m m m w > D A • • o m m m w > D D • • O O w w > D D A • • O O w w > Co 7 A D D m • • m m D D D D D m • • m m D A D A D m • • m D D D D D A m • • a m A w r S • DDD • • • co > DD DDD • • • co > > > DDA • • • wADA DDD • • • w > DW -1 v 0 e 7 a D A D m • • CO D D A A D A m • • CO D D D D D D m • • w D A D D D A m • • co D D W PI E a ▪ o > > > co0mmmwm D A Dwomomwm D DAwOmww > RIDDD womowDw y m m n, o 0 • DKS Associates 921 S.W.Washington Street,Suite 612 Portland, OR 97205-2824 Phone: (503)243-3500 Fax: (503)243-1934 Memorandum Date: April 20.2000 To: Hamid Pishvaie From Carl D. Springer, P.E.,Reah Beach RE: Response to Comments for the Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Project • This memorandum responds to the application review comments from the City of Lake Oswego (dated April 11,2000)that incorporated comments from the Oregon Department of Transportation (dated February 4,2000)concerning the Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Blocks 136& 138 Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by DKS Associates. Each comment has been addressed separately in the following sections. • City of Lake Oswego Comments 1. The inclusion of 2,744 square foot restaurant in the development plan.As your revised narrative has stated, up to one third of the 8,232 square foot retail space may be used for restaurant purposes. While the associated parking issues have been adequately addressed, the traffic report is silent on the potential impacts and trip generation issues. The trip generation for Block 136 was revised to include the new total building area of 16,844 square feet.This separates into 8,232 square feet of retail and 8,612 square feet of office.One-third of the retail use was assumed to be"restaurant use". We selected a conservatively high trip generation rate for this space so that it is valid for any prospective tenant(e.g., coffee shop,bagel bakery, etc.)Actual trip activity should be significantly less than this level. The trip rate used for the restaurant space was for Fast Food without Drive-Thru(ITE Code 833). The following table presents the revised trip generation for Block 136. Revised Block 136 Trip Generation Deily Vehicle PM Peak How Trips Block 136 Quantity Trips In Out Total Townhouses 41 DU 305 19 10 29 Shopping Center 5.5 KSF 404 18 19 37 N Restaurant 2.7 KSF 1,933 36 35 71 "' General Office 8.6 KSF 201 3 14 17 m 8 • Pass-By Trips to New Uses -22 -22 -Mt Block Total Added Trips 2,843 54 56 110 • v � 0j \\DKSPDX\x-drive\PROJECTS\19991P99180(LO Downtown)1Response to comments.doc p Response to Comments on Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment April 20,2000 Page 2 The above land use change results in approximately 29 additional vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour.These additional vehicle trips are relatively low, contributing less than two percent to the existing A Avenue evening peak hour traffic volume. The additional 29 peak hour vehicles do not further impact the roadway system. Therefore,the traffic report findings for study intersection conditions and required mitigation measures remain valid. The revised trip generation calculation sheet is attached. Include the following tables: • Intersection conditions for the year 2017 for all blocks, including Block 137. • Intersection conditions for the year 2017 for all blocks, with mitigation measures. As stated in the traffic report,the future 2017 capacity analysis calculations assumed the construction of raised medians in the center of A Avenue from 2nd to r Street. The medians replaced the existing eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes on A Avenue at 2nd and 3`d Street. It was assumed left-turns from A Avenue will be made from the inside through lane. The future 2017 Plus Project Plus Block 137 conditions were analyzed. The additional traffic from Block 137 resulted in the 1st Street/A Avenue intersection operating at LOS F. The State Street and 4th Street intersections with A Avenue continue to operate below minimum performance levels. The findings are summarized in the table below. Intersection Conditions — 2017 Plus Project Plus Block 137 • Study Intersection Average Delay Per Level of Service Volume to Capacity Vehicle(seconds) Ratio State StreetP'A"Avenue >60.0 F >1.0 State StreetP'B"Avenue 23.4 C 0.81 State Street/Foothills Road 8.5 B 0.68 1 a Streett'A"Avenue >60.0 F >1.0 2°d Street/"A"Avenue 58.4 E >1.0 3'd Streett'A"Avenue 7.7 B 0.90 4th Streetl"A"Avenue 46.5 E >1.0 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections Most Delayed Minor Level of Service Volume-to-Capacity Street Approach (MaJor/Minor Ratio (seconds) Approach) 3`d Street/Evergreen Road 3.7 A/A — 6tStreet/Evetg,cell Road (All-Way 1.7 A STOP) 10th Street/Evergreen Road 33 A/A — "A/A" The level of service for left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street at unsignalized intersections. • l Response to Comments on Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment April 20,2000(Revised April 27,2000,this page only) Page 3 The 2017 Plus Project Plus Block 137 conditions were mitigated to identify roadway improvements that are required due to background growth and the proposed project with Block 137. Project traffic with Block 137 accounts for approximately 30 percent of the total added traffic with background growth and approved developments adding the remaining 70 percent of traffic. The following mitigation measure was identified. • Reconstruct the State Street/A Avenue intersection to include double left-turn lanes and double through lanes at the northbound approach and a separate right-turn lane at the southbound approach.This improvement is triggered by background traffic growth. As stated in the report, these widening improvements at State Street and ''A" Avenue would require relocation or demolition of existing buildings on at least two corners of the intersection. This is contrary to the City's policy and plans for this intersection. Other circulation and operational improvements should be pursued to better serve long-term demands. The above mitigation improvements were included in the Mitigated 2017 Plus Project Plus Block 137 conditions analysis.As summarized below,the resulting performance at State Street/"A" Avenue is acceptable based on the City's required performance level (LOS E)but continues to exceed the required ODOT operating limit(v/c less than 1.0). This intersection can not be fully mitigated to meet ODOT performance standards with reasonable improvements. Intersection Conditions — Mitigated 2017 Plus Project Plus Block 137 • Study Intersection Average Delay Level of Service Volume to Per Vehicle Capacity Ratio • (seconds) State Street/"A"Avenue 47.4 E 1.02 State Streetf'B"Avenue 23.4 C 0.81 State Street/Foothills Road 8.5 B 0.68 1"Street/"A"Avenue 20.7 C 0.92 2"d Street/"A"Avenue 58.4 E >1.0 3"d Street/"A"Avenue 7.7 B 0.90 4th Street/"A"Avenue 46.5 E >1.0 STOP Sign Controlled Intersections Most Delayed Level of Service Volume-to- Minor Street (Major/Minor Capacity Ratio Approach Approach) (seconds) 3fd Street/Evergreen Road 3.7 A/A -- 6t Street/Evergreen Road (All-Way STOP) 1.7 A 0.14 10th Street/Evergreen Road 3.3 A/A -- "A/A" The level of service for left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street at unsignalized intersections. • 0311 II Response to Comments on Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment April 20,2000 Page 4 • 3. 'Update the turn movement LOS table by adding a category for "mitigated 2017 with project + Block 137"." A copy of the updated Turn Movement LOS Table is attached. 4. "The Level of Service Computation Report (Traffix output)for the scenario "mitigated 2017 with project — Block 137". " A copy of the Level of Service Calculation Worksheet for the Mitigated 2017 Plus Project Plus Block 137 is attached. Oregon Department of Transportation Comments Item 3 "No queuing analysis was done for State Street at A Avenue intersection. Queuing analysis should show expected queue and existing available storage length for each movement." A queuing analysis of the State Street/A Avenue intersection is included on page 30 of the traffic report.In addition,the following table summarizes the maximum expected queue lengths for each movement. The queue lengths are based on the 95%design queue and assume 25 feet of required storage for each vehicle. The existing and future vehicle queues will extend beyond the available vehicle storage on most approaches.This occurs routinely today as documented in the report. Queues on "A"Avenue were observed extending back to 2nd Street on average during peak hours. As volumes grow and the capacity of the intersection is reached,the queues during peak hours will • increase. Maximum Expected Queue Lengths at State Street/A Avenue Northbound Southbound Eastbound Scenario Left* Thru*• Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Existing Storage Lcngth*** 400' 750' 450' 450' 300' 300' Existing 525' 450' 625' 625' 375' 450' Existing+Project+Block 137 675' 475' 1025' 1025' 650' 775' 2017 Base 625' 550' 1150' 1150' 700' 825' 2017+Project+Block 137 775' 450' 1250' 1250' 775' 925' Queue length based on the 95%design queue,assuming 25 feet required per vehicle. * Northbound left-turn movement has a dedicated left-aim pocket 175 feet long,and a shared left-thru lane.The combined storage of the two is roughly 400 feet.The peak hour signal timing allows for approximately 26 seconds of green time for the shared lane left-turn movements.After that interval,the signal reverts to thru movements only. ** Queue storage for northbound thru movements is approximately 750 feet to Foothills Road,and 250 feet to the railroad crossing. *** Storage lengths reflect the block length between crosswalks,except as noted above for the northbound approach.The • effective available storage is much longer than shown in the table as queues could extend upstream beyond the approaching block,as occurs routinely today. ( Sr• •i .7 1,i 01 !a Response to Comments on Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment April 20,2000 Page 5 4110 Item 7 "ODOT's Mobility Standards are based on the volume to capacity ratio. The evaluation of highway operation should be based on the volume to capacity ratio." As stated in the traffic report,ODOT requires a volume-to-capacity ratio of less than 0.95 for regional state highways based on the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan. This performance standard applies to State Street(Highway 43).The operating conditions of the State Street intersections with A Avenue and B .venue are required to meet the minimum performance standards of both the City of Lake Oswego and ODOT. As a result, the intersection conditions tables provided in the traffic report included both the volume-to-capacity ratio and the delay with the corresponding level of service for each intersection. Identified mitigation measures for the State Street/A Avenue intersection are a result of both minimum performance standards. s • O 13 Vehicle Trip Calculator(Revised) Project: Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment III Block 136 AM Peak Hour Trips I PM Peak Hour Trips 'Description IITE Code 'Quantity I Units I Daily Rate Daily Tnps In 1 Out I Total I In I Out I Total Townhouses 230 41.0 DU 7.4 305 4 21 25 19 10 29 Shopping Center 820 5.5 KSF 73.4 404 6 4 10 18 19 37 Fast Food Restaurant 833 2.7 KSF 716.0 1,933 71 47 118 36 35 71 General Office 710 8.6 KSF 23.4 201 23 3 26 3 14 17 Total Tnps 2,843 104 75 179 76 78 154 Less Pass-By 34% Shopping - -7 -t3 ..w, iestaurart -•6 -15 -31 Net Trips 54 56 110 Block 137 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Tnps iDescription IITE Code 'Quantity I Units I Daily Rate l Day Trips! In I Out 1 Total ! In I Out I Total I Shopping Center 820 47.3 KSF 73.4 3,472 50 32 82 153 166 319 Shopping Center(Existing) 820 -425 KSF 73.4 (3,120) -45 -29 -74 -137 -149 -286 Supermarket 850 17.8 KSF 111.5 1,979 87 91 178 114 109 223 ITotal Trips 2.332 92 94 186 130 126 255 Less Pass-By 36% Supermarket -41 -39 -80 34% Shopping -5 -6 -11 Net Trips 83 81 164 Block 138 I AM Peak Hour Trips I PM Peak Hour Trips 'Description IITE Code 'Quantity I Units I Daily Rate Daily Trips In I Out I Total I In I Out I Total I General Office 710 40.1 KSF 16.4 658 79 11 90 15 77 92 Shopping Center 820 33.9 KSF 73.4 2,488 36 23 59 110 119 228 Quality Restaurant 831 6.0 KSF 90.0 540 2 2 4 30 15 45 Total Trips 3.686 117 36 153 155 211 3654111 Less Pass-By 34% Shopping -37 -40 -78 44% Restaurant -13 -7 -20 Net Trips 104 164 266 Total for Blocks 136,137&138 I AM Peak Hour Trips I PM Peak Hour Trips I 'Description IITE Code IQuantity I Units I Daily Tnps In I Out I Total I In I Out I Total I General Office 710 48.7 KSF 859 102 14 116 18 91 109 Shopping Center 820 44.2 KSF 3,244 47 30 77 143 155 298 Townhouses 230 41 DU 305 4 21 25 19 10 29 Quality Restaurant 831 6.0 KSF 540 2 2 4 30 15 45 Fast Food Restaurant 833 2.7 KSF 1.933 71 47 118 36 35 71 Supermarket 850 17.8 KSF 1.979 87 91 178 114 109 223 I Total Proieci Trips I 8.860 I 313 I 205 I 518 I 360 I 415 I 775 I 'Total Pass-By Trips I I I I I -119 I -114 I -233 I 'Net New Vehicle Trips Addeo to Adjacent Streets I I 313 I 205 I 518 I 241 I 301 I 542 I •Trip Generation based on ITE regression equation when more than 20 data ponts are available. II DKS Associates,Inc_ 4/19/00 Page 1 0 On 14 Tu ment Level uk Service Summary Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound intersection L T R L T R L T R L T it Average Existing 4th SVA Ave B B B C C C B B D B B B B 3rd SUA Ave D D D D D D A A A A A A A 2nd SVA Ave E E E E E E B B B B B Is E 1st SUA Ave C C C D D C A A A A A A A State SVA Ave D A 0 D E " C • D Slate SUB Ave D B 0 B C C B State SUFoothllls Rd • B B C A D I) B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A • ▪ A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Short-term Without Project 4th SVA Ave B B B C C C B B B 0 B B B 3rd SUA Ave D D D D D D A A A A A A A 2nd SUA Ave ID D D 0 D D A A A A A A A 1st SVA Ave C C C D D D A A A A A A B State SVA Ave E B • D D F • D D State St/B Ave E B C C D D • • • C State St/Foothllls Rd D B E A • E • E B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A • A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Short-term With Project 4th SUA Ave C C C C C C D B B B B B B 3rd SVA Ave D 0 D D D D A A A A A A A 2nd SVA Ave D D D D D D A A A A A A A 1st SVA Ave F F F D D D A B B F A A F State SVA Ave E B E E F 0 E State St/B Ave E B C C D 0 C State St/Foothllls Rd B B E A E • E 0 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th SUEvergroen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Short-tertn With Project Block 137 4th SUA Ave C C C C C C C B B B B B B 3rd SUA Ave D D D C C C A A A A A A A 2nd SUA Ave F F F C C C B B B F A A B 131 SUA Ave F F F F F D A A A F A A F State SVA Ave F B • F F F D E State SUB Ave F B C C 0 • D C State SUFoothllIs Rd B B E A E E B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A • A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Mitigated Short-term 4th SUA Ave C C C C C C C B B B B B B 3rd SVA Ave D D D C C C A A A A A A A 2nd SUA Ave F F F C C C B B B F A A B 1st SUA Ave D D D D D C 0 B B D B D C State St/A Ave F B F F F D E State SUB Ave F B C C D D C C/State St/Foothllls Rd B B E A E E B (•; 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A 1_ 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A a 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A J Turn Movement Level of Service Summary Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection L T R L T R L T R L T H Average 2017 Base 4th SUA Ave C C C F F F F A A A A A E 3rd SUA Ave E E E E E E A A A A A A A 2nd SUA Ave D D D F F F B B B A A A B 1st SUA Ave C C C D D D D B B F B If B Stale SUA Ave F B F F F • D • F State SUB Ave E B C B D D • • C State SUFoothllls Rd • B B E A E E B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A • A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 61h St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 2017 With Project 4th SUA Ave C C C F F F F A A A A A E 3rd SUA Ave E E E D D D B B B A A A B 2nd SUA Ave F F F D D D F F F F A A E 1st SVA Ave F F F D D D 0 E E F B B D State SUA Ave F B F F F • E F Stale SUB Ave F B C B E D C State St/Foothills Rd 8 B E A E • E B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A • A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 2017 With Project+Block 137 4th SUA Ave C C C F F F F A A A A A E 3rd SUA Ave F F F D D D B B B A A A B 2nd SUA Ave F F F D D D F F F F A A E 1st SUA Ave F F F C C C D F F F B B F State SUA Ave F B • F F F E F State St/B Ave F B • • C B E • D C State St/Foothllls Rd B B E A E • E B 10th SVEvergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A 3rd S/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Mitigated 2017 With Project+Block 137 4th SVA Ave C C C F F F F B B A A A E 3rd SUA Ave F F F D D D B B B A A A B 2nd SUA Ave F F F D D D F F F F A A E 1st SUA Ave D D D F C C D C C E B B F State SUA Ave F B • E B F E F State St/B Ave F B C B E • D C State St/Foothills Rd * B B E A E • E B 10th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A 6th St/Evergreen Rd A A A A A A A A A A A A A Ci cr.) • III ill 0 I 04.119/20Z._ 16:47 Filename: 2017MIT.OUT Pace 1 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 2017MIT.OUT Page 2 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 1-1 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 2-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Uuwntown Redevelopment Mitigated 2017 + Project + Block 137 Mitigated 2017 + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Impact Analysis Report Scenario: 2017 w/proj Level Of Service Command: 2017 w/proj Interoection Bane Future Change Volume: 2017 w/proj Bel/ V/ Del/ V/ in Geometry: 2017 L,,;i Veh C Los Veh C Impact Fee: Default impact Fee 4 1 3rd St/A Ave A 4.3 0.762 B 7.7 0.896 + 3.341 D/V Trip Generation: pm Trip Distribution: pm M 2 2nd St/A Ave b 8.7 0.937 S 58.4 1.238 +49.705 D/V Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes 4 S let St/A Ave h 7.7 0.620 C 20.7 0.919 +13.070 D/V Configuration: Default Configuration 4 6 State St/A Ave U i5.2 0.945 R 47.4 1.026 +12.1.87 D/V 4 10 State St/B Ave C 22.8 0.778 C 23.4 0.813 + 0.587 D/V 9 11 State St/Foothilla Rd h 8.6 0.628 B 8.5 0.692 -0.057 D/V )f 15 10th St/Evergreen Rd A 1.7 0.000 A 2.0 0.000 + 0.000 V/C 4 21 3rd St/Evergreen Rd A 1.5 0.000 h 1.4 0.000 + 0.000 V/C 9 24 4th St/A Ave E 50.7 1.404 E 46,5 1.404 -4.139 D/V 9 33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. A 1.5 0.118 A 1.6 0.143 + 0.025 V/C Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Auu..... Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR r !, . L 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 201.7M.IT.OUT Pace 3 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 2017MIT.OUT Pace 4 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 3-1 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 4-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Mitigated 2017 + Project + Block 137 Mitigated 2017 + Pr.,ject + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operatione Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 1►1 3rd St/A Ave Intersection )(2 2nd St/A Ave Cycle (sec) : 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.896 Cycle (sec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 1.238 Lose Time (sec): 8 (Y+R - 4 eec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 7.7 Lose Time (sec): 8 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 58.4 Optimal Cycle: 94 Level Of Service: B Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: S Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Weet Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T .- R L - T - R L - T - R 1 11 11 11 1 I 11 II 11 1 Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Righte: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 u 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 II II II 1 1 II _II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:30-17:30 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:05-17:05 Base Vol: 19 8 16 14 8 25 19 1111 23 23 725 20 Baee Vol: 7 1 18 13 4 30 78 981 23 32 658 22 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1,46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 28 12 23 20 12 37 28 1622 34 34 1059 29 Initial Bee: 10 1 26 19 6 44 114 1432 34 47 961 32 Added Vol: 11 1 0 0 1 0 0 49 10 0 64 0 Added Vol: 11 8 21 0 8 0 0 38 11 20 S4 0 PaeeerByVol: 12 0 6 0 0 0 0 67 6 12 122 0 PaeserByVol: 59 0 32 0 0 0 0 41 32 59 75 0 Initial Fut: 51 13 29 20 13 37 28 1738 50 46 1245 29 Initial Fut: 80 9 79 19 14 44 114 1511 77 126 1090 32 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 53 13 31 22 13 38 29 1830 52 48 1310 31 PHF Volume: 84 10 83 20 15 46 120 1591 81 132 1147 34 R educt Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Redu et Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 53 13 31 22 13 38 29 1830 52 48 1310 31 Reduced Vol: 84 10 83 20 15 46 120 1591 81 132 1147 34 PCS 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 PC6 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 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 Final Vol. : 53 13 31 22 13 38 31 1921 SS 48 1310 31 Final Vol.: 84 10 83 20 15 46 126 1670 85 132 1204 36 1 11 11 11 1 1 II 11 II 1 Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/L8ne: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.05 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.'/0 0.70 0 70 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.07 1.00 1.00 Lanee: 0.55 0.13 0.32 0.30 0.18 0.52 0.03 1.92 0.05 0.83 1.14 0.03 Lanes: 0.47 0.06 0.47 0.25 0.18 0.57 0.13 1.78 0.09 1.00 1.94 0.06 Final Sat.: 732 180 428 409 242 706 42 2582 74 79 2163 51 Final Sat.: 621 74 614 327 245 752 139 1837 93 133 3690 110 I II II II I I II ---II II 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.61 0.61 0.61 Vol/Sat: 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.33 0.33 Crit Moves: r**♦ r*** Crit Moves: **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 Green/Cycle: 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 u.11 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Volume/Cap: 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.73 0.73 0.73 Volume/Cap: 1.24 1.24 1.24 0.56 0.56 u.S6 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.24 0.41 0.41 Delay/Veh: 64.6 64.6 64.6 35.4 35.4 35.4 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.1 3.1 3.1 Delay/Veh: 205.9 206 205.9 28.1 28.1 28.1 73.3 73.3 73.3 199.2 1.7 1.7 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 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: 64.6 64.6 64.6 35.4 35.4 35.4 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.1 3.1 3.1 AdjDel/Veh: 205.9 206 205.9 28.1 28.1 28.1 73.3 73.3 73.3 199.2 1.7 1.7 DeeignQueue: 2 1 1 1 1 2 0 19 1 0 13 0 DesignQtteue: 4 0 4 1 1 2 1 19 1 1 13 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Ass.,,.:. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR r_. 1..... • • • 111 S 04/19/200 16:47 Filename: 2017MIT.OUT Pace 5 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 2017M1T.OUT Pace 6 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 5-1 I 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 6-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment , Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Mitigated 2017 + Project + Block 137 1 Mitigated 2017 + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peek Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 let SC/A Ave I Intersection #6 State St/A Ave Cycle (sec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.919 Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.026 Lou Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 20.7 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sac/veh): 47.4 Optimal Cycle: 112 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 180 Level of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Weet Bound Approach: North Bound South bound East Bound Weet Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R 1. - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Control: Protected Prutec:ted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lance: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 II Lanes: 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 II II II 1 I 1 II II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Jul 1999 c< 17:00-18:00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Sep 1999 c< 16:55-17:55 Bane Vol: 16 8 32 52 13 52 35 1070 17 18 613 24 Baee Vol: 557 609 0 0 1183 144 327 0 981 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.21 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Initial Bee: 23 12 47 76 19 76 51 1562 25 26 895 35 Initial Bee: 685 749 0 0 1455 177 402 0 1207 0 0 0 Added Vol: 54 31 125 0 22 0 0 21 38 95 20 0 Added Vol: 93 0 0 0 0 23 29 0 118 0 0 0 Summer/Fall: 64 0 34 0 0 0 0 39 34 64 70 0 PaeeerByVol: 72 0 0 0 0 62 21 0 52 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 141 43 206 76 41 76 51 1622 97 185 985 35 Initial Fut: 850 749 0 0 1455 262 452 0 1377 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 I 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: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 PHF Volume: 149 45 217 80 43 80 54 1708 102 195 1037 37 PHF Volume: 891 785 0 0 1525 275 474 0 1443 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 149 45 217 80 43 80 54 1708 102 195 1037 37 Reduced Vol: 891 785 0 0 1525 275 474 0 1443 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 I MLF Adj: 1.03 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 149 45 217 80 43 80 54 1793 107 195 1089 39 Final Vol.: 918 824 0 0 1602 275 474 0 1631 0 0 0 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.61 0.88 0.88 0.23 0.90 0.90 0.95 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.17 0.83 1.00 0.35 0.65 1.00 1.89 0.11 1.00 1.93 0.07 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1159 287 1385 437 598 1112 1805 3550 212 1805 3669 131 Final Sat.: 3610 3800 0 0 3800 1615 1805 0 3230 0 0 0 11 ----II 11 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.51 0.51 0.11 0.30 0.30 Vol/Sat: 0.25 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.17 0.26 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: *••* **** **** Crit Moves: •*** ++** C... Green/Cycle: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.12 0.61 0.61 Green/Cycle: 0.25 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.67 0.26 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.65 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.36 0.36 0.49 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.49 0.49 Volume/Cap: 1.03 0.33 0.00 0.00 1.03 0.26 1.03 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 29.4 34.0 34.0 76.1 23.9 23.9 33.8 19.2 19.2 58.2 7.7 7.7 Delay/Veh: 70.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 55.5 7.2 79.1 0.0 44.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 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: 29.4 34.0 34.0 76.1 23.9 23.9 33.8 19.2 19.2 58.2 7.7 7.7 AdjDel/Veh: 70.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 55.5 7.2 79.1 0.0 44.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 6 2 9 3 2 3 3 46 3 9 23 1 DeeignQueue: 57 23 0 0 83 7 29 0 71 0 0 0 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling heave. Licensed to DICE ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR LC ' '_1` W J 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 2017MIT.OUT Pane 7 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 2017M1T.OUT Paae 8 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 7-1 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page B-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Mitigated 2017 • Project • Block 137 Mitigated 2017 • Project • Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Operation. Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #10 State St/B Ave Intersection #11 State St/Foothills Rd Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.813 Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.682 Lose Time (sec): 12 (Tat - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 23.4 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y•R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 8.5 Optimal. Cycle: 89 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 61 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Went Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T R L - T - R L - T - R II II II I I II II II Control: Protected Permitted Split Phase Split Phase Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I I I I I I I I I II II II Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Jul 1999 « 16:00-17:00 Base Vol: 108 801 0 0 1092 146 338 0 156 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 977 58 115 1468 0 0 0 0 68 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Growth Adj: 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 Initial Bee: 133 985 0 0 1343 180 416 0 192 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 1202 71 141 1806 0 0 0 0 84 0 34 Added Vol: 0 29 0 0 23 11 14 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 93 0 0 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaseerByVol: 0 21 0 0 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 72 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 133 1035 0 0 1428 191 430 0 192 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 1367 71 141 1976 0 0 0 0 84 0 34 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 140 1090 0 0 1503 201 452 0 202 0 0 0 PHF Volume: 0 1439 75 149 2080 0 0 0 0 as 0 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 140 1090 0 0 1503 201 452 0 202 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 1439 75 149 2080 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 140 1144 0 0 1578 201 452 0 202 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 1511 79 149 2184 0 0 0 0 88 0 36 I II II II 1 1 II _---II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3800 0 0 3800 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 Final Sat.: 0 3575 187 1805 3800 0 0 0 0 1805 0 161S II II II 1 1 I I I I II Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analyein Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.12 0.25 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.08 0.57 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 Crit Moves: •••* •*•• •••• Crit Move.: *••* *••• *•*• Green/Cycle: 0.10 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.14 0.84 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Volume/Cap: 0.81 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.24 0.81 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.00 0.31 Delay/Veh: 63.8 11.9 0.0 0.0 23.7 14.6 40.2 0.0 29.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay/Veh: 0.0 8.3 8.3 45.9 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.3 0.0 47.4 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 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: 63.8 11.9 0.0 0.0 23.7 14.6 40.2 0.0 29.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 8.3 8.3 45.9 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.3 0.0 47.4 DesignQueue: 10 38 0 0 67 8 26 0 11 0 0 0 DesignQueue: 0 39 2 10 31 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc.. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Auso.:. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR L.. L'7 • . S 1111 04/19/20 16:47 Filename: 2017MIT.OUT Pace 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 2017M1T.OUT Pace 10 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 9-1 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 10-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Mitigated 2017 + Project • Block 137 Mitigated 2017 + Project + Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peek Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 1994 HCM Unaignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #15 10th St/Evergreen Rd Intersection #21 3rd 9t/Bvergzeen Rd Average Delay (sac/veh): 2.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Average Delay (sec/veh): 1.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R 1 II II II I I II II II Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Yield Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include I Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 I II II II I 1 II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 10 Aug 1999 « 16:50-17:50 Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Bane Vol: 0 11 5 7 20 0 0 0 0 18 0 13 Base Vol: 3 5 4 4 8 14 5 17 6 11 28 8 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1,46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 0 16 7 10 29 0 0 0 0 26 0 19 Initial Bee: 4 7 6 6 12 20 7 25 9 16 41 12 Added Vol: 0 0 4 16 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 16 0 0 21 0 PeaserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaseerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 16 11 26 29 0 0 0 0 31 0 39 Initial Fut: 4 7 6 6 12 24 10 41 9 16 62 12 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 17 12 28 31 0 0 0 0 33 0 41 PHF Volume: 5 8 6 6 12 26 11 43 9 17 65 12 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 17 12 28 31 0 0 0 0 33 0 41 Final Vol.: 5 8 6 6 12 26 11 43 9 17 65 12 Adjusted Volume Module: Adjusted Volume Module: Grade: 0% 04 0% 0,1: Grade: 0♦ 0♦ 04 0% Cycle/Care: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 4 Cycle/Cars: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx x=== XXXX Xxxx xxxx I Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx % Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trek/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Adj Vol.: 0 17 12 30 31 0 0 0 0 36 0 45 Adj Vol.: 5 8 7 7 14 28 12 43 9 19 65 12 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gap Module: MoveUp Time:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 2.6 MoveUp Time: 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx x===x Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.5 xxxx 5.5 Critical Gp: 6.5 6.0 5.5 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 xxxx xXXxx 5.0 XXXX xz=** I II II II I I II II Il Capacity Module: Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 29 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 81 xxxx 23 Cnflict Vol: 166 153 48 154 151 71 77 xxxx xvvvv 52 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1661 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 950 xxxx 1348 Potent Cap.: 849 907 1310 863 909 1274 1575 xxxx xxxxx 1619 xxxx xxxxx Adj Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.98 xxxx 1.00 Adj Cap: 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1661 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx XYYYY 933 xxxx 1348 Move Cap.: 808 889 1310 839 891 1274 1575 xxxx xxxxx 1619 xxxx xxxxx II II II I I II II II Level Of Service Module: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:x=*** xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xvvvv xxxxx xxxx vvvvx 4.0 xxxx 2.8 Stopped Del: 4.5 4.1 2.8 4.3 4.1 2.9 2.3 xxxx xvvvv 2.2 xxxx xvvv x LOS by Move: * * • A * * • a * * ♦ • I LOS by Move: * * * • • * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx ==*Yx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 1125 xxxxx Shared Cap.: xxxx 969 xxxxx xxxx 1069 xxxxx xxxx xxxx x**** xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx vvvvx xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 3.7 xxxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ====x xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • • * • * • * • * * A • Shared LOS: * A + * A • * * * • ApproachDel: 0.0 1.1 0.0 3.3 ApproachDel: 3.7 3.4 0.4 0.4 Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DXS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR C..1 C i Z'..� l J 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 2017MIT.OUT Paae 11, 04/19/2000 16:47 Filename: 2017MIT.OUT Pace 12 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 Page 11-1 2017 w/proj Wed Apr 19, 2000 16:29:23 page 12-1 Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Mitigated 2017 • Project • Block 137 Mitigated 2017 . Project • Block 137 PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service C..nmputation Report 1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) 1994 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #24 4th St/A Ave Intersection #33 6th St./Evergreen Rd. Cycle (sec): 90 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.404 Cycle (sec) : 1 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.143 Loss Time (sec) : 8 (Y.R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 46.5 Loos Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 1.6 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Stop Sign Stop Siyn Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 11 11 11 1 I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 1 Oct 1998 « Volume Module: » Count Date: 3 Aug 1999 « 16:45-17:45 Bane Vol: 0 16 5 8 24 6 1 9 7 15 30 7 Base Vol: 25 20 22 110 20 99 74 1006 19 1 699 83 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Growth Adj: 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 Initial Bee: 0 23 7 12 35 9 1 13 10 22 44 10 Initial Boe: 37 29 32 161 29 145 108 1469 28 1 1021 121 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 25 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 76 0 PasnerByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PaseerByVol: 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 73 0 0 134 0 Initial Fut: 0 23 7 12 35 9 1 33 10 22 69 10 Initial Fut: 37 29 32 161 29 145 108 1601 28 1 1231 121 finer Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 IMF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PIIF Volume: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 35 11 23 72 11 PHF Volume: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1685 29 2 1295 128 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 35 11 23 72 11 Reduced Vol: 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1685 29 2 1295 128 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 PCS Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 25 8 12 37 9 2 35 11 23 72 11 Final Vol. : 38 31 34 169 31 152 114 1769 31 2 1295 128 I II-__ __--II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sac/Lane: 338 338 338 447 447 447 600 600 600 740 740 740 Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.06 1.00 1.00 0.06 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.00 0.76 0.24 0.21 0.64 0.15 0.04 0.73 0.23 0.22 0.68 0.10 Lanes: 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.09 0.43 1.00 1.97 0.03 0.04 1.78 0.18 Final Sat.: 0 256 82 92 285 69 25 438 138 161 503 77 Final Sat.: 458 374 410 605 111 544 114 3735 65 5 3346 331 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.14 0.14 0.14 Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.28 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.47 0.47 0.39 0.39 0.39 Crit Moves: •••. .••• .... •... Crit Moves: •... •... ApproachV/S: 0.10 0.13 0.08 0.14 Green/Cycle: 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Delay/Veh: 0.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.7 Volume/Cap: 0.42 0.42 0.42 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 0.67 0.67 0.54 0.54 0.54 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 21.0 21.0 21.0 332.5 333 332.5 372.3 5.0 5.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.7 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 LOS by Move: • A A A A A A A A A A A AdjDel/Veh: 21.0 21.0 21.0 332.5 333 332.5 372.3 5.0 5.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 I ApproachDel: 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.7 DesignQueue: 2 1 1 7 1 6 2 29 1 0 21 2 I Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.7 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.1.0607 (c) 1999 Dowling Asuu.:. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR CID C.) I N 1 ,4:$. 3 V Department of Transportation 'is',N-r.,.. .."zil regonRegion 1 jonn A.Kitzhabei, t.D.,vavemo_ E C E I V E `F' 123 NW Flanders • • Portland,OR 97209-4037 (503)731-8200 •- FAX(503)731-8259 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO February 4, 2000 Dept_of Planning 4 Dsysioun%nt FILE CODE: PLA9-1-2A-LAK-3 Proposal Number: 446 Lake Oswego, City of Planning Department PC Box 369, Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Attn: Hamid Pishvaie Subject: Blocks 136-138 Redevelopment OR43XAAv Dear Mr, Pishvaie, The proposed redevelopment of Blocks 136, 137 and 138 on A Avenue in Lake Oswego will impact traffic operations at the A Ave./State St. (OR 43) intersection. According to the Oregon Highway Plan (1999) OR 43 is classified as 10 a Statewide Urban highway facility. The mobility standard for this facility is a volume to capacity ratio of 1.0. We have an interest in ensuring that proposed land uses do not negatively impact the safe and efficient operation of this facility. Chi Mai, ODOT Transportation Analyst, has reviewed the October 1999 Traffic Impact Study prepared by DKS for the proposed downtown redevelopment. ODOT has identified a number of deficiencies in the study. We request the City require the applicant to address the following deficiencies in the traffic study. Until the full impacts of the proposed development are addressed, ODOT will not be able to comment on necessary improvements. Traffic Study Deficiencies 1. Traffic study should include drawing or schematic figure showing existing lane configuration and traffic control devices for all study intersections. 2. Trips in the traffic study were calculated using the average trip rate. According to the ITE Traffic Generation Handbook: "When the trip Generation data plot contains more than 20 data points and a regression curve and equation are provided, use of the regression equation is recommended." Therefore, it is expected that the regression equation (or fitted curve equation) be used to calculate trip generation for Shopping 111 Center (820), General Office Building (710), Townhouse (230), and EXHIBIT 52 LU 00-0007 Form 734-1850(1/98) :. t 3 i .:, . ODOT Response 2 Lake Oswego. City of 02/04/00 Blocks 136-138 Master Plan Supermarket (850). 3. No queuing analysis was done for State Street at A Street intersection. Queuing analysis should show expected queue and existing available storage length for each movement. 4. Traffic volume figures should include the following scenarios: existing conditions (1999): site trips: projected background and in-process trips; buildout (year?) projections: and 2017 projection. 5. Traffic operation analysis should include: existing conditions: background and in- process traffic without project: buiidout year conditions without mitigations: and buildout year with mitigations; and projected 2017 conditions. 6. Mitigations were recommended for State Street. The constructability of the such improvements should be analyzed and discussed as well. 7. ODOT's Mobility Standards are based on the volume to capacity ratio. The evaluation of highway operation should be based on the volume to capacity ratio. When a revised traffic study has been submitted. please forward two copies to ODOT for review. I will be routing one copy to ODOT Traffic and one to ODOT Rail Division for review. If you have any questions regarding the analysis. please 1111 contact Ms. Mai at 731-8542. I can be reached at 731-8258. Thank you. ItnA61V4- Marah Danielson Planner Development Review r nr T n .,hi Mai, �Lj0 �,eg,oii Dave Lanning. ODOT Rail Division • �,, vc, �u 11:1! rtia 1 aus in tlZ5U UDUT KG 1-FLANDERS 0002/00,3 1 l:III)regori Department of Transportation • Region 1. .'! 123 NW Flanders John n. �+ ,u.D.,Governor Portland,OR 97209-4037 (503)731-8200 FAX(503)731-8259 May 2, 2000 �PLCA9-1-2A-LAK-3 Psoposai Number. 446 City of Lake Oswego, Planning Department PO Box 369 Lake Oswego. OR 97034 Attn: Hamid Pishvaie Subject: Lake Oswego Downtown Redevelopment Block. 136 Dear Mr. Pishvaie: I understand the current review is limited to Block 136. We have no recommended conditions of approval pertaining to Block 136. The remainder of our comments pertain to the 3-block redevelopment traffic impacts and recommended conditions for Block 138. We wish to share these comments with • you so that the city and prospective developers can incorporate them into the Block 138 redevelopment plans. Findings Traffic impacts The 3-block redevelopment impacts traffic operations at the A Ave./State St. (OR 43) intersection. According to the Oregon Highway Plan Highway 43 is classified a Statewide Urban highway facility. The mobility standard for this facility is a volume to capacity ratio of 1.0. No direct access is allowed and none is proposed to State Street. ODOT staff has reviewed the October 1999 Traffic Impact Study prepared by DKS and subsequent addendums which address our earlier questions. The traffic impact study indicates State Street at"A" Avenue intersection is 1 ii expected to operate at conditions beyond ODOTs operating limit (v/c=1.0) at build-out year. We agree with this analysis. Both northbound and southbound queuing on State Street at "A"Avenue are expected to exceed the existing available storage length. A solution to this deficiency would be to install double left-turn lanes and double through-lanes in the northbound approach to "A" Avenue intersection and a separate right-turn lane in the southbound .739-1850(1l9B) EXHIBIT 53 LU 00-0007 \l rr Ili 05/02/00 11: 18 FAX 1 503 731 8259 ODOT RG 1—FLANDERS C?1003;003 ODUT Letter May..2000 approach to 'A"Avenue could be considered. We are not requiring additional • right-of-way to accommodate this improvement because widening State Street is not reflected in the Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan (-TSP) and based on conversations with city staff, a future modification of the TSP to recommend widening of State Street through Lake Oswego is riot contemplated. It would be difficult to widen State Street because of existing development on at least two corners of the intersection. Bike Lane on State Street Additional right of way along State Street may be needed from Block 138 to accommodate a bike lane, Bike lanes are required along state Highways and is a planned facility in the City's TSP. Recommendation to Interconnect "A"Avenue Traffic Signals Based on the master plan traffic report the traffic signals along `A" Avenue between State Street and 4th Avenue need to be interconnected to provide for efficient progression movements. The best time to do this work is when the signal at 2" and "A" Avenue is installed. It is anticipated that the interconnect will primarily benefit the local system but also benefit Highway 43. Plans for the interconnect may already be in place as part of the signal installation, If not, it may be appropriate for this to be a condition of approval associated with Block 138 redevelopment. 40 The timing progression will be based on a progression analysis with recommended signal timings prepared by the applicant. Timing priority needs to be given to through traffic on State Street and an effort should be made to minimize the northbound left-turn queuing on State Street at "A" Avenue intersection and to minimize the potential of westbound queuing on "A" Avenue at 1st Street intersection from spilling back onto State Street. The progression analysis will be subject to review by Doug Anderson, Region 1, ODOT Signal Manager. Thank you for coordinating with ODOT_ I can be reached at 731-8206 to discuss these matters further. Sincerely, Gail Curtis. AICP Senior Land Use Planner cc: Matthew Grady, Glamor Development Chi Mai, ODOT Transportation Analyst 0 4,G [Mg • Consulting Engine STORM RUNOFF CALCULATIONS FOR BLOCK 136 = _2FER: Gramor Oregon. Inc 9895 SE Sunnyside Rd, Suite Clackamas, OR 97015-7784 Phone No. (503) 654-9188 PREPARED BY: Adam Zucker, EIT KPFF Consulting Engineers 111 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 2500 Portland, Oregon 97204 Phone No. (503) 227-3251 SUPERVISING ENGINEER: Matt Dolan, P.E. January 18, 2000 [Revised March 24, 2000] KPFF Project No. 99049 City#: L000-0007 The technical information and data contained in this report were prepared under the direction and supervision of the undersigned, whose seal, as a professional engineer licensed to practice as such, is fixed below. • Ci s ' • Dept. 3 !. I -, c�pt.�c.,, EXHIBIT 54 LU 00-0007 TABLE OF CONTENTS 0 PROJECT OVERVIEW LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 DEVELOPED CONDITIONS CRMWA 7_3(QUALITY CR4IWATE,DETENTION EXISTING DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS PROPOSED DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS 3 WATER QUALITY FACILITIES 4 MAPS AND PLANSHEETS EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 DEVELOPED CONDITIONS 6 STORM DRAIN PLAN 7 CITY WORKSHHETS WATER QUALITY WORKSHEET 8 ORIFICE DIAMETER WORKSHEET 9 • AREAS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS CALCULATIONS 10-12 STORM FILTER TREATMENT CALCULATIONS 13 CALCULATIONS AND REFERENCES FOR DETENTION ANALYSIS MAPPED IMPERVIOUS AREAS(MIA) 14 SWM FIGURE 3,3 15 SWM TABLE 4.8 16 LAKEWOOD BAY AS-BUILT PLAN SHEET 17 FLOWMASTER PIPE CAPACITY OUTPUT 18 STORM DRAIN SYSTEM PROFILE AND DETAILS 19-20 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT LETTER AND CORRESPONDENCE 21-22 • 4 M1 Block 136 3/24/00 KPFF Project No.99049 By ASZ PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed Lake Oswego Block 136 Redevelopment project is approximately 2.11-acre site • located in Downtown Lake Oswego. The property is fronted by 'A'Avenue and Evergreen Road to the north and south respectively, and Second Street and Third Street to the east and west, respectively. Legal Description: Lot 1 through 16, inclusive Block 136, and lots 21 through 32, inclusive, Block 136, extension of the Oregon Iron & Steel Company's First Addition to Lake Oswego. in the city of Lake Oswego, Ccunty 2:ackamas and state :f Crec n prcpcsec ce,ecpment nc:uces .:..38-acre commercial site with a _-story .etail c t]ce dulicina with underground par:. inc anc a surface ;arxing :'Ct. and a '... aacre residential .eve1amen,t with five 3-story townhouse duiidings, including 40 separate 'wing units. 'See attached Existing Conditions sheet and Developed Conditions sheet.) Below is a summary of the existing and proposed areas: Existina Conditions Commercial: Total: 16,635-square feet (sq, ft.) Impervious Areas: 7,610 sq. ft. Building/Sidewalk/Concrete • 2.034 sa. ft. Asphalt 9,644 sq. ft. Total Impervious Pervious Areas: 2,321 sq. ft. Dense vegetation 4.616 sa. ft. Unimproved Ground_ 6,937 sq. ft. Total Pervious Residential: Total: 75,200-square feet Impervious Areas: 4,280 sq. ft. Gravel 7,832 sq. ft. Building 24.746 so. ft. Asphalt 36,858 sq. ft. Total Impervious Pervious Areas: 20,164 sq. ft. Dense vegetation 18.178 so. ft. Unimproved Ground 38,342 sq. ft. Total Pervious t 7 Block 136 3/24/00 KPFF Project No.99049 By ASZ Developed Conditions Commercial Total: 16,581•square feet Impervious Areas: 7,016 sq. ft. Traffic/Parking 8,291 sq. ft. Building 62 so. ft. Pedestrian/Concrete 15,369 sq. ft. Total Impervious ---'ric;;s • Residential Total: 7 5,200-square feet Impervious Areas: 23,243 sq. ft. Traffic/Parking 35,300 sq. ft. Building 3.960 so. ft. Pedestrian/Concrete 62,503 sq. ft. Total Impervious Pervious Area: 12,697 sq. ft. Landscape Stormwater Quality: 41 Compliance with the City of Lake Oswego drainage requirements will require water quality treatment and will be met by utilizing Stormwater Management's Stormfilters. Stormwater Detention: According to the City of Lake Oswego, this development will not require stormwater detention if the downstream storm system has the capacity to convey the developed site's stormwater runoff. Based on the OTAK study, Lake Oswego Surface Water Management Master Plan: Volume I — Recommended Plan, dated July 1992, the 136 site is located in Downtown Lake Oswego South Basin LOS-20. The study modeled this basin and calculated a peak discharge of 30 cfs for the design storm event. This flow is based on our site having Mapped Impervious Area (MIA) of 85 percent. See the attached Figure 3.3 and Table 4.8 from the OTAK study. The proposed MIA for the Block 136 development has been calculated to be 84.8 percent. (See the attached MIA calculations.) According to the Lakewood Bay Storm Drainage Improvements (Phase 2) plans dated November 1994, a 30-inch concrete pipe with a slope of 0,053 ft/ft was constructed to drain the future design flow of the LOS-20 basin, The capacity of this pipe, calculated by the program FlowMaster, is 32.12 cfs. (See attached as-built drawing and FlowMaster printout.) Since the downstream stormwater conveyance, constructed as a capital improvement in 1994, has the capacity to serve the proposed development and the site's developed runoff conditions are consistent with the assumptions used in the 1992 OTAK study, stormwater detention is not necessary for the Block 136 development. • f •.J �% .l Block 136 3/24/00 KPFF Project No. 99049 By ASZ EXISTING DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS • On-site Drainage Characteristics • There are no major drainage features on the proposed Block 136 development. The site has a number of existing catch basins and area drains, some of which were observed to be full of sediment. Runoff from the site drains to the south and is collected in a 12-inch storm drain in Evergreen Road. Uphill Drainage Characteristics t is assumed that no uphill drainage wiil be affecting the proposed project. :cwnniil 2rainace 0 arac:eristics Storm runoff from site :urrently trains nip -;non storm Ice sunning .vest aicra Evergreen Road. This storm pipe combines with a 1 c-inch pipe at a manhole in the intersection of Third Street. This 15-inch pipe runs south along Third Street and combines into a 30-inch storm pipe that drains the entire basin. This 30-inch pipe was constructed as a capital improvement in 1994 based on the recommendations of the 1992 Lake Oswego Surface Water Management Master Plan. PROPOSED DRAINAGE CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS On-site Conveyance The proposed drainage system for the proposed Block 136 development will be separated into two private systems, one for the commercial development and one for the residential development. The water quality and detention requirements will be calculated as one site. Runoff from building and the parking lot of the commercial development will be collected by roof drains and a catch basin • and will be conveyed into the existing storm drain in Second Street that connects into the Evergreen road pipe. Runoff from the residential development will be collected by roof drains for the buildings and by catch basins in the impervious areas. The runoff will be collected by a network of underground storm pipes and connected into the existing manhole in the intersection of Evergreen Road and Third Street. (See attached Storm Drain Plan.) Uphill Conveyance The proposed on-site drainage system will not be designed to collect any uphill drainage. Downhill Conveyance The proposed development will not adversely affect the existing downhill conveyance systems. The proposed Mapped Impervious Areas (MIA) percentage for the proposed Block 136 site development is consistent with the MIA percentages used to model the basin in the 1992 Lake Oswego Surface Water Management Master Flan study. 3 0331 r ■ Block 136 3/24/00 KPFF Project No. 99049 By ASZ SURFACE WATER QUALITY FACILITES The proposed development will use Stormwater Management's "Stormfilter technology to treat its runoff. The water quality peak flow Qtreat, was based on 0.36-inches of precipitation falling in 4 hours on all new impervious surfaces. The proposed development will create a total of 77,872-sq. ft. of new impervious surface. This surface area corresponds with a Qtreat of 0,162cfs. (See attached City's Water Quality Spreadsheet.) -_:c,circ ._ C:ormwete. ;la. age each 2tcr7fliter :arr'c :an `- a. The m.inirr�un ter"' t rs .ec rem :re :rc sec eve. _n: ,5. .._....�,... . �c� _ :�cr,:, `�i e u� :o :roc _�... _ �pc.. __ ....,,� _ . Number of Cartridges = 0.162cfs 0.C23cfs per Cartridge =4.9 Cartridges 4 5 Cartridges The commercial development will incorporate a Stormfilter catch basin, which utilizes a single Stormfilter cartridge. The residential development will incorporate a 6-feet x8-feet Pre-cast Stormfilter which uses five cartridges. A total of six Storm filter Cartridges will be used on proposed Block 136 Development. A flow diversion manhole with a 3-inch orifice and weir will be used on the residential development to by-pass flows greater than .142cfs. (See the attached orifice diameter worksheet.) The Stormfilter catch basin is designed to pass flows up to 1 cfs, A ten-year storm event on the commercial site will result in a peak flow of 0.91 cfs. • According to the manufacture's specifications, the Stormfilter technology has been tested to remove at least 65% from storm runoff, Stormwater Management has reviewed the schematic storm drain layout. See the attached letter from Stormwater Management. An operation and maintenance plan will be provided by Stormwater Management. • 4 • • 0 . _ - I 1 i \ C.'f18cL `q tf -- — — `41 .$_ — _ —II- I SECOND I 5 '7 II --; \ -.1 . .... r . iS la a = I ki 1 • (\ "••••"/ ---................... 41.----•.1..... . , ... , . 4. f I _ r • ,, .".„ _•H_ : ".- - H _ • I..I(i I- _ • f-'r- Yj' +—\\ — :tee ' �r'; �!l V `.1 49,125SQ. FT. :1 I --,k\I l 12 4. L"..2t i — Di — i ; • I II% i!l/1�� rs� E- N/ "-`/ 4.' i 11,1, 11 __ w,=3 '' 1i ,1rarar. maw ( V _�.` I I gat • i : • :: , • 1 if ! i •I i I •• -i rc • a 1 554yrrl ' , il .. `., / 36,554 Sp. FT;tl:' �� `c x' 1 I I )6) 4 \ �r 1 I I I \ti �...1 'IA I I I n I _t. it (7/7--A N-,....• • C 1e/ _ �~ �'1 ' I __ v. j. •—��.ti.1. .�..IJj: .�.I1...../1.,,,L.11 '+ .1�os' ,,i( /kItt M N i0 i Y.__. c-e'• •tip..•—_iu..�.a �...i.....Au.1.-.•,,.......r .. ......1i. — — — - — - —THIRD —STREET - — —w....... • \ L ,q pI — ( I Ells.76—p- �..) I I ; �.i:. \"\ , 0 ,--1 -, 3 --f- ...)r- s 1 911:11. i.....IL' I . /----- \ _....._../ / , AA II s SECO:1 STREET 1 I ..... '••••., / . U •---- ..._% __.: 1 — 1 '1 .• 1 _ N. \\\\ y.1---- -• ./ ,..,..\ \\—\\\ \\ \ _ .,,....1. s j 1 1 1( _________I ._.. -1-i' --/ I • a 1 I.1 1 — ... _ ..... ,. 1 II.1 ' . • . ' . Iii I 1 1 1 ...._ 0 , i - ...ii......,z..5.0....t.. . ,I I i ‘,..11 s-_-- , !. ,1 or , A . - - 1 _ -:1- ;. ;7's -7 !; IL It [I_ i ••• 1: ',.I---: , --- I ‘.."- c= 1 == ,i I r. , ,11, .: :-: ...' ,„, , I 2 , --x:y !.„-_... ! t P , 1 - -- - •----•-----••---- ••••---;---- . , •-4 , ..- i aim,1121,1 II ...4F,....j..... „Loarii, .". ., . d 1 0:r : - il"I' 13r I i r .E.. d : . t:- d 3 . 7 < .".<1 I..I ; T: +11 1 III all !• - -I - - _ I 114. "' E•_.' 2-.1. 7' . 1 i ; I 4 ti-r......9. • . 1 - It_ -- '4131a1P91-"trirr -irt--*-0,14' .•A ' F5 '....t 1 1 —,..1 1 • 1 , • ,..4.i • - 1 , .ipsuertieuracritizz4 Iffri,L 1 . ' I :i..._..7 I lit."41.1°61.113?''-.-"IlLr.:2=YZilLICI5. 1 ' Irrrry.• • 111"11 1 ' - r - I • 7..:7'.... I i•• .:1:. \ I I I 1 II . . '--e... :..: IA i 1 .11 ••• •••••-Pix. ' t . .. .-r• ____ - z____._._. \. ......cr-g.\-,. ...-, a iile..1 rifIri, ,N,. u --- - .. - 1111RD STREET niimil.l • C..) i • , 'V ,- _____ • I 0---- L----ri. •I 1 A _____, 1 *A" AVENUE • !: ! . . :•*- -i-7ZI• . ..... . _.- 0=• _ 0.= s. • I , . j I I v. . .:t . : I _ 4 d! i ..-,`.. . , . 1 I tro. .:-... ! I I L I - , I y il4 1. I 1 k-L 4.1 ir 1:Ft! _ TO 15 i' • •e:ek ziZ 1 t—4 ,•,.a.. .. • P 8 -,-r- i '' i 0 v . r , i I 8r41 z I .1 im • , ,.. 1 - 1 •,., , • , „, ._.., i g . r i • g : 0 ) F1%7 ,• 1.—, N• ......,i.,. gafl•---; ,-' .51 a , i - • I'‘,..• •e. -", E. ';- :.. ... • I et(s 1 g ea "• • '.:c 4 4:- '..i '-•, : 1... v ' ....;- ' &,j s • , , I • -- •' .'--- i ft 3 i . , -, I .1„. s: I 0 I \ i.....- ..„...•- ' --" I-7 1 - . ..../ •pe. r, •__.. . 1-..../ Iso,r 41 -50 1, ,- . . '"'"''' , 1 . s ,.. ,4,11to• I :_. ! LI ININN A e i 1,:,. r if ? . 1 1 I ' .•eg §85 a q :,,,, i 3k,Ep. ..,ii.i k.; 1 :41t) 3'.,-414- - ..: .1 I I, •.... • - :=L_I._ •lil ,,,__..A. i!. -. .. ____ __---! _-,. r-1 411111 I ',, . ' ASO i *_ i l._ .t ,g_ii ,..,,. EVERGREEN R&D Irl ,g, la • e•-• i . .., •..... -a . I• , , II/.' . • . .,— _____ - - I 1 ' , -'' " '__ 1 1 '1 i -_ °F'p 1 1 p. .. . :i .-_. .-,.• ' • ; :•'••,'J:.. ,-, -... _.......______ f I N I a —II .1.2 - ,•• 1 I 7 A LAKE OSWEGO b . 1 I g 1 i It lAtk BLOCK 136 [ i„ii,. REDEVELOPMENT (..g• a KAtii r I? r) r- 0335 .... __ 1 lv- tt WATER QUALITY WORKSHEET (updated October 1, 1999) Project Name: I Block 136 Development City Project Number: I DATE: Computed By: Adam Zucker 3/21/00 Company: ( KPFF Consulting Engineers • Address: I 111 SW 5th Avenue-suite 2400 Phone Numbers: I (503) 227-3251 New Impervious Area Calculation. Total Site Area: 2.11 acre_ _ome t: = is - _ 35.300 new cuu n_s.- 3_29 1 I sq. .:. new parking area: j 7.016 sq. ft. sidewalk area: feet long x 0 feet wide= 4,022 sq. ft. street area: feet long x 20 feet wide = 23.243 sq. ft. other area: I Olsq, ft. Total Impervious Area: 77,872 sq. ft. 1.79 acres percent Impervious area: 85% Design Flow Rate. Design Storm: 0.36 inches of rain fallins in 4 hours. • Calculate the volume to be treated. Vol. =(0.36)X(1 ft./12 in.)X 77,872 sq. ft. = 2,336 cu. ft. imp. area volume Calculate the design flow rate over the 4 hour storm period. Flow rate= 2.336 cu. ft.:(4 hrs. X 3600 sec.)_ 0.162 cfs volume • h:landy_hlquality19049-WQ.xls r, r u � JG ORIFICE DIAMETER WORKSHEE'(updated October 1. 1999) • Project Name: —_- Block 136 Development City Project Number: Computed By: Adam Zucker I Date: 1/13/00 Company: KPFF Consulting Engineers Address: 1 l l SW 5th Avenue-Suite 2400 Phone Numbers: (503)227-3251 L_:aicuiate the outlet orifice size for a given discharge "Q". Orifice Equation: Q = CA(2gh)°' C= 0.62 Coefficient of Discharge = 32.20 Accel. of Gravity(ft./sec./sec.) 99.67 I overflow elevation 99.33 I invert elevation out h = 0.34 feet (Height above overflow elevation to i.e. out) Q 0.1290Icfs (Design Discharge from Detention WVorksheet) Orifice Area: A = 0.044465 sq. ft. A =(Q/C)(2gh)°" A =pi*R' • R= 0.119 feet R =(A/pi)°' Pi =3.1 4 159 D= 0.233 feet (R)2 Orifice Diameter: D= 2.855 inches (D,,,c,) 12 Calculate the discharge "Q" for a given orifice diameter. orifice diameter: D=I 3.000Iinches provided D= 0.250 feet Di„c,„/ 12 R= 0.125 feet (R)/2 A = 0.0491 sq. ft. A =pi*R2 99.67 I overflow elevation I 99.33 I invert elevation out h = 0.34 feet Q= 0.1424 c.f.s. CA(2gh)°i • h:\andy_h\quantity\orifcalc.xis p to 0337 Pried t itIC1 13 D f By 1 _ Snae,No itocanon k- (Dare ((f Ly �-'1G il Consultrng Engrneers ` � "'ICuenr G !Revised A ooNo ?orana.Oregon I 'Dore .I C 4()(,� I • Xt5 �ncf CoAr,^;4;04. Cp r+,+vnerc;c.1; -Cr=-A : ,3 al ,0 _ f r�� i - C(AI lG t /1G!`COIACr<< -. jl dI( 0 (-r • ? ,05/1 T/z > Tafalt I(1 z 0. 36G.c rtri`sC U4c1c l411;01,1: Zo, ILL! 4-P = 0.-76 Ufrl,r„fro,jecK Grcu�J ; ?�� fi =8 �{ O.LI G • (3 vc : `/, Z ?J -cf > o. 10 C.`ft ,Grirr a(A1 I(J1/41/xj : 7,t V a c i Z , O. I 7 r 2-0o c17 De2 k10 P ;tit = 03°8 , 3 c Z. // uc 11110 Io 0338 Prgecr 61., fZ� iBv Ar Berko - - .LCCCMC4Itt k C 0. . -_ I O M l efl rffaC Engineers. '6 :Dare C+enr .Jon no O ua of I Rev,seo 1 S'7 Pomona.Oregcn _ - -- — /1 .. .— (1a n Dare (1 1 ii G�, T ltl 0 (......- i r) 1 _ _ _ E�'�' r �'')•- 'or: ' ' .�--ice :+'0v... _ t ;, tict �cc-..Ft: lZIZ �" - C\03C <.,, - _ - - ., . 1 i i u , ti , G Pec c fiuk f s;a( lk 62. 'L_, .3o..c b•?8,c... Re si tvtt i c.1 0 Trc...,c;L • Z3r 2LC 0. 5�f 136,;\Ai viq . 25 Soo G. 1 ,c. Po,,i-ei,.l 5.„.1,,.lk', "3I , 63 O,o y 4, • 0339 II ^71 Proem:, R1.C(( ( y— !By SneerNo llJ `•+p - —- - --- I At XST Daie ke V l// Consulting Engineers !Location Os � - - — f Cent Gtp, a- !aev,seo =O ?acna.Oreoon --- Any QQ 9 ;Dare 1 1 1 U 1 l 9 t 1 - iJ } r i 'or.4i L4 fir �Lc;40. 1 - - EIA;I 0-CIO iv Grace = 070 p Co'le ( n ; (C,c \CO-z%i• (CILo.0 0.7C (Q19,c)(6.,0) 4 08 .101 II �.u/ C t_mo, cJ c\ar\. Co04m.Lt co.04-1,()(.(22`ZS) (p Cc)• D4 )��.4Q) rr \� I C• L// �. W2;ci ckC • 0, =/ r i< 1"%.r nes��e1�,;U i . a,v )(Cz jta '(o.aoo.(c./o..� ors • �c oa,0 ► a53,., o GX � � R � � � ail, i� ) (D• �� ) O, aOcit.W C_ Ca<LI)<:' Rct ev 1.1 = ( ) (3.k"5 4 (0•710LC (C1`9( ) 73 C•c Ltd C 0. ics. Ex;�tii1 ,� y f . 1 �'' �l` ! Protect WOCk r By /Cl'7 7_ Sheer No -I ) L57gp �Locatan/i�� D�43Ct a Dal e t t 1 !EffaConsulting Engineers ' ` Cent IRevrsea i.cc 4:c. Pomona.Oregon i ,no C(l tt Drne n • Fi 1 t'/ C_LA.cvt Qose4 Ft y (5:clom �j . . Iv; :C*Czr,:Zoe C+; -'T. -tic' C\:;wt,N .�;n� -tO1_ � .�3`3cc x ( 3bw sic 7 Arsl - y75. 2 cu . (1/?S.z Cc.-4) ' o ,pro in f lit 11 4 / IZi K� - �is ��/C� ` -47 0.364� S O -, '-I I � Frorecs � 8v A S'tieesEl. rvc LAcarcn / Vt i•1CrE3 W Consulting Engineers !.C>� Glens V aevrsea Pomona Oregon • Oare • /1/41PC C.)\ j- rytiDer,) („. /I'll A To`ira\ c 1S,r u . o, $ I !.4 - 7J, 0U tei A -- Y - To GI ;,��erin� ;6- 6q Tr' ' c L503 '; $7Z /LIT A _ 77, ±Zce (3\ M ,iis • • =--- vv 2$. ' i►i -71). ..- '' ..l iI City of Lake Oswego Il � 1l = SWM Master Plan I . .... ,. . . , - .-..),____.„ .____ 1,..,,,,.• . .... paQui ii, ,•••• tg:-.-EEI „. \.. 1\----III N... &gi ( 1U DE..-fl ., - .. . 0 _ j . • I :, , -,. ' ,,...,, , _ /' ��[ T ,and Use and Mapped . • ._,., ) ,.-_,,Jz.:1),•...- ,, rEi : . _ _•`' �- ' 1 . ...,,,,,•_,.:,_,--,..,. , � -- ;'CC��2 Impervious Areas 1 I (u�' +�,� ��_ General Land Use � 1 dl ;h !�. 'i r,' atenr. - MLA (Percent' L }t n , , r.:r.: ; =gtirr�- ,; � :• I Single Family �� [= � \°=.� � -_—L� Residential 1 L��r/� r �i•_ r ' Hi oh Density 50 �i �G ,' .7„ , 1 �! ( � IL Medium Density 35-50 I i. ,_. _ • i;Q ., -i —.t `I } ; R-S, R 7.5 „�,� Mr � iL , . . � I Low Density 20 0q-I / •'• �� , —i s. G \ Multi-Family • g.,OgC;v.71-rl;(irj ' 'r-_ � Residential 60 ."---!-1,177:- *)-,--" . .,. -.,.. ;. 5 � -s> • � - Commercial k �r ' O III and Industrial `�-%�`� ��/ MC,oC.Cl. CR&D 70 �j> v1a \ l \Al . I. IP 8 5 �—� --f ;t. NC. GC, HC. EC. 85 N Institutional 40 S � s 't.,I1 (.0. r\..\1..., ::P:11c Bides...�" ( _ M,.. e;:y, -- ` 0 .�-r''�..:.�- ., ,N'� " _,.14. �. Major Arterial 95-100 > Ii // 2fJram M., itr , o .0 �.,..y e�t4'( N ..:_. 7 L_ _.--...=_--5-..,.1..11, ic fs, I ,,, ..___ 4 K..., ..... i.,. iff•-;---e-.4;1 syt A.:1-1) . Q---.-.— -4;7" I ,•:11 1 \ pw• IL br.:...,,x/,' ,s6. Figure 3.3 �� r, -_ � ti`=` 0 1200 2400 3600 I - __, Oic1Jc , t= . '°Ng' " 1 ' Hydraulic Inventory and Performance Evaluation 1111 LOCATION: • STRUCTURE i 4 DEESIGN FLOW: CAPACITY: DEFICIENT: WATERSHED • Basin I oration Length Slope Number& Type Head Event Now Fut. Flow Max Now? Fut? Notes II Node ID ft ft/ft Size (in) ! ft Yr cfs cis cfs cfs Yr Yr 411 P -210 Childs Rd.W 40 0.020 30 CC 10 50 40 40 60 P -10 Mossy Brae Rd. 30 0.020 38 CC 5 50 148 148 65 95 10 10 riWILLAMETTE RIVER ri Tryon Creek T -112 Driveway E of Goodall#16 24 MC 2 50 24 24 13 21 10 10 PR T -110 Goodall#17 60 0.035 24 MC 2.5 50 24 24 17 23 25 25 T -102 Driveway W of Goodall#18 24 CC 10 50 24 24 45 T -101 outlet pond 50x30x2 400 0.055 50 24 24 ri T -105 Country Club Rd.(west)#19 250 0.152 2- 15 CC 4 50 29 29 29 159 7 -92 PIPE @ Country Club Fed.(m 400 0.005 30x 16 CA 10 25 74 74 20 30 10 10 ri T -910 Uplands#14 200 0.025 24 CC 5 50 20 20 30 T -902 DRY CET&Dolph Ct. 200 0.065 24 CC 5 50 20 20 30 T -82 WET POND T -80 Country Club(east)#12 500 0.010 48 CC 10 50 136 136 170 T -70 Atwater M9 100 48 MC 12 50 156 156 200 1 T -610 Boca Raton(south)#10 100 0.050 30 MC 12 50 25 25 70 T -510 Boca Raton(north)#11 100 0.050 36 MC 15 50 26 26 130 11 T -50 Stoney Bridge#8 60 CC 2 50 204 204 25 10 10 OK T -310 Terwilliger Ext#4 36 CC 6 50 31 31 70 • ri T -210 PIPE 1100 0.033 24 CC 5 25 26 26 41 T -20 43 @ Terwilliger(#201 96 CB 20 50 1141 1141 1200 Dunthorpe D -30 Rail Road#3 24x 12 CA 2 50 12 12 12 ID ID -22 Briarwood#2a 12 CC 2 50 25 25 26 D -20 Rail Road#2 36 DC 4 50 41 41 50 I Downtown Lake Oswego North LON -40 PIPE 1300 0.029 12 CC 25 28 28 6 10 10 LON -30 PIPE 1000 ' 0.050 12 CC 25 37 37 8 10 10 • rii LON -210 PIPE 1500 0.017 24 CC 25 30 30 30 LON - -20 PIPE 400 0.150 24 CC 65 65 88 LON -12 PIPE 300 0.073 24 CC 25 65 65 61 25 25 CO: LON -10 PIPE 750 0.013 24 CC 25 88 88 26 10 10 Downtown Lake Oswego South ="� _v. LOS -20 PIPE under Bay 1100 0.001 12 CC 25 30 30 1 10 10 —31" LOS -19 PIPE 1400 0.043 30 CC 25 69 69- 85 —k LOS -10 PIPE 500 0.010 42 CC 25 • 69 69 101 ri Oswego Creek 0 -20 PIPE(small)Maple#34 300 0.120 18 CC 4 50 35 35 36 ri Hallinan Heights H -20 Obrien Trail tt24 24 CC 2 50 28 28 13 10 10 OK H -14 Lund#23 30 MC 4 50 28 28 38 H -12 Bullock#22 30 MC 5 50 28 28 45 H -10 Hwy 43#21 50 36 CC 7 50 42 46 80 MI H -8 PIPE By Burnham+t25 18 MC 4 25 36 39 15 10 10 PR H -6 Rogers Park Trail#36 24 MC 3 50 42 46 20 10 10 OK Glenmorrie ri . S . ri33331reportltab4-8 Page 4 revised 26-Ju: b pro, 91o49 cf _ vc -4 co cc tz )ID I,...,— . s „" H ` T,y 51 /tr ; i jpi I 1 ' I I 'C� P r _ ..s I I i • w• I I = IIIIII I I I I I I 1 I I I .- I. •\• I-. -' '''7' 61 s ''t.:-.4-1---1' i ,.- 0 - -F c .^ r R-4- .■,)�,4av .\ / . I I .ti7. 1111 II 1111 : I i ; \ i, \off• Y.G-O~ i -i•.L. '''. a r; u •• j I i3 , '�f I i I I--I'i 1 1� I 1 I I I i 11 1; H I I j I _ _ i.L R".�`'�5 •1 YSe3 -it I f W I 'R 1 if il14hlrI III 1 I I I I I I l I�: I I I _ _i �.� `f�3jjj 13;FP -' / I e ` I I I I : ' I?.H65L st"r2 I i III --E,.t I; e yr.,>, "\ `\-`_`9�y • ;? F 1 3 r = ✓ I 1. ,I I .r J N ° i • 7 '; -~v` �`? I_ f��J :I •• i• !1 I I1 1I�_�� I■ -`� ��., •1 - - - mac c; 3 I. P31: C" 11 � 7- 1, I f It: ��_ I • • .,""w ` f. it I f _ -,s., • y j tW- II In , I `{ .g S 7-� II jI a i, --g ^ ' S� I =c • 111 / 1 i ! 1 ' I I I i •, s. - O `\ S \ \`' O i s y .21 1 eS ,i -i 1 I p '7 I> - t = o \\ ' ' : I 3 [.':.,.-?1 ' 64 ; I 11 I I 1 1 I i I I 1 ....! ( ' ;'''; ' L l I I1 I ill I l f •\ 1 n y I ( I ?1 I i „� y s_ 7; Ii I I it. E i I 1 1 1 I I , i _-eat wEI I. 1 l \ -e ki _-- ? et' ze° — - a_� — _ :`r- •Iii_ , - _- l'' ! '' ! ' 1[01M1 ' 1 li 6 ' i'''. - 0 ./ 1,,i• ',I. ' } e -Y I I I 1 71X LOT 3100 .dO` p :Jr, I c i • g i ,, nyp P; _1I - - - - - -- Eel -�. i -' III / W I , !;g i l ' ' II III STATE STREET '\ r L--%. • 11:5� -li. f iI ! j ` ` i eQ w I I II I III I I i �'-. :� Via ' . 1I II I � J �' I m m to o I Ci�1 t' _ C Io u. O ° p 2 30-inch pipe discharge capacity Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description . Project File c:lhaestadlfmwlblk136.fm2 Worksheet 30-inch pipe Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharce _,,ar r.e, S•icc_ ft/ft �E�fh2.35 ft iameter 20.20 n Results Discharce 32.12 cfs Flow Area 4.79 ft` Wetted Perimeter 6.62 ft Top Width 1.19 ft Critical Depth 1.93 ft Percent Full 94.00 Critical Slope 0.006909 ft/ft Velocity 6.71 ft s Velocity Head 0.70 ft Specific Energy 3.05 ft Froude Number 0.59 Maximum Discharge 32.12 cfs Full Flow Capacity 29.86 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.006133 ft/ft Flow is subcritical. • 03/10/00 FlowMaster v5.15 01:35:10 PM F!aestad Methods.Inc. 37 Brookside Read Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 • 0 ) ) - , 1 Proiect Noc... ,c \--5(a sy 427,, Sneer No E17 I II 1 Consulting Engineers 1.°"6*n 1-4-114' 65°C-4•12` `..c'e 311710O _ Jca No POniona Cregcn L., —. 2k:a-wi 1, 9SO41 . ./te pro-ciir .0,,„ _Q ,..- , $ -Lc- ? . - - 01-(1- 01-1 0 T- iota< 7-1-1. F Cr, /0Z,C _.. 1----- v i , P 1 • . I i N _ ..._.. 7. = CAI ; . _ .. , :.,. — ..- — .... i .--- r.,.. . .. , i I j t:01-cr 0-1 /07/ .- i 7-----‘ ., 0 0 c% o c; -v -.4 0 I-4 ....._._._....___________ ___ ........ __... . __________... Rim: 1 --5,2, 97,0o i 1 — 1 /A7' , -,____l',..u) , , MI--1 A-I 1 1 ck . /-•6 0 .,,,_:..._.., C k ) - -re= cr5.96 . I .--- _- — . ....-- --_ / coy& A-2. c =:, Oa . ) tv„; / f.-) 6 -, i k E.: ". / r. A- I _ _ _ . . . FCr• /0-Z.o / / • 6 / / il:';' Exiti frt k A . .., v E.0.,r.ger A (3r • --- ;. _ _ _ -- - i 1 ; +-• k-,.. toz.tiZ_ OFFSET FRAME SO THAT OPENING IS DIRECTLY OVER THE LADDER .14f1 2 ROWS RISER BRICK aft% MAX. TO BE MORTARED o Nam„ (NO PLASTER COAT) NO. 5 REBAR ® 6" ^•n s s. N a =m -r.• - : B" THICK PRECAST 1 ;•�� '/CONC. SLAB " 2 NO. 5 HOOPS --�� IE--9ti.b/ s= ; :l OVERFLOW WEIR —� ELEV.=99.67 cv I _+ 1" (POLY) SAFETY TYPE 6 1.1 F MANHOLE STEPS LOCATED—•�I _1 -- 12" O.C. 5+,,� \<�\..,: •O 12" INFLOW PIPE _ 60" I.D. \ e" PIPE FROM — \ : UNDERGROUND • _ - .' : WATER QUALITY \ 6" PIPE TO —� \\: (//INDERGROUND \ -- —T '� \ co WA fER QUALITY �`- 12" n < tt — / 12" PIPE - - IE=97.00 D In BASE SECTION 5 T lJ m rn '^ 12" MAX. L! .;i.67" MIN'. \ / cn m MIN.. 5 " 1,-- ro 0 8" MAX s"xa TEE o Z �' W/ END CAPS 0 -0 v -,- AND 3" ORIFICE. N� • ``_`/ i '' / m160 in �.: ? Fri TO WATER FROM WATER r�1 \12" CRUSHED QIJAI.IIY QUALITY Z 2 PRECAST OR CAST ROCK IE-99-i. IE=97.19 = n IN PLACE BASE. m 3000 PSI MIN. TROWEL FLOOR 0 cn CONC. TYP. SMOOTH II— _ �, f Tl m • PROFILE 0 Z PLAN 0 y o s G, D Z C �T m Z c, torr, MH A-1 P fol6 asiip.go (VERSION S1RU il)13E. III STORMWATER \A MANAGEMENT • February 4, 2000 Adam Zucker KPFF Consulting Engineers 111 1 SW 5th Avenue. Suite 2500 Dear Aoarn, I am writing this letter to inform you that Stormwater Management has reviewed the design calculations and conceptual plan for the StormFilters proposed to treat stormwater runoff for the Block 136 project in Lake Oswego. The calculations and conceptual plan are in accordance with Stormwater Management's design criteria. The phosphorus removal efficiency of the StormFilter with a perlite/zeolite media mix and adequate pretreatment is expected to exceed 65% when the influent concentration of suspended solids exceeds 200 mg/L. This expectation is based on historical data collected • by Stormwater Management and is dependent on the ratio of solid phase to ortho phase phosphorus. Please review this information and contact me if you need clarification or additional data. I look forward to working with you on other projects in the future. Thank ycu. Sincerely, Stormwater Management 9,_ Joanna Ogintz. P.E. Project Engineer Zl ,c\ (11c,01-+9 2036 NE Columbia Blvd. Portland OR, 97211 S03.240.3393 800.548.4667 5 S02.240.9553 stormwarter gt1c EffigU.S. Bancorp Tower, 111SW 5th Avenue, Suite 2400 CONFIRMATION RECORD Ceuw+,ng£ngmeer• Portland, OR 97204 (503) 227-3251 FAX(503) 227-7980 JOB NO. CLIENT TELEPHONE ® • 99049 Gramor DIRECT PROJECT DATE Block 136 03/17/00 LOCATION TIME Lake Oswego 2:08 PM INITIATOR I RESPONDER _;:ir= __Z E.:CRIP .ICN .;SXeC :O review latest rev:sicn of storm drainace plan �i,L .00 and p,rovice a letter of accordance to be submitted to the city. Faxed over plan Maintenance issues. Adam - Is it ok that the vault will be upwards of 10-feet deep? Joanna - Maintenance shouldn't be a problem. Recomment that a ladders is installed into the vault and use typical doors for the vault. Vault also needs to be a maximum of 12' or so away from vehicular access so a vaccum truck can can clean the vault. Three options for maintenance: 1. owner to sign contract with Stormwater Management 2. Owner to maintenance facilites . 3. Cartidge Exchange. Owner maintenance vault, stormwater management to provide new cartridges COPIES TO LOCATION ACTION FOR INFO. COPIES TO LOCATION ACTION FOR INFO. ONLY ONLY REQ. REC. i ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ • !:'r,.i99i99049 iDocs iconfirmation.doe �Z � 0.7 5 0 -71 k9 KLEINFELDER • GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT PROPOSED BLOCK 136 PROJECT 204 "A" AVENUE LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON Kleinfelder Project No. 60-8338-01 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. All rights reserved. This document was prepared for use only by the client, only for the purposes stated, and within a reasonable time from issuance. Non-commercial, educational, and scientific use of this report by regulatory agencies is regarded as a "fair use" and not a violation of copyright. Regulatory agencies may make additional copies of this document for internal use. Copies may also be made available to the public as required by law. The reprint must acknowledge the copyright and indicate that permission to reprint has been received. • L:1I9991PROJEcrs183380116029R350.DOC EXHIBIT 55 COPYRIGHT 19991CL.EINFELDER,INC. LU 00-0007 KLEINFELDER 15050 SW Koll Parkway;Suile I.,Beaverton,OR 97006-602H 1M1 644-944' J � • k9 KLEINFELDER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY KleinfeIder, Inc. (Kleinfelder) has completed a geotechnical engineering investigation related to • the design and construction of the proposed Block 136 project located at 204 "A" Avenue in Lake Oswego, Oregon as shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Based on the results of our investigation, the site is geotechnically suitable for the proposed construction. Key design items are summarized below, and are discussed in greater detail in the body of this report. Soils: Our subsurface investigation encountered a general sequence of loose to dense fill soils consisting of silt, sand, gravel, and cobbles mixtures to depths of 2 to 9 feet. Near surface conditions varied from asphalt pavement and base course materials in the paved areas to topsoil on the landscaped areas. The fill unit is underlain by either medium dense coarse grained catastrophic flood deposits or soft to medium stiff silts and clay of the Waverly Heights Basalt formation. See Section 3.3.1. Groundwater: Groundwater was not encountered in any test pit, although soils were very wet in all test pits at depths (seepage at depth 8.5 feet in Test Pit 3, 10.3 feet in Test Pit 4, 8.5 in Test Pit 5, and 13.5 feet in Test pit 8). We anticipate that groundwater conditions may vary depending on the time of year, localized subsurface conditions, and other factors. Near surface perched water should be anticipated during wet winter months. See Section 3.3.2. Site Earthwork Recommendations: We estimate that over the majority of the site, it will be necessary to strip from 6 to 8 inches of topsoil or other undesirable material, prior to subgrade preparation. Near surface soils encountered below the topsoil have a very high proportion of • fines and will therefore be moisture sensitive. If possible, site earthwork should be scheduled for dry summer weather. Subgrade preparation and proof rolling recommendations are provided in Sections 4.1.3 and 4.1.4 respectively. Structural Fill: The on-site soils encountered below the topsoil are generally suitable for use as structural fill. However, the near surface soils have a very high proportion of fines and will require proper moisture conditioning to achieve specified compaction levels. The use of imported crushed rock may be required if construction proceeds during wet weather and in areas exposed to construction traffic. See Section 4.1.5. Compaction: We recommend that the subgrade in all areas that will receive fill, pavement, or structures be compacted to at least 92 percent relative compaction. The top 6 inches of subgrade that will support pavements should be scarified and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction (See Section 4.1.3). We recommend that fills intended to support structures and pavements be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding about 8 inches in thickness and be compacted to at least 92 percent relative compaction. The top 6 inches of fill intended to support pavements should be compacted to at least 95 percent (See Section 4.1.5). Recommended compaction levels are referenced to the maximum dry density as determined by the modified Proctor test method (AASHTO T-180 or ASTM D 1557). • L:\19991PRoJECTs183380116029R35o.DOC PAGE 1 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER, INC. r, r- m KLEINFELDER • Slopes: No significant permanent cut or fill slopes are anticipated for this project. Shallow Foundations: Based upon the soils encountered, shallow spread foundations can be used for this project provided footing excavations are prepared in accordance with the recommendations provided in Section 4.2. Due to uncontrolled fills, to achieve adequate bearing, footings should overexcavated to a minimum depth of 2 feet below the proposed footing bottom and backfilled with granular structural fill placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations contained in Section 4.1.5. In area where compacted structural fill was placed after the tanks were pulled. overexcavation will not be needed. Individual column footings with loads up to 100 kips and minimum widths of 24 inches, and continuous strip footings with loads up to 5 kips per foot and minimum widths of 18 inches may be designed for bearing pressures up to 2,000 pounds per square foot. This value can be increased by 1/3 for the inclusion of wind or seismic forces. Footings should be founded a minimum of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent. Total settlements are not anticipated to exceed 1 inch, with less than Yl2 inch of differential settlement over a distance of 30 feet. See Section 4.2. We recommend that 12 inches be used as the design frost penetration depth for the Lake Oswego area. In addition to shallow spread foundation support, an alternative would be the use of short aggregate piers, known as geopiers. The geopier system consists of densely compacted aggregate piers made of well-graded stone. Geopiers are constructed by drilling a shaft, compacting the soil at the base of the shaft, and placing aggregate in thin lifts and densely • compacting with a high-energy densification system producing a geopier. If this option is chosen, Geopier Foundation Company, Northwest, Inc. should be contacted at (503) 236-1344 to provide recommendations on site preparation, geopier design, and construction recommendations. Slabs-on-Grade: Due to the potential for near surface groundwater, we recommend that floor slabs be underlain by a minimum 6 inch thick layer of free draining crushed rock and that slabs be established a foot or more above surrounding final grades. An impermeable membrane should be installed if moisture sensitive floor coverings are used. See Section 4.3. Excavations/Subsurface Structures: We anticipate that excavations to significant depths can be accomplished at this site using conventional equipment provided adequate control of groundwater is maintained. The soils encountered are consistent with a Type C soil when applying the OSHA regulations on sloping and shoring excavations. Seasonal near surface groundwater should be anticipated during excavations. See Section 4.4. Seismic Hazards and Design: Based on the soils encountered at the site, UBC Soil Type Sp (Seismic Coefficient Ca=0.36 Cv =0.54) is recommended for use in design. The corresponding normalized response spectra for UBC Soil Type SD is considered adequate for the project site. No site specific seismic concerns were identified during our seismic hazards analysis. See Section 4.7 & 4.8. • L:11999\PRo1ECTs183380116029R350.DOC PAGE II NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. - :; 53 k' ■ KI EINFELDER • Pavements: For general parking and traffic areas, we recommend a pavement section of 2.5 inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over 6 inches of crushed rock base (CRB). In areas of concentrated traffic such as entrance and exit bays, and main drive lanes; and areas used by heavy vehicles such as delivery and garbage trucks, we recommend that the section be increased to three inches of asphalt over ten inches of aggregate base or 3.5 inches of asphalt over 8 inches of aggregate base. See Section 4.9. This summary is intended for introductory and reference use only. A thorough reading of the entire report is essential for understanding the total design concepts and limitations. • • L:1I9991PROJEcrs183380116029R350.Doc PAGE Ili NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. U ) 54 kg KLEINFELDER TABLE OF CONTENTS • Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 GENERAL 1 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 1.3 AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK 1 2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 2 2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION 2 2.2 '_.A.EORaTORY TESTING - 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3 3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY 3 3.2 SURFACE CONDITIONS 4 3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4 3.3.1 Previous Investigations 4 3.3.2 Soils 4 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOM IENDATIONS 5 4.1 SITE EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS 6 4.1.1 General 6 4.1.2 Wet Weather Construction 6 4.1.3 Site Preparation 7 4.1.4 Proof Rolling 8 4.1.5 Structural Fill Materials 8 • 4.1.6 Fill Settlements 9 4.2 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 9 4.2.1 General 9 4.2.2 Foundation Recommendations 10 4.2.3 Foundation Drainage 12 4.3 INTERIOR FLOOR SLABS 12 4.4 SUBSURFACE FACILITIES 13 4.4.1 Utilities 13 4.5 RETAINING WALLS 14 4.5.1 General 14 4.5.2 Retaining Wall Design Parameters 14 4.5.3 Non-Restrained Walls 14 4.5.4 Restrained Walls 15 4.5.5 Retaining Wall Foundations 15 4.5.6 Retaining Wall Backfill 15 4.5.7 BacJjull Drainage 16 4.6 PERMANENT SLOPES 16 4.7 SEISMIC HAZARDS 16 4.8 SEISMIC DESIGN 16 4.9 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 17 5.0 REFERENCES 17 41110 L:\1999\PRoIEcr5\83380I\6029R350.Doc PAGE IV NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. l 5J M KLEINFELDER 6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 18 6.1 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW 18 6.2 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING 18 7.0 UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS 18 FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan APPENDIX A—TEST PIT LOGS Pages 1 through 4 Test Pit Logs • L.:\1999\PRorECTs\833801\6029R350.DOC PAGE V NOVEMBER 23, 1999 , COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. r. � v 0 jai k L E I \ F E L [) E R GEOTECFINICAL EXPLORATION REPORT • PROPOSED BLOCK 136 PROJECT 204 "A" AVENUE LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 GENERAL Kleinfelder completed a geotechnical exploration related to the design and construction of Bloc:: 136 project in Lake Oswego, Oregon located as shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure I. The purpose of the geotechnical exploration was to explore the surface and subsurface conditions at the site, and based on the conditions encountered, provide recommendations pertaining to geotechnicaI aspects of the proposed development as outlined below in Section 1.3. 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site (site) is located at 204 "A"Avenue in Lake Oswego, Oregon. The site is roughly rectangular in shape and extends approximately 385 feet north-south and 250 feet east-west. The site is bounded by "A" Avenue on the north, by Evergreen Street on the south, by Third Avenue on the west, and by Second Avenue on the east. We understand that the proposed site development will include the construction of forty new • two-story above-grade residential row houses with at-grade parking and a two-story at-grade retail shop with basement parking located in the northeastern portion of the site, Associated site improvements will include paved parking and driveways and landscape areas. Building types are understood to be reinforced concrete for parking level and timber framing for the floors above parking level. Individual column footings with loads up to 100 kips and continuous strip footings with loads up to 4 kips per foot are anticipated. We should be contacted to review these recommendations if higher loads are anticipated. Current site conditions are shown on the attached Site Plan, Figure 2. 1.3 AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK Kleinfelder's proposal for geotechnical services to Gramor was dated May 25, 1999. A revised proposal was submitted on August 6, 1999. Written authorization to proceed with the work was provided by Gramor dated October 4, 1999. This report presents the results of the Geotechnical Exploration phase of the proposal which includes the following tasks: 1) Collect and review readily available geotechnical and geologic data for the project area. 1111 2) Perform a geotechnical site reconnaissance prior to the subsurface investigation. L:11999\PRoJEcrs1833801\6029R350.DOC PAGE I OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KI.EINFELDER,INC. � . ■ kI KLEINFELDER 3) Plan and conduct a subsurface investigation consisting of excavating 4 backhoe test pits to provide information relative to soil, groundwater, and other geologic • conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development. 4) Conduct Iimited laboratory testing in general accordance with appropriate American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) standards to check the visual soil classifications and to provide estimates of engineering parameters necessary for geotechnical design. 5) Based on the field exploration and laboratory testing programs. provide discussions and recommendations regarding the following: • Regional geology and seismicity; • General site surface and subsurface conditions; • Shallow foundation design including soil contact pressures, embedment depths, resistance to lateral loads, and settlements; • Frost penetration depth estimate; • Earthwork construction including site preparation, fill placement and compaction; • Anticipated excavation conditions; • • Groundwater conditions; • Pavement design; • Mitigation of deleterious soil conditions, if appropriate; 6) Prepare a report summarizing the results of our subsurface exploration program and our analysis and recommendations. Environmental sampling and testing of the soil and groundwater to evaluate the potential presence of hazardous materials was not included in the scope of work for the geotechnical subsurface exploration program. This Geotechnical Exploration Report does not include an assessment of existing or potential environmental concerns associated with this site. 2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION The subsurface exploration program consisted of excavating 2 test pits on October 21, 1999, and six additional test pits on October 29, 1999. The test pits were excavated to depths of 5 to 13.5 411 L:119991�ROIr crs183380I\6029R350.Doc PAGE 2 OF 19 NW/EMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. 0 3 5 S KLEINFELDER feet, or refusal using a Linkbelt 2650 trackhoe. The approximate locations of the explorations • are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. Exploration locations were estimated by observation and pacing from known landmarks; locations as shown on Figure 2 should be considered approximate. All explorations were conducted under the full time observation of a Kleinfelder geological scientist, who developed logs of the subsurface conditions encountered. The logs of the test pits are attached as Pages 1 through 4. SoiI samples were obtained at selected intervals in the test pits. The stratigraphic contacts indicated within each boring zest pit log represent the approximate boundaries between soil ypes; actual transitions may be more gradual. The soil and groundwater conditions depicted are only for the specific dates and locations reported, and therefore. are not necessarily representative of other locations and times. After the test pits were completed, the depth to groundwater within the excavation was measured if encountered. No groundwater monitoring installations were made. Each excavation was backfilled with excavated spoils and tamped with the backhoe bucket. The backfill should not be expected to behave as compacted structural fill. It is important to note that structures, slabs-on- grade, or pavements located over these areas may experience excessive settlement. Removal and recompaction of test pit backfill may be required prior to construction of improvements over these areas. • 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits were returned to the Kleinfelder laboratory for further examination and testing to refine the field classifications and to evaluate physical properties of the soils which may affect the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY Near surface soils in the vicinity of the site are mapped as coarse-grained sediments of Pleistocene origin. These coarse grained sediments consist of crudely to complex layered, poorly consolidated cobbles, gravels and boulders deposited by one or more phases of catastrophic glacial outburst floods from late Pleistocene Lake Missoula. A knob of Columbia River Basalt is mapped in the northeastern portion of the adjacent Millennium Park site. The nearest mapped fault is the Lake Oswego fault zone, which is less than '/4 mile from the site. However, the most recent displacement of this zone is estimated to have occurred prior to the Quaternary period (1.5 million years) and is therefore considered to have a low probability of activity. L:\19991PRo1ECTs\83380116029R350.Doc PAGE 3 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLENFELDER,INC. 0359 KLEINFELDER The Relative Earthquake Hazard Map of the Lake Oswego, Oregon Quadrangle indicates that the proposed site lies within Zone C, the zone of the next to lowest seismic hazard. This composite • hazard map was developed by combining single hazard maps for ground motion amplification, liquefaction, and slope stability. It is not possible to use this relative ranking to ascertain the magnitude of damage sustained in an earthquake resulting from individual earthquake hazards. It is probable that this ranking comes primarily from a concern for relative amplification hazard at the site. This is discussed in greater detail in the following section of this report. The Uniform Building Code, specifies that any structure built on this proposed site be designed in accordance with the provisions of Seismic Zone 3. A site specific seismic evaluation may be required if the proposed building meets certain size and use criteria, as outlined in the ode. At the present time it is our understanding that a site specific seismic evaluation will not be required for this project. 3.2 SURFACE CONDITIONS The site covers approximately three acres and is currently developed with a variety of retail and commercial buildings, pavement and landscaping. A gravel/paved alley bisects the block from north to south. Other than a bank at the northwest corner of the block, the remainder of the block west of the alley is undeveloped and covered with trees and vegetation. The surface of the site slopes down to the south, with vertical relief of approximately 10 feet across the site. 3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS As discussed in Section 2.1, subsurface conditions at the site were explored by means of • advancing 8 test pits, logs summarizing the subsurface conditions encountered in these explorations are presented in Appendix A. Approximate exploration locations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The soil and groundwater conditions observed during the subsurface investigation were relatively consistent across the site and are summarized below. 3.3.1 Previous Investigations According to an AGRA Earth & Environmental UST Excavation Report dated October 9, 1997, three underground storage tanks located within an alleyway near the corner of Evergreen Road and Second Street were removed from the site. The excavation was approximately 85 feet long (north-south) by 45 feet wide (east-west) and 10 feet deep. The excavation was backfilled with structural fill materials and compacted to at least 92 percent of ASTM D1557-90 for the surficial three feet and to 90 percent of ASTM D1557-90 laboratory maximum dry density for the remainder of the depth. 3.3.2 Soils The site vicinity has been extensively modified by a variety of natural and man-related processes. The area is generally underlain at depth by basalt from the Columbia River Basalt Group of the Waverly Heights formation. These materials, particularly the Waverly Heights Basalt formation, have weathered at and near the surface into thick saprolitic clay. The clay retains some of the original bedrock texture and is highly altered with oxidized iron. The ancestral Tualatin River • drainage likely used the Lake Oswego basin to drain to the Willamette River. The Lake Oswego 411 L:1I999\PRoJEcrs183380I\6029R350.Doc PAGE 4 OF 19 NovEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. kg KLEINFELDER basin was also used as a drainage pathway by the glacial outburst floods from late Pleistocene • Lake Missoula, which flooded up the Willamette River channel and into the Tualatin Valley. The glacial floods occurred several times; 10,000 to 15,000 years ago; scouring the Lake Oswego basin and leaving deposits varying from fine grained sands and silts to coarser grained gravels, cobbles, and boulders. Soil units encountered in the explorations are briefly discussed below. Base Course/Topsoil: The near surface materials consist of either asphalt pavement and base course materials in the paved areas or topsoil on the landscaped areas. The topsoil layer is ver,, soft and wet and contains significant roots and organic matter. Depth of maior roots is generally 6 to 3 inches, occasional roots extend to depths of 18 inches or more. The asphalt pavement and base course layer is generally less than 1-foot thick and is well compacted. Fill Soils: Underlying the base course or topsoil are fill soils consisting loose to medium dense silt, sand, gravel, and cobbles mixtures with wood, concrete, and asphalt fragments. This unit extends to depths of 2 to 9 feet. The fill unit extends to maximum explored depths of 5 in Test Pit 7 and 9 feet in Test Pits 3 and 6. The fill materials were likely placed to level the site for development, which was constructed in the 1940's. Native Soils: The fill unit is underlain by either loose to medium dense coarse grained catastrophic flood deposits or soft to medium stiff silt and high plasticity clay weathering remnant of the Waverly Heights Basalt formation. These units extend to a maximum explored • depth of 13.5 feet. 3.3.3 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in any test pit, although soils were very wet in all test pits at depths (seepage at depth 8.5 feet in Test Pit 3, 10.3 feet in Test Pit 4, 8.5 in Test Pit 5, and 13.5 feet in Test pit 8). Mottled soils were observed in the test pits which are indicative that a near surface groundwater table may develop during some times of the year. We anticipate that groundwater conditions may vary depending on the time of year, localized subsurface conditions, and other factors. Near surface perched water should be anticipated during wet winter months. Because the soils are fine grained it is probable that they will be saturated by capillary action several feet above the groundwater table. Percolation rates for these soils as defined by the USDA Soil Conservation Service are slow and impaired by seasonal wetness. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of the field exploration, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses performed, it is our opinion that the proposed project is geotechnically feasible as planned, provided the recommendations of this report are incorporated in project design and construction. The following key items should be noted: i L:11999\PRoJEcrs\83380116029R350.Doc PAGE 5 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 • COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. 01�l v U KLEINFELDER 410 • the subsurface conditions are favorable for the use of spread footings; • seismic design can proceed using standard UBC procedures for Zone 3 and a Soil Type SD (Seismic Coefficient Ca= 0.36 and CV=0.54); • there is the potential for limited differential settlement due to seismically induced liquefaction and/or softening of the low plasticity silts encountered; • potential risks due to seismically induced lateral spreading and/or landslides are minimal due to the relatively flat slopes and expected site grading; • design of slabs-on-grade, pavements, and underground utilities should take into account the potential for a near surface seasonal groundwater table. 4.1 SITE EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1.1 General Existing building structures are currently being demolished. We understand that the existing buildings do not have basements. As mentioned above, underground storage tanks (USTs) were removed and the excavations backfilled with compacted structural fill materials. Additional UST and contaminated soil removal activities were ongoing at the site at the time of our site exploration. We assume that these excavations will be backfilled with compacted, engineered fill. Kleinfelder requests documentation of these activities (dimensions and locations of excavations, description of backfill soil and compaction testing results) when this information is • available. We reserve the right to modify our recommendations, if necessary, after the receipt of this information. 4.1.2 Wet Weather Construction Soils with a significant proportion of fines, such as the native soils encountered at this site, are moisture sensitive. Proceeding with site earthwork on these soils during wet weather can add significant costs to a project. We therefore recommend that, if possible, site clearing, preparation and earthwork be completed during periods of dry weather. Subsequent sections of this report assume that earthwork will be accomplished during relatively dry weather when adequate moisture control can be maintained. If earthwork must take place during wet weather, we should be contacted for additional detailed recommendations. The remainder of this section is intended to provide an overview of wet weather construction practices; it is not sufficient for final design. During or subsequent to wet weather, drying or compacting the near surface on-site soils will be difficult or impossible. It will be necessary to import granular fill materials for structural fill uses and it may be necessary to install a granular working pad to support construction traffic. Delays in site earthwork activities should be anticipated during periods of heavy rain. In addition, site clearing and stripping activities will expose very "tender" subgrades, which are subject to disturbance (severe pumping and loss of equipment support) if construction traffic is allowed on the subgrade while wet conditions exist. • L:\I999\PRorEcrs\833801\6029R350.DOC PAGE 6 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER, INC. �i � u2 KLEINFELDER For equipment support directly on the near surface fine grained soils during wet weather construction, we recommend the use of a granular working base to protect subgrades in areas supporting construction traffic. The working base should consist of a suitable thickness of crushed rock or ballast placed by end dumping off an advancing pad of rock. In areas of very soft subgrades, it may be necessary to place a geotextile fabric (AMOCO 4545 or equivalent) beneath the working blanket to prevent the intrusion of fines into the rock. Because construction practices can greatly affect the amount of rock required, we recommend that if conditions require the installation of a granular working blanket, the design, installation and maintenance be made the responsibility of the contractor. During wet weather, we recommend that site clearing and demoiition that expose the native soils be performed using an excavator equipped with a straightedged bucket working from the granular working pad without traversing the subgrade. Proof rolling procedures can disturb sensitive fine-grained soils and should not be used to test subgrade suitability during periods of wet weather. Instead, we recommend that systematic probing be conducted to evaluate the suitability of the subgrade. Rock work pads should be proof-rolled in accordance with Section 4.1.4. During periods of marginal weather, drying of the on-site soils can be accelerated and the support characteristics improved through the addition of cement or quicklime. We are available to provide additional recommendations on the use of these techniques, if requested. 4.1.3 Site Preparation • Much of the site appears to be covered by fill of variable depth. Although this fill appeared to be of relatively good quality, it is possible that it contains areas of organic matter, debris, or voids. Because of the high costs involved and the nature of the structures to be built upon the site, we do not necessarily recommend the removal of this fill. However, the owner should be aware that there will be some risk of future settlement of the structures, floor slabs or paved areas if undetected areas of poor quality fill are left in place. To fully eliminate this risk it would be necessary to remove and replace all fill or to structurally support the structures on deep foundations. Because the performance of the existing structures provides some indication that the risk of settlement on the site is tolerable, and due to the nature of the proposed structures, the owner will need to weigh costs and risks of these approaches. If the fills are not removed, we recommend as a minimum, that the stripped subgrade in all building areas be thoroughly compacted with a heavy vibratory roller (minimum of 400 pounds of impact force per inch of drum width, minimum drum width of six feet). This will tend to break down any marginal areas or areas where the soil is bridging voids. During wet weather this operation should be performed on the surface of the rock working pad, as discussed in Section 4.1.2. All areas that will receive fill; pavement, base rock, or structures should be stripped of all vegetation, heavy root mat, and any deleterious soil conditions that might be encountered. We estimate that it will be necessary to strip six to eight inches from most of the unpaved areas of the site. The stripped materials will not generally be suitable for reuse as compacted structural fills and should either be stockpiled for possible later use in landscaped areas, or exported from the site. L:119991PRoJEcrs\833801\6029R350.Doc PAGE 7 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. 03 3 `�� KLEINFELDER Within areas that currently are paved or support structures, it may not be necessary to remove all the material down to native soil; however, pavements and slabs should be removed to develop a uniform bearing surface and to expose potentially undetected underground facilities. Existing aggregate base can be left in place or mixed in with the soils encountered below during re- grading operations. It should be anticipated that these areas will require recompaction prior to final subgrade evaluation proof rolls as discussed in Section 4.1.4. After areas are stripped or excavated to design subgrade elevations, we recommend that all areas that will receive structural fill, pavement, or structures be compacted to at least 92 percent relative compaction. We recommend that the top_ 6 inches of 3ubgrade :hat will support pavements be scarified and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Relative compaction should be based on the modified Proctor test method (AASHTO T-1 80 or ASTM D 1557). 4.1.4 Proof Rolling Following stripping and subgrade preparation, and prior to placement of structural fill or base course, we recommend that the site be proof rolled with a fully loaded 10 to 12 yard dump truck. Any areas that pump, weave, or appear soft or muddy should be scarified, dried and compacted, or else overexcavated and backf lled with compacted granular fill. If significant time passes between completion of subgrade preparation and commencement of other construction activities, or if significant traffic has been routed across the site, we recommend that the site be similarly proof rolled before placement of base rock or paving. A representative of our firm should observe this operation. As discussed in Section 4.1.1, proof rolling of the soil subgrade should • not be conducted during wet weather conditions. 4.1.5 Structural Fill Materials We anticipate that cuts and fills of less than 5 feet will be required. This section contains our general recommendations for suitable structural fill material and its placement. Structural fill material should consist of relatively well graded soil that is free of organic material and debris. The suitability of soil for use as compacted structural fill will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (that portion finer than the US Standard No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines cannot consistently be compacted to a dense, non-yielding condition when the water content is significantly greater (or significantly less) than optimum. The native soils at this site (excluding the stripped material) are suitable for structural fills; however, due to their very high fines content, they will be virtually impossible to place during wet weather. The moisture content of the near surface soils appears above the optimum moisture content, and the near surface moisture contents can be expected to increase significantly depending on the time of year and weather conditions. Therefore, it should be anticipated that the on-site soils will require disking in warm, dry weather or chemical treatment to reduce the water content to a suitable level for placement as structural fill. • L:119991PRoJEcrs\83380116029R350.Doc PAGE 8 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. 0364 hi KLEINFELDER Soils used for engineered fill should be uniformly moisture conditioned to within ±2 percent of • the optimum moisture content and compacted in thin lifts using suitable mechanical compaction equipment. We recommend that fills intended to support structures or pavements be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding about 8 inches in thickness and be compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the modified Proctor test method (AASHTO T- 180 or ASTM D 1557). For fill intended to support pavements, we recommend that the top 6 inches be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. The specified compaction level may be reduced to 85 percent in landscaped areas if the potential for settlements of an inch or two is acceptable. 4.1.6 Fill Settlements The majority of settlement within the soil underlying structural fill should occur as the fill is being placed. Fills less than 5 feet in thickness that are properly placed and compacted to at least 92 percent should experience nominal settlements of less than 'A inch. If fills are proposed to be thicker than 5 feet, we should be contacted for additional recommendations. 4.2 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 4.2.1 General Portions of the site contain engineered fill where USTS and contaminated soil have been removed and replaced. However, much of the site is blanketed with (apparently) uncontrolled fill. Fills can vary significantly over short distances. Unless fills are engineered and monitored during construction they are generally not suitable for the support of significant structures. Structures supported on such a fill may experience distress due to differential settlement or localized bearing failure. To completely remove this risk would require complete removal and replacement of the fill or to support the structures on deep foundations (such as piles) that extend through the fill to the undisturbed native soils below. However, since the fill is so extensive, it is probably not economically feasible to completely remove and replace the fill, and the use of deep foundations would significantly increase cost of the project. In addition, the presence of cobbles and boulders up to five feet in diameter within the fill could result in considerable difficulty in installing deep foundations through the fill. Considering all of the above factors, it is our opinion that structures can be supported on shallow foundations, subject to preparation as outlined in the following sections of this report. However, some risk of settlement or unsatisfactory performance of the proposed structures remains. This risk is primarily related to unknown or undetected deleterious conditions within the existing fills. Alternative foundation support recommendations, to minimize the risk of settlement mentioned above, are also provided. Based on our understanding of the project, the assumed foundation loads used to develop the recommendations included below are limited to strip footing loadings not exceeding 5 kips/foot and column loads not exceeding 130 kips. The structures should be able to accommodate total settlements of as much as 1 inch and differential settlements approaching %2 inch over a distance of 30 feet. We recommend the following foundation alternatives for the proposed construction. i L:\I999\PRoJEcrs\83380I\6029R350.Doc PAGE 9 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. J � UJ �9 KLEINFELDER 1.1.1. 4.2.2 Foundation Recommendations i Shallow Spread Foundation Recommendations Footing Preparation To achieve adequate bearing, footings should overexcavated to a minimum depth of 2 feet below the proposed footing bottom and backfilled with Granular structural fill placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations contained in Section 4.1.5 of this report. The width of the overexcavated area should extend a distance beyond the sides of the rooting equal to one half the depth that the overexcavation extends below the base of the footing. See following sketch. Exterior // I //// 12" Min. FOOTING • J 2 COMPACTED / I GRANULAR FILL j fleet Approved Subgrade J In area where compacted structural fill was placed after the tanks were pulled, overexcavation will not be needed. All footing excavations should be trimmed neat and footing subgrades carefully prepared. Any slough or loose material that may accumulate on top of the structural fill should be removed from the footing excavation prior to placing rebar. Alternatively, the entire footprint of the structure may be overexcavated 2 feet below footing _glades and backfilled with granular structural fill placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations contained in Section 4.1.5 of this report. In either event, the use of isolated spread footings should be minimized and continuous strip footings should be used where possible. These strip footings should 410 L:\19991projects\8338\6029r314.doc Page 10 of 19 November 23, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder, Inc n 036G KLEINFELDER continuous reinforcement to permit them to span a distance of 10 feet between points of subgrade 4111 support without failing. We recommend that the excavation and structural backfill of the footings be observed by a geotechnical engineer prior to placing steel and concrete to verify that the recommendations of this report have been followed. If poor quality fill is observed in the bottom of the excavations, additional excavation may be required. Bearing Pressure individual column footings and continuous strip footings should have minimum widths of 24 and 13 inches, respectively. Footings should be founded a minimum of 12 inches below :he lowest adjacent grade. Spread footing foundations that are designed and constructed as described above may be designed for bearing pressures up to 2,000 pounds per square foot. This applies to dead plus frequently applied live loads and may be increased by up to one-third for the inclusion of wind or seismic forces. These recommendations apply to strip footings that do not exceed five kips per foot and column footings that do not exceed 100 kips. We should be contacted to review these recommendations if higher loads are anticipated. Settlements • For foundations that are designed and installed as described above, we estimate that settlements will generally not exceed one inch. As discussed in section 4.2.1, there is a risk that localized settlements could exceed this amount due to undetected deleterious conditions in the existing fills. This risk will be lessened by the foundation preparation recommendations that are contained in Section 4.2.2. Although the risk of significant settlement appears to be quite small, this risk cannot be eliminated without completely removing the existing fill, or through the use of deep foundation support (piles, or geopiers). We understand that the owner is willing to accept this risk. Lateral Resistance The soil resistance available to withstand lateral foundation loads is a function of the frictional resistance which can develop on the base and the passive resistance which can develop on the face of below-grade elements of the structure as these elements tend to move into the soil. For spread footings founded on structural fill placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations in Section 4.1 or on undisturbed native soils, the allowable frictional resistance may be computed using a coefficient of friction of 0.35 applied to vertical dead-load forces. The allowable passive resistance on the face of footings or other embedded foundation elements may be computed using an equivalent fluid density of 200 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) (triangular distribution) for the near surface on-site soils. The top 6 inches of the adjacent soils should be neglected when calculating the lateral resistance capacity of the soil. The above coefficient of friction and passive equivalent fluid density values include a factor of safety of about 1.5. • L:\1999\PRoJEcrs\83380116029R350.Doc PAGE 11 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. 03G7 KLEINFELDER Geopier Foundation System • To minimize settlement, an alternative would be the use of short aggregate piers, known as geopiers. Geopiers consist of densely compacted aggregate piers made of well-graded stone. Geopiers are constructed by drilling a shaft, generally in the range of one to three feet in diameter, densifying the soil at the bottom of the shaft. Aggregate is then placed in thin lifts and compacted with a high-energy densification system producing a geopier. This system is generally used in conjunction with shallow spread footings. Typically, individual footings are supported on geopiers, allowing the use of increased bearing capacity and resulting in reduced settlement. compared with spread footings alone. Geopiers are ideally installed in soft/loose soli located above the groundwater table. Installation below groundwater level is possible, but obstructions such as boulders or other debris, if encountered above the base of the geopiers, may prevent their installation. If this option is selected, Geopier Foundation Company, Northwest, Inc. should be contacted at (503) 236-1344 to provide recommendations on site preparation, geopier design and construction recommendations. 4.2.3 Foundation Drainage Seasonal groundwater Ievels may be expected to fluctuate up to near the existing ground surface. Due to potentially high groundwater conditions, perimeter footing drains are recommended for exterior footings. All drainage systems should be sloped to drain by gravity to a storm sewer or other positive outlet. Water from downspouts, and surface water should be independently • collected and routed to a storm sewer or other positive outlet. This water must not be allowed to enter the subsurface drainage system. • Landscaping adjacent to buildings should be sloped to drain surface water away from perimeter footings. 4.3 INTERIOR FLOOR SLABS The subgrade under all floor slab areas should be prepared in accordance with Section 4.1. Due to the potential for near surface groundwater, we recommend that, where possible, floor slabs be established a foot or more above surrounding final grades. Above grade floor slabs should be underlain by a moisture barrier consisting of a minimum 6 inch thick layer of compacted, well graded sand and gravel or crushed rock. Gradation requirements of this material should be similar to those specified for 1 inch minus base in Table 02630-1, Grading Requirements-Base Aggregates, of the 1991 Oregon Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, with the added requirement that no more than 5 percent by weight pass a US Standard No. 200 sieve. We recommend the granular layer be compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the modified Proctor density test. Even with a capillary break as outlined above, there is the possibility of some floor moisture or dampness. If floor moisture is a critical consideration due to storage of materials directly on the floor slab, or because of the use of glued down impervious floor coverings such as tile or • linoleum, we recommend the use of an underslab impermeable membrane. Normally a thin sand L:119991PRoiEcrs183380116029R350.Doc PAGE 12OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 ' COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. Li)') KLEINFELDER layer is placed above and below the membrane to protect it from punctures during construction, • and to assist in the curing of the concrete floor slab. To maximize water tightness, the membrane must be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. If floor slabs must be located at or below the adjacent ground surface they should be underlain by an underslab drainage system and an impervious moisture barrier. We should be contacted for additional recommendations in this event. 4.4 SUBSURFACE FACILITIES 4.4.1 Utilities Stability of temporary excavations is the responsibility of the contractor, who must maintain safe excavation slopes and/or shoring. Excavations must comply with the current requirements of OSHA and the State of Oregon. We are providing the information below solely as a service to our client. Under no circumstances should the information provided be interpreted to mean that Kleinfelder is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities. The contractor should be aware that slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depths (including utility trench excavations) should in no case exceed those specified in local, state, and/or federal safety regulations (e.g., OSHA Health and Safety Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR Part 1926, or successor regulations). Such regulations are strictly enforced and, if they are not followed, the Owner, Contractor, and/or earthwork and utility subcontractors could be liable for substantial penalties. • The soils encountered during our field investigation vary widelyfrom silts to clay to coarse grained fill (including boulders) to weathered bedrock. Based on our exploration, we expect that fills will generally be excavatable with moderate-size track-mounted excavators. The presence of occasional boulders may make some excavation difficult. Any excavations that will involve personnel within the excavation should be adequately sloped or shored if they are deeper than 4 feet, or if loose soils or ground water seepage are encountered. In our opinion the soils encountered would be considered a Type C soil when applying the OSHA regulations. For this soil type, OSHA recommends a maximum slope inclination of I.5H:I V or flatter for excavations 20 feet or less in depth. Flatter slopes and/or trench shields may be required if loose, cohesionless soils and/or water are encountered along the slope face. The recommended maximum inclination for temporary slopes assumes that the ground surface behind the cut slopes is level, and that surface loads from equipment and materials are kept a sufficient distance away from the top of the slope (typically at least half the slope height). In addition, these recommendations also assume that the utility trench excavations are completed and backfilled prior to the construction of structures adjacent to the excavations. If these assumptions are not valid, we should be contacted for additional recommendations. • L:\I999\PRo1ECTs\833801\6029R350.Doc PAGE 13 of 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. 03119 �` ■ KLEINFELDER It should be anticipated that perched groundwater may be encountered within a few feet of the surface throughout the wet seasonal months. During the dry summer months the water level will probably be lower, but may still be encountered in some of the excavations. If groundwater is encountered, some of the low plasticity fine grained soils or fill encountered in the explorations may tend to flow or slough. With time, and with the presence of seepage and/or precipitation, the stability of temporary unsupported cut slopes can be significantly reduced. Any temporary slopes that are exposed for more than a few days should be protected from erosion by installing a surface- water diversion ditch or berm at the .op of the slope and by covering the cut face with well-anchored plastic sheeting. Slopes left open for more than one month should be designed as permanent slopes, or they should be shored. 4.5 RETAINING WALLS 4.5.1 General We understand that the proposed retail shop will have basement parking. Retaining walls may be required in several locations. We have provided typical design parameters for wall types that we believe represent the range of types of systems that are likely to be constructed. 4.5.2 Retaining Wall Design Parameters Lateral soil pressures on retaining walls depend on several factors including retained soil type, amount of wall movement (rotation) that is allowed, and drainage provisions. Our • recommendations are based on the following assumptions: • Retaining walls will be designed to support both existing soils and constructed fills. • Retaining walls will be backfilled with free draining crushed rock, in accordance with Section 5.5.6 of this report. • • Adequate subsurface drainage will be provided, as discussed in Section 5.5.7 of this report. • Walls will be less than 12 feet high. 4.5.3 Non-Restrained Walls Non-restrained walls have no restraint at the top and are free to rotate about their base. Lateral movement at the top of the wall can be up to 0.005 times the wall height. Most cantilever retaining walls fall into this category (unless they are attached to buildings or other structures). The following table summarizes estimated coefficients for backfill pressures on non-restrained walls. These coefficients are based on a Rankine analysis, which assumes zero wall friction. This is a conservative assumption that we consider appropriate for preliminary designs. Once a final wall type is selected it may be possible to incorporate an allowance for wall friction, depending upon the wall type, construction material, backfill material and waterproofing or other coatings. The tabulated coefficients do not contain a factor of safety. Selection of a design factor of safety will depend on the design method used, and on the assumptions made regarding • L:11999\PRoJEcrs183380116029R350.00c PAGE 14 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. f� 0 ,, �0 KLEINFELDER wall friction. These coefficients should be used in combination with a soil unit weight of 120 • pounds per cubic foot when computing equivalent fluid pressures for use in design. :Coeicient:ofActive Coefficient of Passive ' Slope = Lateral Pressiire _ (Ka) :L;ateral�Pressure (Kp) Level (at top and toe of wall) I 0.3 2.8 4.5.4 Restrained Walls Restrained walls are any walls :hat are prevented from rotation during 'oackfiling. Most basement walls and other rigid walls that are restrained by buildings, parking decks, or other perpendicular walls fall into the category of restrained walls. In addition, pile supported retaining walls should be considered restrained because the piling will not allow significant deflection. We have tabulated below a typical pressure coefficient for restrained walls with a level backslope. This coefficient assumes that wall friction is zero, and does not contain a factor of safety. This coefficient should be used in combination with a soil unit weight of 120 pounds per cubic foot when computing equivalent fluid pressures for use in design. Coefficient of Active.: Slope Lateral Pressure(Ka)' Level (at top and toe of wall) I 0.5 4.5.5 Retaining Wall Foundations Spread footing foundations for the retaining walls should be constructed in conformance with our previous recommendations for footings (Section 4.2). Spread footing foundations for the retaining walls that are designed and constructed as described above may be designed for bearing pressures up to 2,000 pounds per square foot. This applies to dead plus frequently applied live loads and may be increased by up to one-third for the inclusion of wind or seismic forces. We recommend the use of a friction coefficient of 0.35 when evaluating the sliding resistance of retaining wall foundations. This coefficient includes a factor of safety of approximately 1.5. 4.5.6 Retaining Wall Backfill Backfill behind retaining walls should consist of free draining crushed rock. This material should meet gradation requirements in Table 02630.1, Grading Requirements-Base Aggregates, of the 1996 Oregon Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, with the added requirement that no more than 5 percent by weight pass a US Standard No. 200 sieve. To reduce backfill pressures, we recommend that this fill be compacted to between 90% and 92% relative compaction within five feet of the wall. In addition, we recommend that any backfill that is placed within five feet of the wall (measured horizontally) be compacted with lightweight, hand-operated compaction equipment. Overcompaction of this fill can greatly increase wall pressures. If any foundations, or other major loads, are supported on the backfill this can also increase wall pressures and we should be contacted for additional recommendations. L:11999\PROJECTS\833801\6029R350.Doc PAGE 15 of 19 NOVEMBER23, 1999 ' COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. 0J71 k' ■ KLEINFELDER 4.5.7 Backfill Drainage • It is possible that zones of perched or permanent groundwater may rise into retaining wall backfill. To provide drainage, all retaining walls should be backfilled with a free draining granular material as discussed in the previous section. This backfill should be separated from native soils or constructed fill by a geotextile, and should be drained by either a perforated drainpipe or by weep holes through the wall face. Normally the backfill is capped with one foot or so of topsoil, clay, or pavement, so that surface infiltration does not overload the drainage system. A typical detail is provided as follows: 4.6 PERMANENT SLOPES Grading plans for this project indicate that no significant slopes will be required. We recommend that finished cut or fill slopes up to 6 feet in height be no steeper than 2H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical). Steeper slopes and any slopes over six feet in height should be reviewed by our firm. All permanent slopes will require erosion protection. 4.7 SEISMIC HAZARDS Site Amplification. The site is underlain by shallow bedrock, so amplification of the underlying bedrock motions as they are propagated to the surface during a seismic event should be minimal. However, for structures such as those proposed for the site, seismic structural design in accordance with the UBC requirements as discussed in the following section should be adequate. • Liquefaction. Based upon the soils encountered in the explorations completed, liquefaction does not appear to be a significant hazard at the site. Landslide/Lateral Spreading - Because the site and surrounding areas are relatively flat and site grading will further reduce localized topographic variations, we conclude that there are no significant earthquake induced landslide/lateral spreading hazards at this site. 4.8 SEISMIC DESIGN The Lake Oswego area lies within Seismic Zone 3 as defined in the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code (1996). Based on our experience in the Lake Oswego area, structural design utilizing the procedures outlined in the Uniform Building Code for Seismic Zone 3 is considered adequate for this type of project. Subsurface conditions vary from a profile consisting of just a few feet of fill over weathered bedrock and deep alluvial depoists. Based on the soils encountered during the exploration program, UBC Soil Type SD represents the closest approximation to the overall site conditions and is recommended for use in design. This soil type relates to a Seismic Coefficient Ca of 0.36 in Table 16-Q and a Seismic Coefficient Cv of 0.54 in Table 16-R. The corresponding normalized response spectra shown on Figure 16-3 is considered adequate for the project site. Significant site amplification is not anticipated. • L:\1999\PRo;Ecrs\83380116029R350.Doc PAGE I6oF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER, INC. KLEINFELDER 4.9 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS • Pavement design is based on considerations of predicted traffic volumes, soil subgrade conditions, and acceptable maintenance levels. Some owners prefer to construct a minimum pavement to lower construction costs, and are willing to accept the need for occasional patching. Others may choose a more durable pavement section that is designed to last for 20 years or more with minimal maintenance. The recommendations contained herein outline a somewhat conventional approach. The pavement is designed for a life of 20 years but some patching or crack sealing is likely to be required during that time. As requested. the pavement is divided into two principal areas: parking areas that are intended for automobile traffic 3niy (10,000 EAL's); and delivery routes that will have occasional truck traffic (50,000 EAL's). Pavement designs assume that heavy construction traffic will not be allowed on finished pavement sections. For general automobile parking areas, we recommend a pavement section of 2.5 inches of asphalt concrete over 6 inches of aggregate base. In areas of concentrated traffic such as entrance and exit bays, main drive lanes, and areas used by heavy vehicles such as delivery and garbage trucks, we recommend that the section be increased to 3 inches of asphalt over 10 inches of aggregate base or 3.5 inches of asphalt over 8 inches of aggregate base. Areas that are to receive pavement should be stripped, compacted and proof-rolled in accordance with the recommendations in Section 4.1. We recommend that asphalt concrete be used that conforms to the 1991 Oregon Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Highway • Construction. The aggregate base material should conform to Section 02630 of the Standard Specifications for 1.5 inch minus material. 5.0 REFERENCES Geomatrix Consultants, 1995. Seismic Design Mapping State of Oregon: Final Report, prepared for Oregon Department of Transportation under personal services contract 11688. International Conference of Building Officials, 1997 Uniform Building Code-Structural Engineering Design Provisions, Volume 2. Mabey, M.A., I.P. Madin, and D.B. Meier, 1995. Relative Earthquake Hazard Map of the Lake Oswego Quadrangle, Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties, Oregon. State of Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Geologic Map Series GMS-91. Squier Associates, 1995. Preliminary Subsurface Investigation for Redevelopment of Block 138, City of Lake Oswego, Oregon. Letter report prepared for the City of Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency. • L:\19991PRoJEcrs\833801\6029R350.Doc PAGE 17 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. J 7. - — • - �� KLEINFELDER 6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 6.1 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW • Because the design details for the proposed project were not available at the time this report was prepared, we strongly recommend that Kleinfelder be given the opportunity to review the geotechnical aspects of the project plans and specifications as the design is being developed to confirm the applicability of our recommendations, or to make approach modifications. In the event Kleinfelder is not, at a minimum, retained to review the final oroiect Dlans and specifications to evaluate if our recommendations have been properly interpreted, we will assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. 6.2 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING We recommend that all earthwork during construction be monitored by a representative from Kleinfelder, including site preparation, placement of structural fill and trench backfill, construction of slab and roadway subgrades, and all foundation excavations. The purpose of these services would be to provide Kleinfelder the opportunity to observe the soil conditions encountered during construction, evaluate the applicability of the recommendations presented in this report to the soil conditions encountered, and recommend appropriate changes in design or construction procedures if conditions differ from those described herein. 7.0 UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS • We have prepared this report for use by Gramor Oregon, Inc. for design and construction of this project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be considered as warranty of the subsurface conditions. Experience has shown that subsurface soil and groundwater conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations and not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, Kleinfelder should be notified for review of the recommendations of this report, and revision of such if necessary. If the scope of the proposed construction changes from that described in this report, including foundation loads outside the limits assumed in this report, our recommendations should also be reviewed. We recommend that we be retained to provide continuing geotechnical services as the project proceeds through design. We also recommend that we be retained to monitor the geotechnical aspects of construction in order to evaluate compliance with our recommendations, particularly those activities outlined in Section 4.0 of this report. • L:119991pRoJEcrs183380116029R350.Doc PAGE 18 of 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. U �'7 - KLEINFELDER This report may be used only by the Client and for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance. Land use, site conditions (both on- and off-site), or other factors may change over time and could materially affect our findings. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after 24 months from its issue. Kleinfelder should be notified if the project is delayed by more than 24 months from the date of this report so that a review of site conditions can be made, and recommendations revised if appropriate. The scope of work for this Geotechnical Exploration Report did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or groundwater at this site. Environmental assessments are ,rcv iea En separate reports. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein unsafe. Report prepared by Report reviewed by "CDCW44.9 e 14,0 INE¢ i� • OREGON 8TNeitr6- p0� 474 ss.i Exprp 1 Z/7-7.-,e fi9�1. STe—'. ?�" got ,0. b-3 a-oo Travis T. Nguyen, P.E. Robert L. Stephens, P.E. Geotechnical Engineering Staff Principal Geotechnical Engineer • L:\1999\PROJECTS\8 3 3 8 0 1 16029R350.Doc PAGE 19 OF 19 NOVEMBER 23, 1999 COPYRIGHT 1999 KLEINFELDER,INC. r a r _ . /• ,camGHORSE amaNrconzmrr cul1' I g Bouct 7 ,Z-Ae --- .•1,. 43/ il \I --tocom , ........----....,,., . ,.,,•.; , ,,s,s .. LN \ .. - . . . - •. .-6 •_,„ „,. 53-----------.1...----- 44 • // :-- ----- Tr •...-- .s . -•-•. c•Ap,tivo • 1v0044 ,.... r „ z -•-,,. o . 1N \-A .,., g „ ,..S"-99-../I: lir k ..... '09'1)/' /- •cPuMikq .; -,, a _ ...,. '. )1 It 5 d Si / ?/ - : . . ' g .5- 114.0..o -,To cr T R TIPREC*OE 43.- co,--=:-..--... ....-. i! „, i , ifillamene Riwr ota ------s --:: (---3 in 0 •er'y7' ,3_. ;C-4,-7-7.:7.-_,:pj-„ \ IL.°C, .tr. r il li ii irTh;.•'', --Fr I if 4 „ , : .: ,, , .......7....... V* • 13 7WATER.RD...-.-=.---_--.6, -,,r, .--'--Ji— .; I: !! i r.'''- .13 .67 .........-17.5--------' .,.--.r.--.;,....---,' . ;I ,o.;:z..... .- 1 J,.:.--'--.'-'-.- ..---- -•'.L.L.....-,:.• . j . . X LI . -..-.-,..........„ -. / 41 -• ...,,,A5441‘ 1,,Z .. • `A y.r..- \ Issecep:103:_ :; I j 1., •j it ;i :j ;ik-`.›... •:•.,•-‘ i 1.1F '•-•."-",,ta.--':-----j i ii '7 I' li '7;-;::: I A. z . . o l'i i N ,,, ..,...,,19.. 7r—7,----,;-----1:.........„! 1; ,t ,: , , 0,. :I -:' II ii ;11-.7rs-:::::' ----2 j y‘ ,... i 1 1 t • '' :1.----,:-.111 . -..;:, s---V'C- -------.07:1 ,ii---:.- -1 r _Lj 1...21,11 i l 1. .1 D ''. Creek a w , --o— ---,-. 11 ,C,v I /.1 , I ,: rs-:-..-f`----1!-___11 .:i 43!! i I CC° /14.4311----.,,----.11 t. I iill fl"--1,rifzcl ,.-4.-- , .tiLialidiOsliter- i SITE LdCATION. V t 61.1 •.-----L-----7.---eavra mvirzaczo ...---.7---21-----11-__Iiir Iii !..6 ,.. ..-- 1) i I 1 0 s-,-.....z.._ _. /j T1.3 ,4,14-1:--r ...li ce...„......„.. . /(______ 7___---'z---------- L i IT ' ii '/ -----7"--- • ii / ircD°F1149, II -01_ l• x • iievAt ......:::. :• - '''. '' II _ -SE• . .-.7.! .'...\-', .....-". .....›......_. . ././ir.:_T; . . ‘. . _owe jtrucuil. . k—',---'-4---1----°Lakeicoodi gay • :31 .' rifilli .„_ . //i)oGly 11 0 RU-.-....)r ..-...........-17=, -..-'7. N''C)... 4.,s . ,..',/ .•• ! River Foilesi Lake 1 11 1-.--1. ; i I 0 tt' ...-,-.1., ONARD =_•-:...., • - 0 . .P -P - . .. VIEW . i i"-- ii SEnvHNIp ,- 7 • .. co• ' - R .. i -' -: -- rn orri-H -SORED i______'' ;j ;, ,..• !., . -LAKE" ----,::R.:-0.-,.. '00v,•---- -- -,s-,-,--;, 8- - CHU RCH.- - - P -- Mr -.„, „al_. I _•_-_-:: /II,• .$..,:._.....,,•)-:7._-_,--•.."... •-...:--•--.-•••. i D ,2a _ . 0 .n. Lae•. go_ as 87-RaE k - \_ Mag 15.00 --z__—.....wAFF,0 . . Fri Nov 12 15:25 1999 .----Zs-7/T- --1--------E:2. z ::;0' ,-.....„. Scale 1:15,625(at center) • r7- ,•.-7_-_2'-..--_-S:::-.-1:-.:-_o_:_...-_--_- 1 ,svf-, ,....< if, ,-, ..... . ‘‘' --oz.=-A, r 0 = m -' g ' !..".:,:,‘ 1000 Feet .....-,. .-:--- :; 4.4 0 _. , • 3E0FOR6•- •• i; .2. \\Nto,_ . •> 500 Meters HALLZIAN i WELLS' r.- . .. ..-c 1.,,,,, ....4 St' ". iiewor-K-7 C.,Ca _ r' Z 'A/ -•• .•• • ' "• S VICINITY MAP GRAMOR- BLOCK 136 InKLEINFELDEIR 204 "A" AVENUE LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON L:\19;9\PROJE-CTS\8338\8338F 1.CDR 11/99 JAM Project#60-8338-01 I FIGURE 1 0 3'7 G r N Tti — T — — — SECOND STREET — — le I I ;� — '� ' r"^=�1 iIi I ' � � II1IIIiI ; il � t -i—Ii1I ( �- : i I- "_ ( ?� II �,� 1 TP 0 T P—� - L. I i i II1r :I I I I I I I i !-F • �. TPP6 0 ITP 5 I I r- I — — 17r ��NMI ■r�■w��■�ii� �■■r■ i� —— " I I I i I zy..L. .--1T.. ..•_I u — -4 — — — — — — — it -- — — -f a — - Fe ap�;w - ; — - a • CI I _ ._ - JiL: ! ■ him- --■■a■u■■ 1 1 - o • TP-2 I I LEGEND I _ TP-2❑ TEST PIT OCATIO , �„ lilfllllllliii I lllllItIlflllfIH III H HI 11111111I11111111_,) & DESIGN TION ' I THIRD STREET I SITE&TEST PIT LOCATION MAP CRhFHIC .r... RI KLEIN FE LDER GR'2`MOR-BLOCK 136 204':q•AVENUE " Rwv LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON rEOTC NCA uo emoor emuere� 501LS MOMAJWIvsianvo v I „rr„ �„ ,,,may„ PROJECT#60-8338-01 FIGURE 2 • III • 11110 SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART i LOG MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS TYPICAL GRAPH LETTER DESCRIPTIONS !I L E G E N D •L• I• WEu-GRADED CRAWLS,GRAVEL- CLEAN _ •� a GW WIN wrue S.urns OR Ho GRAVEL CRAVELS ••,•* FINES • AHD GRAVELLY (aril OR NO fYtES) o•C a CY POORLY-CRAM CRAYELS. 50IL �n.IAFLEj 5o OOo O GP cum.-sANo YUTIAES.Atlas J SOILS �0 0.0 OR NO TINES COARSE • Git.AV<L Willi p y_çj SLIT GRAVELS.MOE.- CoL (3- 00) sort sn YORE THAN 50X fuss 0p. ' GMSILT 11011JRU SOILS Of COARSE TRACTION RETAINED ON NO. (APPRECIANIE AMOUNT ClATEY GRAYETS,CRAVEN -SAND- A SIEVE of FINES) GC CLAT YOCTLIRES -0I. Sold Soeer. ................... h• : •:•:: II .vi ;In.t ) C ••:• SW rai—ID®sums. avtr CLEAN SANDS `=:::•:•::{ SAWS.u1RF at no fWEs --.. 1 SAND { ::-::-::-:) STORE THAN Sox IAND I .u1(TF OR NO TINES) Of LATERAL 5 :I ?OORLY-GRADE?SANDS. LARGER THAN NO. I SANDY - •.•, S r GRAVELLY SAXO.UM!OR NO NO STEW SIZE SOILS :..� FLARES SPT (2" 00) Split Seeon YORE THAN 50x SANDS WITH SM sltn SANDS,SANS-S;T or COARSE FINES YlICT7:R� ructtoN •PAWNG ON NO.1 SIEVE (APPREc AMOUNT % SC nAII Sues.Swa -GAT Showy Tube Of rven) � YIICNR� INORGANIC SILTS MO PERT FINE M L CLAYE SANDS,Y fl ROCAat n nil OR SLITELAT OESR SANDS sass YfiH SLOW PLAST1CITT Crab INORGANIC curs or We To SILTS IIEoaT11 PLASTIQr,aura Y FINE AND IESS THANUOLID�3a CL CLAYS.SANOT cuss.SdTY GRAINED CLAYS _ n LEAN curs SOILS — — — ORGANIC SIa s Alm ORGANIC OL PITY a,LYs of IDsr PuS1 J1 ,. Recovery —1I RIORGATiC SLTS, CACt0U5 OR YORE THAN 50X III MH CAATCYACs0U5 FINEY SAND OR — or YATERSAL IS SLIT SOILS • SMALLER i"IW" WELL CONSTRUCTION NSA.zw SIEVE STL SILTS /Jl ANCI uaulD (BAIT %/// CH INORGANIC CLLTS 10Gt1 GREATER THAN 50 , PLASTIG7T CLAYS -' Elcnk casing O I„I ORGANIC CLAYS Of YEDIUY HIGH PIAS(to Y.ORGANIC SLTO[S i //,r \/A So e.n.d casingHIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS `{2 u a PT PEAT TRNna,SUMP sods I''T" I a a u•" NIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS Cement grout NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOL CLASSIFICATIONS I B.mon"c FIELD MEASUREMENTS LABORATORY TESTS V Sand peck or grovel pock Water Revel observed during drilling Consol Consollaetlon CS Crain Site Anatysls Coune or fin• Siev ' Hatt Dny nite.I mixed withe Water level observed otter drilling H Groin Sit• Analysis Xydrorn.ler - PIO Phatetont:otton Detector UC Uneenlln. Corm:evasion Coevasion 1•otive baek1111 or ee..ngs IJW Unit Wight PPm. Pans Par Million by Volume• X Org. Organic Content - BeNentl.-e.m•nl grout k9 411 KLEINFELDER BORING LOG LEGEND GECTEalaCALAIID Exv,aar.AarAL ENGOELTS SAC S Am)t.N;cd45 TESTING CiprA,TY I97C L .. .. .. I I FIGURE A-1 t ; • ! 0 (:ramor Oregon,Inc. Test Pit Soil Descriptions Retail Development Block 136 "A"Avenue and 2nd Street Lake Oswego,Oregon . Refer to text and to the Site Plan,Figure 2 for Approximate Test Pit locations. Test Pit#1 w t. G ' „ ;0.0 o v '. .. in A -6- ya ' • o s = ASTM Classification p n p U 4 ' O .".i E� Description - Sandy GRAVEL(GW) 0-0.7 Sandy GRAVEL with roots,subangular fine to coarse gravel,brown,moist,loose to medium dense(FILL) _ Cobbly GRAVEL(GP-GM) 0.7-3 Cobbly GRAVEL,with silt,sand,red brick fragments,and concrete and asphalt blocks,light brown and gray,moist,loose to dense(FIl.L) Sandy SLIT(ML) 3-4.5 Sandy SILT with organics and wood fragments up to 1"diameter,dark brown,moist, soft to medium stiff(FILL) CLAY(CL) 4.5- I 1 CLAY trace silt,dark brown to black,low to moderate plastic,moist,soft Bottom of test pit at 11'on 10/21/99,at scheduled depth. Groundwater was not encountered during explorations Test Pit#2 A .. > ` 4.. a, G a a c (It r a o Z. E g c a, r a° H ASTM Classification till. n 7, v p 2 u:: Description Sandy GRAVEL(GW) 0 0.7 Sandy GRAVEL with roots and plastic and metal fragments,subangular line to coarse gravel,brown,moist,very loose to loose(FILL) Well-graded GRAVEL with 0.7 3 Well-graded GRAVEL,with silt,sand,shoe and concrete fragments,light brown, silt(GW-GM) moist,loose to medium dense(FILL) Sandy SLIT(M1.) 3-7.5 SILT trace clay,light brown,light gray,and rust mottling,moist,very stiff(FILL) metal can at 4'depth _ grades to soft at 6'depth Well-graded SAND with silt 7.5 10 Well-graded SAND with silt,brown and gray,moist,louse io medium dense (SW-SM) broken basalt fragments at 11'depth Refusal at 10'on 10/21/99,at scheduled depth. Groundwater was not encountered during explorations. �s (. L:\1999\projects\8357\testpits.xls Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. Page 1 of 4 bgs:depth below ground surface 1 Cramor Oregon,Inc. Test Pit Soil Descriptions Retail Development Block 136 "A"Avenue anti 2nd Street Lake Oswego,Oregon Refer to text and to the Site Plan,Figure 2 for Approximate Test Pit locations. Test Pit#3 Y J. Y Y , G V) 'CI L 4 ~�. Y 0 L. G h ASTM Classification p EO. i. U ' o es J Ft Description Sandy GRAVEL(GW) (I- 1 S 1 -0' Sandy GRAVEL with roots,subangular fine to coarse gravel,dark brown,moist,loose to medium dense(FILL) SILT(ML) I -3 SILT with organics and wood fragments,sand,and gravel,fine to coarse gravel,dark brown to black,low to non-plastic,moist,soil to medium stiff(FILL) SLIT(Mt.) 3-9 S2-6' SILT,gray and blue gray,brown mottling,low plasticity,moist,medium stiff(FILL) S3-9' increase rust mottling at 6.5'-7.5'depth Bottom of test pit at 9'on 10/29/99,at scheduled depth. Groundwater seepage at a depth of 8.5 feet. Test Pit#4 o °\ d A Y W 0 .0 Y Y L. L a G n! 0 ✓i a E o a o .. t ASTM Classification Y �4 U 6 a F Description ASPHALT i -0.2 Asphalt pavement(FILL) ' Sandy GRAVEL(GW) 0.2-1 Sandy GRAVEL with silt and roots,round to subangular and fine to coarse gravel,dark brown,moist,loose to medium dense(FILL) SILT(ML) 1 -3.5 S I- 1' SILT,dark brown and blue gray,low plasticity,moist,soft to medium stiff(FILL) roots at 3'depth SLIT(MI.) 3_6SILT with organics,dark brown to black,low plasticity,moist,soft to medium stiff (FILL) SILT(ML) 6-8.5 SILT,blue gray,low plastic,moist,soli to medium slit Silty CLAY(CL) 8.5- 11 S2-8' Silty CLAY,dark gray,low to moderate plastic,moist to vrt y moist,medium stiff S3- I l' Bottom of test pit at II'on 10/29/99,at scheduled depth. CT) Groundwater seepage at a depth of 10.3 feet. C.:.-.) (O L:119991projects183571testpits.xls U Copyri 99 Klcinfcldcr, Inc. Pa1f4 bgs:depth below gr urfacc 1 • • • • Gramor Oregon,Inc. Test Pit Soil Descriptions Retail Development Block 136 "A" Avenue and 2nd Street Lake Oswego,Oregon Refer to text and to the Site Plan,Figure 2 for Approximate Test Pit locations. Test Pit#5 v 0 v t M v 2 41 ja G 6 • ASTM Classification al U , e -0Vi p 3 i... Description Silty GRAVEL with sand 0 2 SI -0' Silty GRAVEL with sand,subrounded to rounded fine to coarse gravel,dark brown, (GM) moist,loose to medium dense(FILL) SILT(ML) 2-5.5 S2-2' SILT trace sand and gravel,light brown,low plasticity,moist,medium stiff SLIT(ML) 5.5-6.5 S3-5.5' SILT,blue and gray,dark gray mottling,low plasticity,moist,medium stiff SILT with fine to medium grained sand,dark gray with brown mottling,moist,medium SILT(Ml..) 6.5-9.5 S4-6.5' stiff S5-9.5' boulder at 9.5 feet depth Refusal on boulder at 9.5'on 10/29/99,at scheduled depth. Groundwater seepage at a depth of 8.5 feet. Test Pit#6 d l;' C w v ii en 4, L C (n L V.. 41 O. E 0 =4. P .. 1. s n t ASTM Classification p U p 3 E� Description • ASPHALT 0-0.2 Asphalt pavement SILT(ML) 0.2-7.5 S I - I' SILT with line sand,brown,low to non-plastic,moist,medium stiff(FILL) wood fragments at 5'depth SILT(ML) 7.5-9 S2-8' SILT with fine sand and trace wood fragments,gi.ry and olive gray,non-plastic,moist, soft to medium stiff(FILL) Bottom of test pit at 9'on 10/29/99,at scheduled depth. Groundwater was not encountered during explanation. C ' Gr% !r-' L:1I 999\projects\8357\testpits.xls Copyright 1999 Klein(elder, loc. Page 3 of 4 hgs:depth below ground surface • Grantor Oregon,Inc. 'rest Pit Soil Descriptions Retail Development Block 136 "A" Avenue and 2nd Street Lake Oswego,Oregon Refer to text and to the Site Plan,Figure 2 for Approximate Test Pit locations. Test Pit#7 = +r r, o 6 e ea °E. E~ .,.P.ASTM Classification p cn A' U O J g Description SILT(MI.) 0-0.3 SILT with organics,dark brown,moist,soft(TOPSOIL) SILT(ML) 0.3-5 SI -3' SILT with fine sand,brown,non-plastic,moist,medium stiff(FILL) • Boulder at 5'depth Refusal on boulder at 5'on 10/29/99,at scheduled depth. Groundwater was not encountered dining exploration. Test Pit#8 A u d o L L tt W r� MI Z. F. E. E w e o °1 ° ASTM Classification p j % a D a g Description ASPHALT 0-0.3 Asphalt pavement(FILL) • Silty GRAVEL(GM) 0.3-6 Silty GRAVEL with cobbles and boulders,dark brown,moist,loose to medium dense (FILL) SILT(ML) 6-9 Clayey SILT,brown,moist,medium stiff to stiff • Poorly-graded GRAVEL 9- 13.5 Poorly-graded GRAVEL,COBBLES,and BOULDERS with silt,gray,moist,medium (GP) dense Bottom of test pit at 13.5'on 10/29/99,at scheduled depth. Groundwater seepage at a depth of 13.5 feet. CD C) .00 hJ L:\1999\projects\8357\testpits.xls Copyrigra99 Kleinfeldcr, Inc. Pag 4 hgs:depth below grceurface TREE ASSESSMENT (Lake Oswego, Block 136) Presented To: Mr. Matt Grady • Gramore Development 9895 SE Sunny side Road Clackamas, OR 97015 Prepared by: Halstead's Arboriculture Consultants, Inc. David Halstead, BS CA ASCA Philip Hickey, BS AAS CA November 30, 1999 • EXHIBIT 56 LU 00-0007 � J I, A HALSTEAD'S ARBORICULTURE SPec:ar,sts in the care anc r CONSULTANTS Preservation of tree .1David f•ra stead Cor:s.,'rac'6 PO Box 1 182 7uaiarm OF 970E2 1' K Pnone i503,245•13E3 November 30, 1999 ATTN.: Mr. Matt Grady Grampn.?. Development 9895 SE Sunny Side Road „ifitiv•` Clackamas, OR 97015 • Reference: Tree Assessment • 4 Location: Lake Oswego, Block 136 j � .'.1: Subject: All Trees Ten Inches and Over .6 i. ,r _, We have inspected the site, trees and the site map for the purpose of determining all trees 10 inches in diameter at 4.5 foot above ground for the ''r purpose of determining their health and structural stability. •14- ,- r `� All trees 10 inches in diameter at 4.5 foot above ground have been numbered s;t.. _ ;! - both in the field, using aluminum tags numbered 101-124, and on the attached III site map for easy identification. "A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas", "Tree Hazard Evaluation Form". "21d edition", ! "International society of Arboriculture"has been completed for each tree to i Ad identity general characteristics. These characteristics will not be repeated unless problems indicate specific detail of the individual tree. • o4rs, • • Encompassed within this report is a "Therapeutic Care and Preservation"outline that will be required in order to preserve preservable trees. This outline will not !�d i be repeated for each tree. V- 1 t . 1I. Tree # 101: : Kwanzan Cherry (Prunus ktvanzan): V The tree's diameter at ground level(DGL) is 2.5 foot west to east and 2.5 foot north to south and is growing up out of a 3 foot by 3 foot planting hole with 98 I percent of the root zone under and raising the asphalt, curb and concrete. The main trunk has been flush cut and the graft is failing, causing several l; suckers which are poorly attached to grow both above and below the graft. The tree is unsightly and will eventually fail from decaying flush cut wounds, breakage of codominant stems and/or the poorly developed graft. However, the tree is not a hazard and it's appearance and the general conditions fits many of the street { I l trees in Lake Oswego. 0 ,l .4 • Page 2 November 30, 1999 Reference: Tree Assessment Location: Lake Oswego, Block 136 Sabi-ea:: All Trees Ten Inches and Over Tree # 101: Prunus-kwanzan Continued.' We recommend removal for the following reasons. 1) Due to continual up lifting of sidewalk, curb and sidewalk. 2) Unsightly due to lack of unsupervised untrained tree cutters. 3) Poorly developed growth, graft union, lack of callus layer around large wounds and decaying inter trunk wood which will continue to weaken the free until it becomes a hazard. 4) Necessary removal and repair of damaged up-lifting sidewalk and asphalt that will increase damage to the root system. 1110 Preservation Recommendations: 1) Pruning. Caution: If the asphalt, curb and sidewalk are to be replaced or repaired, it will increase structural damage to the tree. Tree # 102: Kwanzan Cherry(Prunus-kwanzan): Same as Tree number* 101. We recommend removal for the following reasons: 1) Same as Tree # 1. 2) Grading to correct down slope on east side of tree will increase structural damage and health of tree. Preservation Recommendations: 1) Same as Tree *1. Tree # 103: Seedlina Fruit Cherry (Var.-unknown): Tree is one of 3 overgrown seedlings or waterspouts, protruding from a 3 foot tall . soil mound. Page 3 November 30. 1999 :7;efererce: Tree Assessment _ocaticn: Saxe Oswego, Block 136 Subject: All Trees Ten ,'nches and Over Tree # 103: Seedling Fruit Cherry Continued: The trunks protrude from the ground and all three are codominant with included bark. This tree is part of a grove of 39 Cherry tree seedlings or waterspouts averaging in size from 1 to 9 inches. All wafer shoots are growing from the same Eco-system. We recommend removal for the following reasons:. 1) Tree is leaning in three different directions and is poorly rooted. 2) Trunks at ground level is split, growing and pushing against themselves. 3) if surrounding trees are removed it will cause severe root damage and will • have adverse affects on the movement of the tree during winter storms that will cause decay, splitting and blow down. 4) Fruit production is not suitable (small meat and large seed) for consumption and will be an insect nuisance. 5) Chemical applications on a regular basis to keep disease and insects under control. Preservation Recommendations: 1) Pruning. 2) Bracing. 3) Cabling. 4) Continuos chemical applications. Tree # 104: Washinoton Thom (Crataeaus-ohaenoovnjm) The tree is growing up out of a 3 foot by 3 foot planting hole with 98 percent of the root zone under and raising the asphalt, curb, water meter box and sidewalk. Tree has grown around a power pole which is less than 6 foot from the south side of the trunk. Preservation Recommendations: 1) Class Ill pruning, including raising lower limbs for street and sidewalk. I _i .; Page 4 November 30, 1999 Reference: Tree Assessment Lccaiion: __eke Oswego, Block 136 Subject: All Trees Ten inches and Over Tree # 104: Washington Thom (Crataequs-ohaenoovrum) Continued: 2) Cabling. 3) Removal of pole, water meter box and all damaged asphalt. Redesign sidewalk and curb to enlarge tree well. 4) Therapeutic treatment as needed to ensure tree survives the construction trauma. Tree # 105: Black-locust (Robina-oseudoacacia) Tree was measured at 8 inches above ground(smallest taper below split) at 75 inches in circumference or 25 inches in diameter. However, this is actually two trees which have grown together below ground level. Both trunks are separated by an included bark layer. Separation of the two trunks due to natural causes is likely. There are several severe codominant stems throughout the tree's scaffolds and 50 percent of the crown is dead. We recommend removal for the following reasons:. 1) Tree has slight lean in two different directions and is poorly connected to root flair. 2) Trunks at ground level are split, growing and pushing against themselves. 3) Large amounts of dead wood throughout tree is a strong indication of root flair problems. Preservation Recommendations: 1) Pruning. 2) Bracing. 3) Cabling. 4) Therapeutic fertilizing applications. Tree # 106: Siberian Elm (Ulmus-oumila is This tree is one of approximately 50 Elm tree seedlings or waterspouts within a 40 by 75 foot area and has been singled out due to it being the furthermost 10 inch at 4.5 foot above ground tree of the grove. • Page 5 November 30, 1999 .Reference: 7ree Assessment Location: Lake Oswego, Block 136 Subject: .411 Trees Ten Inches and Over We recommend removal for the following reasons: 1) Trees of this species are well known for their brittle wood, weak splits, and are not considered as desirable trees. They produces papery, winged seeds that disperse seedlings over wide areas. Tree # 107: Siberian Elm (Ulmus-Dumila) Continued: 2) This species of elm, as it grows older is subject to several different insect and disease problems which will have to be chemically treated on a regular basis. Preservation Recommendations: 4111 1) Pruning. 2) Chemical applications for insect and disease. Tree # 106, 8. 9, 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15, 16. 17, 18 and 20: Siberian Elm (Ulmus- pumila): We recommend removal for the following reasons: 1) These trees are not desirable due to their fast growth, destructive root system, disease and insect problems. 2) These are all young trees growing within a grove of a hundred like waterspouts and are relying of each other for root support and protection against adverse weather. It is doubtful that anyone of these individual numbered trees can stand on their own. 3) If the small trees within the grove are removed, it will cause severe root decay problems with the remaining trees. Preservation Recommendations: 1) Leave the grove undisturbed. 2) Pruning. 3) Chemical applications for insect and disease. I vJu I Page 6 November 30, 1999 Reference: Tree Assessment Location: Lake Oswego. Block 136 Subject: All Trees Ten Inches and Over It is my understanding from you, your discussion with the City of Lake Oswego, the notation on your site plan and my discussion and verification with the City of Lake Oswego, that the next three trees (121, 122 and 124) are and/ quote "to remain without exception and regardless of the cost". Tree # 121: Oregon Sig Leaf Maple (Acer-macrophyllum): The tree is 33 inches in diameter at 1.5 foot above ground or the smallest taper below the split. The tree has two trunks. Trunk number 1 is 24 inches in diameter, is still upright to a height of 35 foot and has 15 percent holding wood, 2 live limbs and 4 suckers. The remainder of the trunk area is 90 percent severely • decayed wood from below ground to 25 foot and the remaining 10 foot is completely dead. Trunk number 2 is 25 inches in diameter just above the split, has a 50 percent lean caused by falling over and is being held up by Tree Number 124. The trunk is 40 foot long with less than 10 percent holding wood, 1 live limb and 4 suckers. The remaining trunk area is 90 percent decayed from below ground to 30 foot and the remaining 10 foot is completely dead. The Willow has stopped the trunk from falling to the ground. Preservation Recommendations: 1) Tree is extremely dangerous and needs protective fencing to eliminate target area. Tree # 122.' Siberian Elm (Ulmus-oumila): Tree is 36 inches at the narrowest part below the split which is one foot above ground. The tree has 3 trunks, 70 foot tall with a 58 foot north to south, 54 foot west to east trunk/limb spread. Trunks have a 40 percent lean from vertical. Tree is healthy and structurally stable for a Siberian Elm • • Page 7 November 30, 1999 reference: Tree Assessment Location: Lake Oswego, Block 736 Subject: All Trees Ten Inches and Over Tree # 122: Siberian Elm (Ulmus-aumila) Continued: Preservation Recommendations: 1) Class Ill Pruning. 2) Cabling. 3) Periodic inspections, disease and insect control. Tree # 124: Weeping Willow(Salix-babylonia): Tree is 34 inches in diameter below the split, double trunk, 40 foot tall and has a 45 foot north to south and a 57 foot west to east diameter trunk✓limb spread with 22 foot over hanging 311 Avenue. Both trunks have been topped and several large sucker limbs have been ripped off of the two trunks causing several severe defects within both trunks, such as advanced decay both surface and internal. The north trunk is severely decayed between two sub trunks; one growing west the other southeast which is adding pressure to the decaying split area. The south trunk although sealed over is internally decayed and/or has discolored wood from the past topping. There are long, heavy and stress cracked limbs growing out of and above the decayed inter trunk and the added weight of the toppled Maple tree trunk has increased the breaking potential. The target areas are defined as anywhere within the dripline of the tree especially the parking and street area. The Willow tree is infected with leaf and twig blights and has had aphid and Cottonwood Borer in the past. This is not unusual for Willow trees, but a nuisance to parked vehicles and pedestrians which park or pass under the tree. Some of these things can be treated provided they are done on a continual basis. Over all the Willow is healthy, has a large root system which will add additional weight to a weak structure, and will need to be root pruned regularly or root barriers installed to prevent up-rooting curbing and pavement. 110 • Page 8 November 30, 1999 Reference: Tree Assessment L:caticn: sake Oswego, Block 136 Subject: All Trees Tan Inches and Over Tree # 124: Weeping Nilow(Salix-babyionia) Continued.' The Willow is very dangerous and we cannot endorse the trees preservation regardless of what methods are taken unless person and properly are protected from harm. Preservation Recommendations: 1) Placement of a permanent heavy duty chain link fence large enough and far enough out to protect person and property from trunk and limb breakage. 2) Class Ill Pruning. This will help to eliminate heavy weight from poorly developed limbs. All cuts should be 2 inches in diameter or less, however it may be necessary to make larger cuts in order to reduce heavy weight. Cuts should not be made in or near decaying and discolored wood where possible. 3) Cabling is not recommended within the tree due the lack of advantage points. Tree has no central leader and cabling whether it be trunks and/or limbs will only increase the twisting and leverage against the strength of the tree. 3a) It may be possible to erect some type of artificial structural system for the tree, but we are not qualified to make these recommendations. If hardware is used in the tree it would, in many cases, have to be put into or through decaying and/or discolored wood which will increase the decay and decrease the structure. 4) Inspections of fencing, tree's structural integrity, pruning as needed, disease and insect control needs to be conducted on a monthly basis. All or parts of the forthcoming "Tree Care and Preservation" will need to be preformed in order to preserve the preservable trees. • Page 9 TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION Because of the number of trees to be preserved. the particular situation of where the trees are growing, the species of the tree(s) and the proposed construction plans, there will be a certified arborist on-site and/or on-call for the entire project, especially during any excavating and/or the removal of tree (s). In this way, decisions can be made in the field that are only speculations at this writing. MEETINGS: Before the site clearing and construction begins a pre-construction tree preservation conference will be held on site with the general contractor in charge of tree removal, and/or in charge of heavy equipment. the resident certified arborist and those official representatives who have interest in the project. PURPOSE: •The purpose of the on-site meeting will be to introduce all parties to the specifications and sensitivity needed in the protection and preservation of trees, their environment and protected areas. PREPARATION/FENCING: We have found through several years of tree preservation that the protected area is the first and most important procedure of tree preservation. If the fencing is placed properly and maintained the root zone of the tree (s) within this protected area will not be compacted nor damaged by needless excavation. Before any site clearing takes place tree fencing needs to be erected out to the drip line (furthest most branches) of those tree/s to be preserved. Tree barrier fencing will be at least seven (7) foot tall steel chain link fence with the necessary structure to keep persons out from under the trees. In some cases the fencing, will need to be adjusted from the drip line to a smaller area in order to accommodate walls, building, sidewalks, excavation and other like building construction. The adjustment of the fencing and any disturbance within the protected area will be done under the supervision of the consulting arborist. • I Page 10 TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION If the fencing is adjusted to a smaller diameter it may be necessary a heavy plywood fence in order to protect the adjusted area. Regardless, any adjustment of the fencing from the drip line, no matter how slight, will require therapeutic care for the tree and its root zone. REMOVALS: Those trees that are structurally unsound and/or unhealthy whether they be in the construction area or in the preservation areas will need to be removed or sequerly fenced for the safety of person, property and to the surrounding trees as well. Tree removal will be done in such a way so as not to damage other tree/s and their root zone which are marked for preservation. Removal of these tree/s may require climbing the tree/s and taking them down in small pieces. Stumps of the removed tree/s, which are less than 20 feet from a preserved tree, will be ground-out using a stump grinder. THERAPEUTIC CARE: Therapeutic care is described as that treatment which will be needed to ensure the tree/s within the protected area receive the best chances for survival. In order to accomplish this objective, the tree/s will have to be periodically inspected during the construction process and for at least two years after construction is completed. Individual treatment is based on the tree/s needs, it's root zone, structural condition and health. Factors will be taken into consideration, such as species, soil compaction, soil analis, season in which construction is done, how much root zone will be affected by construction, losses of surrounding native plantings and loss of and/or over abundance of surface and sub-surface water. 0333 0 Page 11 TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION ROOT PRUNING: Excavation when using back-hoe or track-hoe, or other mechanical device, will be done towards the tree rather than along side of the tree. Furthermore. before excavation begins, bridging and tunneling will be considered; especially if tree root/s are found to be in excess of 4 inches in diameter. When excavation needs to be done within the drip line of the tree, it may be necessary to cut roots. The best way is to sever the roots by first digging a trench with a trencher just outside of the proposed excavation area. Ali roots 2 inches and larger need to be cut clean with the use of an ax, saw and or other like sharp instrument. In this way the root/s are severed clean and will start to produce new root hairs. Regardless, any work done within the drip line of the tree will be done under the • supervision of the consulting arborist. FERTILIZING: If the tree/s diameter root zone is reduced, the tree/s will need to be therapeutically fertilized. How much and types of mixtures will be determined by the amount of disturbance, root loss, soil analysis, condition of the soil, season, health and condition of the tree/s. Those tree/s which will be less than 8 feet from excavation at ground level may require not only therapeutic fertilizer, but root hormones as well. This will help the sealing process of damaged roots and the stimulation of new growth. When a tree root area is severely damaged, it may need additional fertilizing within 6 months and again within a year. ACCIDENTS: With the amount of activity on a major development project, accidents are bound to happen. Limbs are broken, roots are dug-up or root zones are compacted. In most cases, if these problems are addressed immediately by the resident arborist, they will not hamper the trees longevity. 0 0 9 4 • Page 12 TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION Where negligence occurs and the contractor deliberately damages a tree and/or the root zone, the contractor should be held responsible and monetary values arrived at for the repair and or replacement of the ttree's. We have taken extensive field notes, pictures and completed specific detailed analysis of the trees and if we can be of further assistance or more information is needed please call us immediately. Sincerely, David Halstead BS CA PN-0146 • ASCA Philip C. Hickey BS AAS CA PN-1604 • U:iJS • Technical Reference: 1) "Tree Biology and Tree Care", "Alex L. Sheigo" Pages 4, 8, 26, 30. 44-49, . 3-74, 86. '04. C8 and '21. 2) 'Tree and Development", a Technical Guide to Preservation of Tree During • Land Development", "Nelda Matheny and James R. Clark". 3) "A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees In Urban Areas", 2rd Edition", "Nelda Matheny and James R. Clark". 4) "Building With trees in the Pacific Northwest", "Michael R. Reichenbach" 5) "A New Tree Biology", "Alex L. Sheigo" 6) "A New Tree Biology Dictionary", "Alex L. Sheigo" 7) "Long-Range Planning for Developed Sites In the Pacific Northwest", Hazard tree Management", "USDA". • 8) "Introduction To Forest and Renewable Resources", "Sixth Edition", "Grant'Wenonah Sharpe-Clare/John Hendee" 9) "The Landscape Below Ground", Edited by "Dr. Gary W. Watson, Dr. Dan Neely" S 0396 i:sap.. jell / ........ \ Mr...."*.U. . - ...i Ik I I SECOND STREET J ..11 ...I. —�r�._• 1 C„-- 7\ ). 0 r f. :,./_ *- 7* `. Q ' r 1 r t-- - _I I i i . ............ -.cc .... i•.• r" _ r7.1":........., ." ...\1=7":'.." I 1 ec) '--- : 2 :N t I - w �'f� • 5 SQ. FT. fr.i•-• ' ): *)i....., i:: :.-.---x. . 0 _Ina ll 1-' 4 I 1! / iI t _ I / t1JI r to7f2Y t .Ini.' L.N.„1::::,,,..\ ------v.. ..: 1 ILI =1\ . ! __. _ k 7' ? I •O• \ 0 '' 1 1 I ! "� I\ iJ 36,554 SQ. F F.vi ~. \ J ?..-.\ ._, ,, 1 ... ._ • • . , ,, ,,,:. „..,,,... , 0, 0 f'" ' , 3 ri lii ---— 0 . 6 wr. t. is_ 2 . ...9 II-11RD STREET r r' .i.. - ._ - - - -- - ----- - - - — - - 1-0R—P0 _ I =5i_�. `°\ =emu, '"./ . —�fly '7�7+•��,,r-r_. wna. 1. ----_r,,, �.•....CL.,.,� t - A.L.T.A./A.C.S.M. LAND TITLE SURVEY FOR GRAAAOR DEVELOPMENT RATION I' Consulting I � _,• • waa BLOCK 136, F►.-~ It p f f ADDITION TO OSWEGO F"^A� �e - - — ` — (Saar ' _.•- ` K. .� _ww —- aT Y (E OS' 1 COUf STATE - --EOON ,-325J FAX __ - --- -- ,f6nd W-- Ara vrc?. '11 A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas :: :_ TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edltlon Site/Address: ___EaL___ZZLZ.tzte HAZARD RATING: Maortocation: SO//77{ ► „ Owner public . • Failure + Ste + ' ---- priv to unknown other Poterrda] of p Rating = Ra rd Date: )//2 '/91 Inspector /'. keKE'�/ .rT f eRating / �R, _ Immediare action needed Date of last inspection: VAS b i.1 A) Needs further in spection TREE CHARACTERISTICS Dead tree Tree t• 'Of Species: (4i 1 C oCvt 013H: _)7of fronts: Height �� /tS road: `7 i . 4-415 Form: E ger.eraifv symmetric 0 minor asymmetry major asymmetry .stump �' aor sprout =.stag-headed Crown class: , dominant 0 co-dominant E intermediate C suppressed Live crown ratio: 9i °; Age class: C young 0 semi-mature `mature C over-matureisenescent Pruning history: E.crown cleaned 'excessivety thinned Xitopped ,crown raised E pollareed crown reduced,Kflush cuts C cabled/braced C none C multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: C specimen C heritage/historic C wildlife C unusual ,0 street tree L screen E shade E indigenous C protected by gov.agent, TREE HEALTH Foliage color. C normal E chlorotic V necrotic Epicormics?a N Growth obstructions: C Foliage density: normal E sparse Leaf size: C normal C small — _stakes C wirefties E signs r ;cables Annual shoot growth: E.excellent average L. Door Twig Diebacir? 0 N ,acurbipavement C guards Woundwood development: L excellent C average X poor ❑none - -otherill__ Vigor class: C excellent cl<average � 0 fairpoor Major pests/diseases: NOApe_ abstrucd I 71 a a/(e ppl II o c Gc e7 4 ,� a drnY^) 1I SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. E residence Xcommercial 0 industrial 0 park C open space ❑natural C woodlann°rest Landscape type: %parkway C raised bed 0 container C mound C lawn C shrub border wind break Irrigation: none 0 adequate E inadequate 0 excessive C trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? Y ( E construction n soil disturbance Cgrade cha eC line clearing r site cleahng %dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75'0 75-100^•Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0°•0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0°b 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: y drainage C shallow%compacted C droughty C saline ❑aticaline CI acidic C small volume C disease center C history of fail 0 clay C expansive ❑slope ° aspect Obstructions: C lights C signage C line-of-sight C view ,overhead lines C underground rrtiltties A traffic C adjacent veg. C Exposure to wind: Xsingle lee —ibelow canopy C above canopy C recently exposed C windward.canopy edge C area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: (in/ Occurrence of snowrice storms 0 never ❑seldom Xregularly TARGET Use Under Tree: wilding .parking [traffic Apedestrian E recreation C landscape r hardscape C small features Autility lines Can target be moved? Y 6 Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: E occasi°nal use C intermittent use C frequent use A{constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. THEE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECT& Suspect root rote) N Illesiireomitoekitndiet present Y() ID: Exposed root ❑severe 0 moderate Aillow Uelenninet Asevere ❑moderate 0 low xot prenea: distance from trunk Root area stie % Bass wouodet N Whey 1 Restricted root area: ,severe 0 moderate ❑tow Potential for root allure: ,severe 0 moderate 0 low LEAN: (t) deg.from vertical ❑natural 8 unnatural Xseif-corrected Soil hewing: Y Decay In plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil trading: Y N Compounding factor= 'n I P 3 10iiJ f A/On/f .cht../ in/ .� X. hope bun=l a° ��s eve "leg(t ec� U � �fe moderate mow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN or goer TRUNK I SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Bow, sweep w1 I Vs1 Codominants/forks Multiple attachments I I 0,1 I Included bark Excessive end weight I Cracks/soiits Hangers rn �_ I Girdling I Wounds/seam S S I I Decay I 1 Cavity + { Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleedina/sap flow Loose/cracked bark 411 Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs I J Borers/termites/ants Cankers/galls/buds I Previous failure HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: p ciT-s .0/eel o C Ci )o..i, kt)N, AP /'/" aeSp y � F'�hur oteniial: 1 -low;2•medium:3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18 3O"(45-75 cm);4->3lY(75 cm) 7 + + / Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part 0 reduce end weight ❑crown clean 0 thin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce ❑ restructure ❑shape Cable/Brace: , Inspect further. 0 root crown 0 decay 0 aerial J'rriionitor Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: G none gevaluate Notification: r'owner O manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS Tit.ee /oea,.2op zu foJ f} , rte.( /y,.O (ll Q.P.r 17 (9(V Aced r�.1 ea S 7" j h a l�' y� 7C C1u..� 1 J re n+ uy�Q d a� " W • (�-�.Pi 1 S P../ .r_•.:';t' S' / very fr -aJrJ S u c,•ft/, , re i s 40 91V J, 0/04 s S f—4- CJt /tPQ CA,„)J 11-1 /i, ,' /'r '1 CII JII./f .fio6wc.�i 7 ) CA CA, D/;//o fn e—( 4'fi' ,r Q)) 'Joint Sib icr- 4927' A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: )1740Gd 4 rap HAZARD RATING: ` f - Map location: SG1rril of i4" Aler. . ..6J 2"4(fe r sir,-L) O S Z" + Z + �1 = Owner 4_ public ri�ratE Failure + Size + = R unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: 11/2 y/9? inspector. it 4rek&f/f 1 l i sf A'. Immediate action needed Date of Last inspection: I/AT V-MP J Needs further inspection tree TREE CHARACTERISTICSn Dead Tree tt: 10 Z Species: DBN: 17. t of trunks: 1 He ht Spread: '/✓� r J /p/ //C Form: 0 generally symmetric E minor asymmetry X" major asymmetry `stump sprout =stag-heated Crown class: dominant ❑co-dominant El intermediate ❑suppressed Live crown ratio: 95 % Age class ❑young ❑semi-mature mature ❑over-mature%senescent Pruning history: =:crown cleaned fg excessively thinned%topped crown raised ❑pollarded,it crown reduced flush cuts ❑cabled/braced none 0 multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: ❑specimen ❑heritage/historic El wildlife 0 unusual street tree ❑screen El shade El indigenous 0 protected by goy.agent TREE HEALTH Foliage color. El normal El chlorotic ❑necrotic Epicorrnics?() N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: ❑normal ❑sparse Leaf size: ❑normal ❑small ❑stakes ❑wire/ties ❑signs cables Annual shoot growth: ❑excellent T,Average ❑poor Twig Dieback? N curb/pavement ❑guards Woundwood development: ❑excellent 61keitio poor ❑none El other Vigor class: ❑excellent ri tI 'average ❑fair ❑ oor Major pests/diseases: ,thin it tiA, �1/P l p h c f a Arta / ,4 ,,,� A" AJ/!JGe /� SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. El residence commerciak Clindustrial ❑park ❑open space 1� p p ❑natural ❑woodlandVorest r Landscape type: gparkway u raised bed ❑container ❑mound El lawn ❑ shrub border El wind break Irrigation: ,none C adequate El inadequate ❑excessive El trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y ❑construction ❑soil disturbance Cl grade change a line clearing ❑site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 5-100% Pavement lifted? N %dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil p rob!ems: drainage ❑shallow gcompacted ❑droughty ❑saline ❑alkaline ❑acidic ❑small volume ❑disease center ❑history of-fail El clay ❑expansive ❑slope ° aspect Obstructions: ❑lights ❑signage ❑line-of-sight ❑view A overhead lines ❑underground utilities eg traffic ❑adjacent veg. ❑ Exposure to wind: ngle tree ❑below canopy ❑above canopy ❑recently exposed ❑windward,canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: SW Occurrence of snowiice storms ❑never ❑seldom ,f regularty TARGET Use Under Tree: rifibuilding X parking , `traffic pedestrian 0 recreation ❑landscape ❑hardscape 0 small features utility lines Can target be moved? Y ® Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: ❑occasional use 0 intermittent use ❑frequent use Alconstant use • The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. :� `$0 .) TREE DEFECTS ROOT Otte-ix Suspect root rot () N Idesbroornicoekitrectet present Y 0 1D: • Exposed rock O severe r moderate 0 low tlndermlaett AI/severe 0 moderate 0 low ipRoot pruned: distance from trunk Root am affected: % Buttress wounded:( 13 N When 12/0 Restricted root area: severe 0 moderate ❑low Potential tot mot failure: Alsevere 0 moderate 0 low LWt - deg.from vertical 0 natural 'unnatural E etf-corrected Sell Main Y Decay in ptane of lean: Y Roots broken Y N Soil craddeg: Y N 0 ,Qom !- euk ls, s Compounding factor= I1 0o gJD,.I,,i f ,,� .' '3 I �11117 I a L.elft.4(LA . Lein severtty: 0 severe ❑moderate blow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT I ROOT CROWN I TRUNK SCAFFOLDS 3RJtNCHES ?ocr tacer I I Bow. sweep Codominantsforks /11 I M Mutticie at=chments Ivl 111 Included bark L. • Excessive end weight Crack.splits M L I Hangers j • Girdlingtvl Woundsseam i M c S I S M Decay Cavity Conks'mushrooms/bracket f i Bleeding/sap flow Loose/cracked bark � i L I s L Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs ryl S hil • Borerstermites/ants Cankers/oailsburls 5 Previous failure HAZARD RATING Tree par,most likely to fail. serf ft/S kci/114/Nit- /L_/rrf If Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 <6"(15 cm);2-6-18 (15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18-30"(45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) Z ; = Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 7, a 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: remove defective part 0 reduce end weight crown clean 0 thin 0 raise canopy0 crown reduce1 �'�estructure ❑shape Cable/Brace: � A/6(1CG) 4'c(0CS 1f 1 ePhatei ) L' QSledfurther ❑root crown ❑decay Oaerial monitc Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: 0 none Zevaluate Notification: 0 owner 0 manager ❑governing agency Date: • COMMENTS / /o r•c1 Cr 7-1—,�` Z.Q.t -��/L / I 0 / ( ( ii 0i1 i '4 /avv e- /f f ,ra Cl) /0 I 6J� !u fja� rn, Jo� sy4)( 1�9M a -A �srG.^JJ AI 1 t_cf , ,)I A , r d,0 I -i yr rvr f y (,1-/- /1Z-/AaerAzA`, died o f 6 ''G..,t, 1 ` CA) 4' 1C .,GIG rn_ )i'4 f-C &J/cj . 4 • c/ kHz-% c pad die cf<r�r solid �>+� I A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas = TREE HAZARD H RD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: 22Q6k /..s'` 4„4.¢0fg0 HAZARD RARING: . Ak__ iap/Locabon: -ledrni cif A" r4zlize-vr rikt,J ? /rf-d c"r1C.02ax COS -2 - + 1 + 1 Failure + Size + Target Owner. public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: /l/24//91 Inspector. fe Hickey/ sml-,f r¢rc'_ Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: I/iiI J&e ) Needs further inspection TREE CHARACTERISTICS Dead tree Tree #: /0 7 Species: Co rr J OSH: /0 #of trunks: II Height L/# Spread: Cr A),//O j/l /T I Form: ❑ generally symmetric ❑minor asymmetry 2/Maier asymmetry =stump sprout ❑stag-headed Crown class: ❑ dominant %co-dominant ❑intermediate ❑suppressed Live crown ratio: 70 T. Age class: rJ young At semi-mature ❑mature ❑over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned ❑excessively thinned ❑topped El crown raised n pollarded El crown reduced ❑flush cuts ❑cabled/braced X none ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: ❑specimen ❑heritage/historic ❑wildlife ❑unusual ❑street tree ❑screen ❑shade El indigenous ❑protected by gov.agenc TREE HEALTH Foliage color. ❑normal ❑chlorotic 0 necrotic Epicormics? C N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: ❑normal Cl sparse Leaf size: ❑normal ❑small ❑stakes ❑wire/ties ❑signs ❑cables Annual shoot growth: ❑excellent ❑average ❑poor Twig Dieback? (5 N ❑curb/pavement ❑guards Voundwood development ❑excellent 'average ❑poor ❑none %other 1)C g 7/ '71V Vigor class: ❑excellent average ❑fair Cl poor MajorpesWdiseases: /10^re O4-1•1 -ed , fP,/ i.vt( hat a/crock, Orcwr'ied SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ❑residence %commercial 0 industrial ❑park 0 open space ❑natural ❑woodland\forest Landscape type: 0 parkway ❑raised bed ❑container 1 mound ❑lawn ❑ shrub border ❑wind break Irrigation: gi none 0 adequate ❑inadequate ❑excessive ❑trunk welled Recent site disturbance? (3 N ❑construction ❑soil disturbance ❑grade change ❑line clearing ,site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% °/°dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75°4 75-100°/° Soil problems: %drainage Cl shallow ❑compacted ❑droughty 0 saline ❑alkaline ❑acidic ❑small volume ❑disease center ❑history of•fail ❑clay ❑expansive [slope era ° aspect S Obstructions: 0 lights ❑signage ❑line-of-sight ❑view El overhead lines ❑underground utilities ❑traffic f%adjacent veg. ❑ Exposure to wind: 0 single tree ❑below canopy ❑above canopy r recently exposed it windward,canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Sh) Occurrence of snow/ice storms ❑never ❑seldom i regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: 0 building 0 parking El traffic 'pedestrian El recreation 0 landscape 0 hardscape ❑small features ❑utility lines ;an target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: itoccasional use ❑intermittent use 0 frequent use 0 constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DOTS: Suspect root rat Y N likssiroornisontAireciart peat Y N ID: Exposed root:: ❑severe ❑moderate )t.fkrw tltdernalset 0 severe 0 moderate „yam 40 loot pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When Restricted root area: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Poteotlal for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low «: jC) deg.from vertical J1natural 0 unnatural 0 serf-corrected Soll beavina Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y ® Roost broken Y C Soil cracking: C3 N Compounding factor Ti SA ri Jj firAS-liSleni c/ // _ *AL(( Lean severity: ❑severe ,moderate ❑low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) I DEFECT l ROOT CROWN °cor=pr I TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Sew, sweet) I .S I tut i NICodominants/forics I _S • . Murtmole attachments Included bark s Excessrve end weight .1 Cracks/splits L L • Hangers Girdlino !— Wounds/seam . • Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket • Bleeding/sap flow Loose/cracked bark . � Nesting hole/bee hive I Deadwood/stubs i Borersrtermites/ants IAA L • I Cankers/galls/burls Previous failure S • HAZARD RATINri Tree part most likely to fail: LEV-Al i//)O7- fyfril - Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18-30"(45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) + 1 + j = l f Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; "T 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part 0 reduce end weight ❑crown clean 0 thin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce 0 restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: 4-II Sl-2Mf 7c1)v<J-? iA . Inspect further. ❑root crown ❑decay ❑aerial grrtionito Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N More target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: ❑none %evaluate Notification: C owner r'manager 0.governing agency Date: COMMENTS auz._ /O c. a•1r..4. 7 0 /Q-Qtto c Z r.Jd it /.�17 fo-'/Z- 4 4- - , r -L.t; I J G►ti.Q 4 1 / 61 ) S 1<C iMl pcp/i+ font�i'nt (t r i 1 lM 1'1 Gi14 n -1 /9° /z- T� �s 104,,,NS a �,,, A4s irv'y u 'rot c ~ �sv �c sJ r-/ Ss-ram 0(4 Al aae , FA.rk. /JCIag ›J e /0 - of c 5 rev, )49-'".---t A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/kidress: rtedk /3` .4,¢744264° HAZARD RATING: wiaNtocation: 5a,rrt/ erf 4" AvauF {„Ye,./ 24de.? ILKO S 2— + 3 + 3 . Aik__ Failure + Size + Target Owner:public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: 1 f/Zy/9f Inspector. k. !t/OJ<'EY/ s /f Arm, Immediate action needed • Date of last inspection: 1)4 VAi d.J 0 Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS . Tree#: I { I DI/ Species: IA)El c i rc.iC 4,:.; f s.J" r',2 DBH: I 1,0 t of trunks Height ID Spread: - ,1. //f _i / 1-'£ /.; c,,/ Form: .❑ generally symmetric minor asymmetry ❑major asymmetry E stump sprout E stag-heated Crown class: dominant ❑co-dominant ❑intermediate ❑suppressed Live crown ratio: '3S % Age class: ❑young %semi-mature E mature u over-mature/senescent Pruning history: E crown cleaned ,excessively thinned )4 topped rown raised ❑pollarded ❑crown reduced,irflush cuts ❑cabled/braced ❑none ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: ❑specimen ❑heritage/historic ❑wildlife ❑unusual A street tree ❑screen ❑shade ❑indigenous ❑protected by gov.agent TREE HEALTH Foliage color: X normal ❑chlorotic ❑necrotic Epicarmics?© N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: %normal ❑sparse Leaf size: ❑normal E small ❑stakes ❑wire/ties E signs ❑cables Annual shoot growth: ❑excellent Kaverage ❑poor Twig Dieback? Y d ,curb/pavement ❑guards Woundwood development Z excellent TA/average 0 poor =none ❑other ill- Vigor class: =excellent :Overage E fair ❑poor Major pests/diseases: AL,.ha 0,6LAArrrJ SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ❑residence %commercial ❑industrial ❑park E open space ❑natural ❑woodlandVorest Landscape type: 'parkway ❑raised bed ❑container ❑mound ❑lawn r shrub border ❑wind break Irrigation: `none El adequate ❑inadequate CI excessive _i trunk wettled t"� Recent site disturbance? Y ❑construction ❑soil disturbance ❑grade change 0 line clearing ❑site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% -tor°•• Pavement lifted? 0 N %dripline w/till soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: K drainage ❑shallow f compacted ❑droughty ❑saline ❑alkaline ❑acidic ❑small volume ❑disease center El history of•tail ❑clay ❑expansive ❑slope ° aspect Obstructions: ❑lights ❑signage 0 line-of-sight ❑view X.overhead lines ❑underground utilities X traffic ❑adjacent veg. ❑ Exposure to wind: Xsingle tree ❑below canopy ❑above canopy ❑recently exposed ❑windward,canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: 5 J Occurrence of snow/ice storms ❑never E seldom A regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: g building Larking ,Ff3 traffic llpedestrian G recreation ❑landscape O hardscape 0 small features rtility lines Can target be moved? Y © Can use be restricted? Y N III Occupancy: 0 occasional use ❑intermittent use ,frequent use ❑constant use . The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. 1) ,.;c4 TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect reel rot Y N theshroomitooktracket present Y N ID: Exposed root:` ❑severe ❑moderate low Uaderrntoet 4severe 0 moderate ❑low foci pruned: distance from trunk Root area aflsdet % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Rertrided root area: severe 0 moderate 0 low Potsntfal for root failure: xi severe 0 moderate 0 low LEAN: deg.from vertical ❑natural ❑unnatural 0 self-corrected Soil heaving Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking Y n� Compounding fact= %,;a r; ��,J,J. Al X-1 ' /i!?(0 1,) fi 0 ¢ �l r .rj 1,ve c✓Lean sever* ❑seven: ❑mo moderate derate ❑low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN I TRUNK SCAFFOLDS Poor doer BRANCHES Sow. sweep i L Codominantsrforics I S• 5 Muttioie attachments $ I S Included bark I I S S Excessive end weight i w1 Cracks/solits ,�,� M Hangers Girdling fy1 Wounds/seam hA s Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleeding/sap flow Loose/cracked bark I tv1 M I Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs 5- Borers/termites/ants Can k e rs/aallslbu its M Previous failure HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: .'Or)4- Sy.( r'r Failure potential: 1 -low:2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2 6-16"{15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18 30"(45-75 cm);4 >30"(75 cm) + 3 + 3 Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use: 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part ❑reduce end weight crown clean thin graise canopy ❑crown reduce I restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. ❑root crown ❑decay ❑aerial Arriionitc Remove true: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent bees: none ❑evaluate Notification: ❑owner ❑manager ❑governing agency Date. COMMENTS 11.zc /oco, ( Z Z /Z-r/ee-/- . Time sr✓� •' «yL,Jct1 I (p /9a4- Sr.TTg--e"'1 rALQ_ Axecti r0AJ e 7i hi*/kyr Su' rvaPc, S7 r arc /,Ih 1Jf S of e4k TA_Lk 5/c! VNA fG1u-•t a,'ad nJ & f u,i i,t r/r 21 C a'""") 7/1 4v J t7ti I1 {�i✓LuGP/S ,PC , A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas �= TR EE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: ��r ILL ,,crap HAZARD RATING.: ,ap/tocation: SO1rr71 c` �4" �4 A7I�fl ! 2 c,j"c� jL}�O S Z + 2 + l = Failure + S e + Target _ Owner, public pate unknown other Potential of part Rati Rahn ,/ / � 9 Date: If/2y q ' Inspector. ' +>~/eKEY/ JT /f �Cg, Immediate argon needed Date of last inso on: Lri)fCVt1� J.) !! Needs further inspection TREE CHARACTERISTICS Dead tree Tree #: /I. �+ 1 Species ,-/Jr r. .0 f. DBH: - `#"of trunks: Height g �./n Spread: r'4'+ i ,4. /�;kti-ii clSC 41.7 _ Form: 0 generally symmetric` N'miner asymrr.etri C major asymmetry G stump sprout C stag- eaded Crown class: t dominant C co-dominant =intermediate `:suppressed Live crown ratio: C--() % Age class: C young ,Z semi-mature C mature C over-mature/senescent Pruning history: =crown cleaned C excessiveiy thinned G topped E crown raised C pollarded =crown reduced C flush cuts `cabled/braced none E.multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: 0 specimen C heritage/historic E wildlife ❑unusual ❑street tree E screen C shade C indigenous C protected by goy.ages; TREE HEALTH Foliage color. C normal C chiorotic C necrotic Epicormics?C9 N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: C normal C sparse Leaf size: C normal C small ❑stakes G wire/ties C signs C cables Annual shoot growth: C excellent ,average C poor Twig Disback? Q N C curb/pavement ❑guards Voundwood development _excellent C average gzpcor C none C other Vigor class: C excellent C average fair C poor Major pests/diseases SiTE CONDITIONS Site Character. =residence Commercial ❑industrial C park C open space =natural C woodland'fcrest Landscape type: C parkway C raised bed C container ❑mound ,'lawn shrub border C wind break Irrigation: X none C adequate C inadequate C excessive C trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? N C con truction C soil disturbance G grade change ❑line clearing ite clearing %dripline paved: 0°0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y %dripline w/till soil: 0°0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75°0 75-100% Soil problems: C drainage C shallow C compacted C droughty 'C saline C alkaline E acidic C small volume C disease center ❑history of fail clay C expansive slope ° aspect Obstructions: C lights C�signage C line-of-sight C view C overhead lines C underground utilities =traffic %adjacent veg. Exposure to wind: Xrsingle tree C 1below canopy ❑above canopy C recently exposed C windward.canopy edge C area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: ct✓ Occurrence of snow/ice storms iC never C seldom egularfy TARGET Use Under Tree: C building C parking ❑traffic ,pedestrian C recreation Zflandscape C hardscape ❑small features C utility lines :an target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: occasional use C intermittent use C frequent use C constant use The International Society of Arboricurture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFWTS Suspect roof rot Y SlustrueenAteskibraciad preseet Y N ID: Exposed root:; 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Undenulust 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low • ,00t pruned: distance from trunk Root area afiedet % Buttress rouudet Y N Whet Restricted root area: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Poisrrtlal for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate ❑low LEAN: deg from vertical 0 natural 0 unnatural 0 seff-corrected Sail heaving; Y N Decay in plane of Ian: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cradling: Y N Compounding taetors . Lean severity 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN i TRUNK SCAFFOLDS RANCHES I Poor Goer I Bow. sweep Codominants"forks 5 Muttroie attachments I N1 I y, Included bark I S • Excessive end weight Crackssp►its rr7 I 5 M I L Hangers I L Girdlina Wounds/seam S i • Decay • Cavrtv Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleeding/sap flow Loose/cracked bark kv1 J41 Nesting hole/bee hive I Deadwood/stubs I s • I Borers/termites/ants M I Cankers/galls/burls Previous failure I1� h'1 • HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: icte i,'/(fUJ u Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2 Er18"(15-45 cm): Failure Potential +Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18.30"(45-75 cm);4-AD"(75 cm) 7 + Z + = Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part 0 reduce end weight crown clean 0 thin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce [ restrucure 0 shape Cable/Brace: _ j i)1?-ti4 S �'.r 0 0 • Inspect further. ❑root crown O decay ❑aerial ❑monitr Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees. 0 none evaluate Notification: C owner 0 manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS t oceJ ci f lZ h/a..f dam, gI1.4y 46" 3 (kT ' /10 1 V,i4 EitAcf)/-4.% . 6/hi/64 �j'Ui✓el a /0 '� f74s'r,S- /0 /A/oeed gore 5 !.// .�e INI ei o�. 77i tic✓,ASfv(-� (hoed/Le �Jd C�� ►s ClEitA A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Editor Site/Address: 1, HAZARD RATING: Map/Location: 501r77/ ea A'' 197,16rar 6ii,rrt..1 ?' e ,L}Co S 2- + Z + Failure + Sae + Target Owner public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: f//207f Inspepector. '• iiteKe�/ '1-/ri _r immediate action needed Date of last inspection: C//l.)r rq..I.) Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree t: I C'& Species: F. DBH: I! t of trunks: Height 4"O 1 Spread: 71— `� S /S E ; , Form: P. A¢generally symmetric minor asymmetry P major asymmetry ❑stump sprout a stag-neaoed Crown class: ❑ dominant A.'co-dominant 0 intermediate ❑suppressed Live crown ratio: 9,7 % Age class: ❑young %sem-mature ❑mature C over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned 0 excessively thinned 0 topped 0 crown raised ❑pollarded ❑crown reduced 0 flush cuts 0 cabled/bracec none ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: C specimen 0 heritage/historic C wildlife 0 unusual 0 street tree 0 screen 0 shade 0 indigenous ❑protected by goy.age TREE HEALTH Foliage color. ❑normal ❑chlarotic C necrotic Epicormics? V N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: C normal ❑sparse Leaf size: ❑normal ❑small ❑stakes ❑wire tJes C signs 0 cables Annual shoot growth: C excellent average ❑poor Twig Dieback? © N ❑curb/pavement p guards Woundwood development C excellent eaverage ❑poor ❑none other �� 0 wh e,—) Vigor class: J excellent average ❑fair ❑poor Major pests/diseases: __Igitte S /j,r,,e 4:4 1-1 SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ❑residence Kommercial ❑industrial ❑park ❑open space ❑natural ❑woodland\forest Landscape type: ❑parkway a raised bed ❑container ❑mound ❑lawn Ashrub border ❑ wind break Irrigation: ,inone ❑adequate ❑inadequate ❑excessive ❑trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y C construction 0 soil disturbance ❑grade change ❑line clearing ❑site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50°0 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0°/0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: J drainage 0 shallow C compacted 0 droughty C saline ❑alkaline ❑acidic ❑small volume ❑disease center ❑history()flail ❑clay C expansive ❑slope ° aspect Obstructions: ❑lights I signage C line-of-sight ❑view ❑overhead lines ❑underground utilities 0 traffic Riadjacent veg. 0 Exposure to wind: C single tree 0 below canopy ❑above canopy ❑recently exposed ,' )windward.canopy edge CI area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: SO Occurrence of snow/ice storms ❑never C seldom A regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: ❑building ❑parking ❑traffic 0 pedestrian C recreation Xlandscape ❑hardscape 0 small features 0 utility lines Can target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupanc : 1,Loccasional use 0 intermittent use 0 frequent use 0 constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. 0 40 3 TREE DEFECTS ROOT DOTS Suswd root rot Y N mushrocemisookindat prrssest Y N 10: Exposed nwtx 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low tledermieet 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low 410 .opt pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Bennis wouodet Y N Wbe¢ Restricted root am: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 law Potential for root tallare: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low LEAN: deg.from vertical r,kiatural 0 unnatural 0 self-corrected Soil Marini Y Decay in plane of lean: Y Roots broken Y N Soll aaddaq: Y N ost Compounding factors: 1 & /4 r? / lQ T i- 5,21,0 c/p _ q/0.•✓S Lean severalty: 0 severe 0 moderate RI' w CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES ?nor doer Bow. sweeo i j rV Codominants/forks Multiple attachments L. - ( !y1 Included bark I f Excessive end weight Cracks/splits / L i L— I L.—Hangers i L • Girdling I Wounds/seam Decay M Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket • I Bieedina/sao flow I• L,Loose/cracked bark L 1— Nesting hole/bee hive I I Deadwood/stubs i I Wl L- • Borers/termites/ants I I • Cankers/aalls/burls I I Previous failure I I INl HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: cll./raw t) Zr/-Px Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential +Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18-30"(45-75 cm);4-,30"(75 cm) 2 ! Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; + Z + t = 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defectivefer part 0 reduce end weight 0 crown clean 4 thin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: I r i S>"HJ (',2 LP . Inspect further. 0 root crown 0 decay 0 aerial Al rnonit Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other: Effect on adjacent trees: 0 none ,evaluate Notification: 0 owner C manager ❑governing agency Date: COMMENTS re I0 ea c ZS f yu lm ? /3 o ?V,i Fire.r r cej ci�S Leg @ Zs/- w/ 6ark i,JC&1 ,dJ , Se, e qtQelf r soette a, a d coact. poi? cat.),J c--71AA--Q 40 9 s. A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas �� TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition • Site/Address: ;Leek_ ,fj n0 HAZARD RATING: Map/Location: $c err A" i.cit z'de?-sr r-LK o S 3 + ( + i = Failure + S¢e + Target Owner public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: 1/I2U�9f Inspector 4/c1. 61/`f -Z_ cr rug, Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: 1,1'.- tiq L.41 J Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree # /C7 Species: FLU OBH: _ i of trunks: Height -2 ' I Spread: /_e r fI , Form: minor asymmetry _major asymmetry C stump sprout ,„erg-heaoec Crown class: dominant E.ce-dominant 0 intermediate C suppressed Live crown ratio: % Age class: C young C semi-mature a<mature C over-mature/senescent Pruning history: C crown cleaned excessively thinned C,topped E crown raised ❑pollarded C crown reduced C flush cuts C cabled/braced Xnone C multiple pruning events Approx. dates: Special Value: E specimen C heritage./historic C wildlife C unusual C street tree C screen C shade C indigenous C protected by goy-ager TREE HEALTH Foliage color. C normal C chiorotic 0 necrotic Epicormics? V N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: C normal C sparse Leaf size: E normal C small stakes `!wire/ties C signs S cables Annual shoot growth: _excellent average C poor Twig Dieback? N CI curb/pavement C guards Woundwood development: excellent / average =pcor 0 none CXother Ue<Aseviiie /,, J 10-- Vigor class: C excellent average C fair =poor Major pests/diseases: Ira 1+�• 11'4dr r_0' S/4,7,Q / 1J SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. C residence ommerciai E industrial park C open space C natural C woodland'Jorest Landscape type: C parkway E raised bed C container _mound C lawn shrub border C wind break Irrigation: none C.adequate C inadequate C excessive Ell trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y construction C soil disturbance C grade change J line clearing C site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25.50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: drainage C shallow 0 compacted 0 droughty E saline C,alkaline C acidic C small volume C disease center ❑history offal' clay C expansive C slope aspect: 0bstructions: Ei lights C signage ❑line-of-sight C view =overhead lines C underground utilities C traffic adjacent veg. C Exposure to wind: 0 single tree C below canopy ❑above canopy C recently exposed windward.canopy edge area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: CIA) Occurrence of snow/ice storms C never ❑seldom 'egulary TARGET Use Under Tree: C building a parking EJ traffic C pedestnan E recreation ,andscape ❑hardscape C small features C utility lines Can target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: ,i _eccasional use `intermittent use C frequent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. n TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECT Suspect root rot Y N print Y N I0: Exposed roots: ❑severe O moderate 0 low Undertnhtett 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low W ,at pruned: distance from trunk Root arse affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe 0 moder ate 0 low Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Lam: deg.from vertical 0 natural 0 unnatural 0 self-corrected Solt bearing: Y N Decay in plane of Ivan: Y N Root:broken Y N Soli oaddng: Y N Compounding tech= • Lean sever 0 severe 0 moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate. I=low) i DEFECT ROOT CROWN I TRUNK �ocr goer SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Sow. sweep Codomrnants/forks Mumole attachments I S included bark I S �� S I Excessive end weight gagoiF , tams Cracks/solits I I _ M I r1.1 Hangers I ! Girdling Wounds/seam I S S Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleed ino/sao flow Loose/cracked bark (, L ! /+1 L. ,Vesting hole/bee hive I I Deadwood/stubs I I 5 -c I Borers/termites/ants I Cankers/galls/burls I Previous failure S S HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: bare i„Jr US t-) . Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18-30"(45-75 cm);4->3O'(75 cm) + f + I Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part 0 reduce end weight {crown clean ,tiin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce r'restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: o tX . Inspect further. 0 root crown 0 decay O aerial „IiIi'monitoi Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: 0 none evaluate Notification: 0 owner 0 manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS /�-lt_2 to c c r yo &41 I ! 7O f rv,s v-26 A4 *Cca C' �'vr� tip -f v c /w?- A� szedo //( G d y , se, ,' v,✓6oI9,Jt-�� (-'te w ) Sfo(M do,n uo 1 At2 C( ,J s*Je , /ivy l7 bolds e za ized- S0,_t 0 eO‘rav . - ` 11 -.'"°'_' A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition SrteJAddress: rtneE' /?L /,.,Z44e0 HAZARD RATING: laojjtocation: 50//771 cr- 4" f4t -fir l 7i,yt.✓ P'ace.re c7xecr LKO S l + Z ) = • Owner. public _ Failure + S¢e + et _ Hazard privatePotential of part RatingRating Date: )l/Zy/Qf Inspector. P'- /-+/CKuE� j,�i¢Sf f other �iiCB, Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: C-)N 1./C,-,;„;' Needs further inspection Dead tree CHARACTERISTIC? Tree t: Species: EZ/1'1 38H: >• of tunics: 1 Height . /. - , Spread: %,;; 1 - - Form: C generally symmetric Pg minor asymmetry C major asymmetry C zrumo sprcin C stag-neaeec Crown class: E dominant X.co-dominant 0 intermediate C suppressed Live crown ratio: 9.1— Age class: C young y` semi-mature 0 mature :=over-mature%senescent Pruning history: C crown cleaned C excessively thinned E.topped C crown raised C pollarded 0 crown reduced C flush cuts C cabled/braced ,X none E multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: C specimen iC heritageihistoric C wildlife C unusual C street tree C screen ❑shade --=J indigenous C protected by gov.agent TREE HEALTH Foliage color. C normal !chloratic 0.necrotic Epicormics? 65 N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: C normal C sparse Leaf size: C norrr,ai 0 small Ci stakes C wireties C signs C cables Annual shoot growth: C excellent Tvp,ge C poor Twig Dieback? (D N C curbipave ent C ,// guards Voundwood development: C excellent ctaverage 0 poor C none other uec_ h,rJ 0-- o Vigor class: C,excellent K average C fair C poor Major pests/diseases: :i` ! . f F_e�aer _S //:, f:gr/Y SiTE CONDITIONS Site Character. C residence .commercial ❑industnal C park C open space C natural C woodlancNorest Landscape type: 'C parkway C raised bed 73 container C mound C lawn , 'shrub border 0 wind break Irrigation: K nonne ❑ade uate C inadequate C excessive C trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? Y 0 construction C soil disturbance C grade change ❑line clearing C site clearing %dripline paved: t 10-25% 25-50% 50-75'/0 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline WI fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: C drainage C shallow C compacted C droughty C saline C alkaline ❑acidic C small volume C disease center C history of•fail J clay C expansive C slope ° aspect Obstructions: C lights C signage C line-of-sight C view C overhead lines C underground utilities C traffic ,adjacent veg. C Exposure to wind: 0 single tree C below canopy ❑above canopy 0C recenty exposed Xwindward, canopy edge C area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: st,v Occurrence of snowiice storms 0 never C seldom Regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: ❑building C parking C traffic 'pedestrian C recreation , landscape ❑hardscape C small features C utility lines 'an target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: X occasional use C intermittent use C frequent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. U`4J. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECM Suspect refit rat Y N likaircomAtanOrackief pruest Y N ID: Exposed root= 0 severe 0 moderate K.knv Uedermined: ❑severe 0 moderate P9 low 0 tact pruned: distance from trunk Root area afectod: X Buttress w 0uadet Y N Wter Restriesad root area: 0 severe 0 moderate ❑low Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate A low LEAN: S deg.from vertical 71.13atural 0 unnatural 0 self-corrected Sall bearing: Y N Decay is plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soll cracking: Y N Compounding factor:: itt.e cr A oi // Ary prAr y EC 11 Lean severttr: 0 severe 0 moderate ,Clow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK "oar`aver • SCAFFOLDSBRAtICHES Bow. sweep I ' I r_ - CodominanLvforks i Multiple attachments Included bark lti1 Excessive end weight t . Cracks/splits WI Hanoers Girdling L- Wounds/seam SA Decay I ' Cavity j Conks/mushrooms/bracket l Bleeding/sap flow L L.Loose/cracked bark L. I. L 0 Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs I I I Barersrtermites/ants I ''iA I L Cankers/aalls/buris Previous failure I i L- HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: 55rvg.M Alk#44terc / $ ",N ! ijilafjejt Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm):2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard R ting 3 18-30"(45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) + 2_ + ` _ Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part 0 reduce end weight gown clean Xthin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: . Inspect further. ❑root crown 0 decay 0 aerial %monit Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: 0 none valuate Notification: 0 owner 0 manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS --fit- /OCwiri 2,i-p- ,, f„, g./-6), e ,:...: ..�� ,ram. 0egnr,vs Gig/1 invd.4..10p J f resi d4 H ode r,./ Cita✓,►1 . Al C.rd)-i j fivv , so" Degc act / 4oc),: 5 3 A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas t-ki_0; TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition StteiAddress: giOf /l` (rr2 4" HAZARD RATING: AaLL'Location: Se,rrz/ Dr= k /1 Art 2�I �*t�J Z'�/.��cT�a''�'L < S ' + 2- + > _ S Failure + Sae + Target = Hazar Owner. public pn ate unionown other Potential of part RatingRatng Date: . Zy 95' Inspector. %" '. g/Ckel/ , S71-rNf 1�G fti,CB, Immediate action needed Date of Iasi inspection: ()Aui k1►1 ra,J 47 Needs further inspection TREE CHARACTERIST1c Dead tree Tree #: I C9 Species: C/ii JSH: 1 Y of trunia: Height 7b iw pread: ,1 v/Iv 5/6 Z %'j.. e vN ftegd J `orm: C ;enerally symrretnc Zmincr asymmetry C major asymmetry C stump sprout C stag-leaded C:own class: C dominant , 'co-dominant C rtermediate C;suppressed Live crown ratio: 9.5- % Age class C young i semi-mature L,mature r over-matureisenescent Pruning history: C crown cleaned C excessively thinned ❑topped Acrr'oyy__rrn rail d n (larded crown reduced C flush cuts cabled/tipced Ci none C multiple pruning events Aoprox_dates: l��f,G�� anise �'" Jjyt4//r �j�r41r t•,�,I Iry G Special Value: C specimen 0 heritage/historic ❑wildlife E unusual street tree C screen C shade C indigenous C protected by gov.agent TREE HEALTH Foliage color. C;normal C chlorotic 7 necrotic Epicormics? 67 N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: C normal C sparse Leaf size: C normal C small C stakes C wire/ties C signs 7 cables Annual shoot growth: C excellent average C poor Twig Diebactc? CP N C curb/pavement C guares Voundwood development 7 excellent average C pccr C none ,iother {/IcA-x.)-1'4,, 4D-- y2 Vigor class: C excellent average C C fair poor Major pests/diseases: li 'r S'/r 'Al 'r SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. C residence Acorn mercial : industrial C park E open space C natural C woodlannorest Landscape type: ,'parkway C raised bed C container C mound C lawn shrub border 7 wind break Irrigation: one C adequate ❑inadequate C excessive C trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? Y C) C construction C soil disturbance ❑grade change C line clearing C site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10 25°r�25 50°� D 75% 75-100% Pavement lined? Y dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: Zdrainage C shallow $rompacted 7 droughty C saline C alkaline ;C'acidic C small volume C disease center C history of•fail C clay C expansive C slope ° aspect Obstructions: C lights C signage C line-of-sight C view C overhead lines C underground utilities,traffic %adjacent veg. C Exposure to wind: C single tree C below canopy C above canopy C recently exposed , windward.canopy edge C area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: _Cr),/ Occurrence of snow/ice storms C never C seldom eegularty TARGET Use Under Tree: C'buildienarking 1paffic 4edestran C recreation C landscape C handscape C small features C utility lines Can target be moved? Y Can use be restricted? Y(I) • Occupancy' C occasional use 7 intermittent use gfrequerrt use ❑constant use The International Society of Arooncutture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. ,- lJ -f14 TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: StrsMect rod rot Y N filinehroomiconikibracket present Y N ID: Exposed rootz O severe O moderate 0 low Uedermtoe t O severe O moderate O low shot pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress vonede& Y N When Restricted root area: 0 severe O moderate flow Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate low Lam:S deg.from vertical natural 0 unnatural 0 self-corrected Soil heaving: Y Decay in plane of least Y N Roots broken Y N Sell craddng: Y N Compounding factors: ittt Ail Z.e1c.P JJj n/ . s Lean severity O severe 0 moderate ,Vow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT • ROOT CROWN I TRUNK I SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES I oer Bow, sweep I Codominantsrforks t I I 1^-1 Mumcle attachments Included bark I I I Y'1 Excessive end weight L.- Cracks/splits WI M r►i Hangers Girdling • Wounds/seam � L L Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket ! j Bleeding/sap flow f L • Loose/cracked bark • w) L Nesting hole/bee hrve • Deadwood/stubs 11') L • Borers/termites/ants Cankers/calls/burls I Previous failure HAZARD RATINr Tree part most likely to fail. 5 7' ,# ��2�4�1U-f, Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-sever Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part: 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18-30"(45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; + 2 + 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: 0 remove defective part CI reduce end weight O•srown clean thin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce restructure O shape Cable/Brace: TO .rtMjt etVp.dr,/r "Tice o A . Inspect further. ❑root crown ❑decay ❑aerial Xinoni Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: =none Aevaluate Notification: 'O owner �.manager governing agency Date: • COMMENTS / 7--ALL /0 c - /Sjed is M cl J 7A elterT/tzsA1 • dee c(r') f .Jq r"-e s2 /Oer , , 15 rS? ';\.;t. A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition shelAddress: ,t2Or"..1- /3L 4.2113-,6 , HAZARD RATING: • tan'Location: SQL ar i4 /91Aor ?442ece? -1-[t r,C ',LK4 S 1 + Z + = / Failure + Size + Target Hazard Owner public private unknown other Potential of part Fang Ong Date: JIt/l y/95' Inspector. / .7. ll/e•kel/l/ J ft7¢z/f Immediate aeon needed Date of last inspection: (JAW) Needs further inspection TREE CHARACTERISTICS Dead tree Tree t: I•1 C Species -1 fr1 it OSH: ( 1 of trunks: I Height r: Spread: )C l il.3Jt 2 '1.;0441" Form: C generally symmetric 'minor asymmetry C rnaior asymmetry C stump sprout C stag-healed Crown lass: C dominant Xco-dominant =intermediate E.suppressed Live crown ratio: I S % Age class: C young semi-mature E mature E over-matureisenescent Pruning history: C crown cleaned 0 excessively thinned E topped , crown raised E.pollarded C crown reduced C flush cuts C cabled.loraced ❑none C multiple pruning events Approx.dates: \)ef rj( Cda C a '___ ,C,i4 i'N, Special Value: E specimen ,C herirgethistoric E wildlife C unusual Kstreet tree ❑screen ❑shade E indigenous C protected by goy.agenc TREE HEALTH Foliage color. C normal Li chlorotic E necrotic Epico►mics? S N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: C normal E sparse Leaf size: C normal C small E stakes C wireities C signs C cables Annual shoot growth: C excellent ,a average E poor Twig Dieback?S N C curbipavement E guards loundwood development: `excellent Overage ❑poor E none other Vigor class: E excellent 4everage E fair E poor Major pests/diseases: S ., .r.P 1 //7 SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. C residence Xcommercial ❑industrial C park E open space C natural C woodland sorest Landscape type: ,parkway ❑raised bed E container E mound C lawn JF shrub border C wind break Irrigation: ,K none ❑adequate C inadequate ❑excessive ❑trunk wettied Recent site disturbance? Y .) C construction 0 soil disturbance C grace change `line clearing �C site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25" -50,e 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Sail problems: ❑drainage L C shallow C!compacted C droughty C;saline C alkaline C acidic C small volume C disease center C history of•fail L_clay 0 expansive C slope aspect 0bstructions: C lights C signage C line-of-sight C view C overhead lines C underground utilities E traffic 'adjacent veg. C Exposure to wind: E single tree C below canopy C above canopy C recently exposed Awindward.canopy edge C area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Si-.) Occurrence of snowiice storms ❑never C seldom ,regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: ❑building (parking %traffic , 'pedestrian C recreation C landscape C hardscape E.small features ❑utility lines :an target be moved? Y C"J Can use be restricted? Y N . Occupancy: C occasional use ❑intermittent use ,lfrequent use C constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. -MEE DEFECTS ROUT DEFFDT Suspect root rot Y N NimesaraorniconkArackel presort Y N ID: Exposed roots C severe ❑moderate )i.low Uederm{oet ❑severe 0 moderate 0 low 40 soat pruned: diVance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N Whew . Restricted root area: C severe ❑moderate G low Po fel for rod failure: G severe C moderate g low LEAN: S deg.from vertical natural C unnatural G self-comes t Sall heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Ro broken Y N Soil casting: Y N Compounding fact= o ,Ar',L a� n�1.el- 5 jiN 6-246?l Lean severity: Li severe G moderate ow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity s=severe,m=moderate. 1=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK _-J- SCAFFOLDS 3RANCHES =.cr zoer f 2cw. sweep Codominantsiforks_ t- L Mumole attachment — • L I (.._- included bark L I t— E cessive end weight I i Cracks/splits I i i1Vi vN Hangers I r . Girdling Wounds/seam l L L. Decay Cavity _ . Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleeding/sap flow C_ L.-- . Loose/cracked bark I ioNestino hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs r,1 I i'1 Borersiermites`ams Cankers/galls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: C r'y I jitm f(ta6 c-c /ityn., d4 Al S k Failure potential: 1 -low;2•medium;3-high;4 -severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 <fi"(15 cm);2 6 18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential +Size of Para+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18 30"(45 75 cm);4 >3Q (75 cm) 1 + 3 _ / Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; (p 3 -frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: C remove defective part G:reduce end weight gown clean Xthin G raise canopy C crown reduce structure ❑shape Cabie,Brace: Inspect further. C root crown !—decay C aerial -mcni` Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: LT none valuate Notification: C owner C manager governing agency Date: COMMENTS rAL,_ )„,k-4 20 /Q,i- e4,71- / zdAv-E. -= /5z/(0-- ivv„, F4)-urt—Q2A- 1 • ry i- f A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edttlol Site/Address: .1LOGe._ 00, HAZARD RATING: Mapitocation: SOLfrni rir~ 4" 4UgrU,c i,ree") ?' r� r LKo S + + 3 Failure + SO:e + Target = taaard Owner public private unknown other Potential of part RatingRating n9 Date: ///2 4p Inspector. /'. fi,/CKeY/,11k I.f Ake Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: U1) eiJA) Needs further inspection TREE CHARACTERISTIC Dead tree Tree#: j I I Species: E-L.w1 OBH: #of trunks: — i{eigftt 7 C Spread: !DNgyp r1 /,s'e/zx!'✓f ! Ju allst v /o d l Form: _ generalry sym rich 6i)minor asymmetry major asymmetry E stump sprout C stag-headed Crown class: ^ dominant g co-dominant `intermediate -:-i suppressed Live crown ratio: 9s- % Age class: ❑young Ksemi-mature u mature C,over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned ❑excessively thinned ❑topped ❑crown raised C pollarded ❑crown reduced ❑flush cuts ❑cabled/brace( none ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: - Special Value: O specimen E heritage/historic ❑wildlife ❑unusual %street tree ❑screen G shade E indigenous ❑protected by gov.age TREE HEALTH Foliage color. ❑normal G chlorotic ❑necrotic Epicormics? N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: J normal ❑sparse Leaf size: ❑normal 0 small 0 stakes 0 wire/ties 0 signs 0 cables Annual shoot growth: `excellent „verage 0 poor Twig Dieback? N O curb/pavementr O guards/ • Woundwood development: excellent leverage ❑poor O none other I JP� h' Vigor class: 0 excellent y' average ❑fair C poor Major pests/diseases: S/r in4.0 I )• SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ,&commercial Ci industrial 0 park O open space ❑natural 0 woodland\forest Landscape type: parkway G raised bed C container O mound ❑lawn (shrub border O wind break Irrigation: ,none G adequate 0 inadequate ❑excessive 0 trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? Y (1 C construction E.soil disturbance O grade change 0 line clearing O she clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline refill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75°4 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ❑drainage C shallow C compacted ❑droughty 0 saline ❑alkaline ❑acidic ❑small volume O disease center 0 history oftail ❑clay 0 expansive 0 slope ° aspect Obstructions: ❑lights 0 signage O line-of-sight ❑view ❑overhead lines ❑underground utilities 0 traffic Cit,idjacent veg. CI Exposure to wind: ❑single tree C below canopy ❑above canopy O recently exposed ]windward,canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: S1,4/ Occurrence of snow/ice storms 0 never ❑seldom !$regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: 0 buildi rking ffic �pedestnElan ❑recreation 0 landscape 0 hardscape small features ❑utility lines :.an target be moved? Y t! Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: 0 occasional use ❑intermittent use ,i§ffrequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DrEFECTM- Suspect root rot Y N littssiwoomIcookilsracket presort Y N ID Exposed root ❑severe ❑moderate ;flow Underrnlned: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low • out pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress rounded: Y N Whom Restricted root area: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Potential for root failure: 0 severe ❑moderate Al low LEAN: deg.from vertical 0 natural 0 unnatural 0 serf-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane at lean Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracidng: Y N Compounding factor:: . Lean severity: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low CROWN DEFECTS Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES =oor 2per • Bow. sweep Codominantsiforks I i S ,ti Multiple attachments I / Included bark S I Excessive end weioht Cracks/splits c I Yti1 1_ Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam L Decay I Cavity I I Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleeding/sap flow Loose/cracked bark Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs 141 S i S Borers/termites/ants ICankers/galls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to tail: irce 114/c1J 1J w Caw yLJ Failure potential: 1 -low:2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2 6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18 30"(45-75 cm);4->30'(75 cm) J = Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑removffdefective part 0 reduce end weight crown clean Athin 0 raise canopy ,crown reduce 0 restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: reri) ( i&!1 . Inspect further. 0 root crown 0 decay 0 aerial +Pty monit: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: 0 none evaluate Notification: E owner ❑manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS 1u-k cges/ 12 -y ,l /8DFart, ,E s t.e-4-, ESP K Oi 1"tJ,r, i 1 iv /../ 94 f Z _ �r 0Y19 A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TR EE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: 8the.P /g` /..,PA461, HAZARD RATING: dap/Location: SOc/Tt/ Aa filvevac be74.,,+r..' 7'4#Te c7-x rLko SL + I = + San + Target = Hazard Owner public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: 11/205' Inspector. f . #/e er/J .sr*rs ffiiC ' Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: UAJ cl,l*.) Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS • Tree #: I 1 Species: -ELM • DBH: l # of trunks: Height 7 U Spread: JO r A)/S/E r L„' =arm: lenerlly symmetric 4iminor asymmetry =maiar asymmetry 0 stump sprcut =,ag-'eaaeo Crown class: = dominant , co-dominant ❑,intermediate ❑.!suppressed Live crown ratio: It-1 % Age class: E.young i aemi-mature ❑mature ❑over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned 0 excessively thinned Cl topped wn raised pollarded 0 crown reduced 0 flush cuts 0 cabled/braced rE none 0 multiple pruning events Approx.dates: dclApe S'miliP A✓AtiA..1 r.Ji-S Special Value: ❑specimen ❑heritage/historic 0 wildlife 0 unusual $street tree 0 screen ❑shade 0 indigenous ❑protected by gov.agenc TREE HEALTH Foliage color. 0 normal ❑chlorotic C necrotic Epicormics? Q N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: normal G sparse Leaf size: 0 normal 0 small L stakes ❑wire/ties 0 signs 0 cables Annual shoot growth: p excellent $average ❑poor Twig Dleback? N ❑curb/pavement a guards Noundwood development: ❑excellent :overage ❑pocr 0 none ,X ther ()Le k c Vigor class: a excellent i'average 0 fair E poor Major pests/diseases: S/r..tom ,f ft Y SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ❑residence %commercial G industrial 0 park 0 open space 0 natural 0 woodlandltorest Landscape type: ,parkway 0 raised bed 0 container C mound 0 lawn 381 shrub border 0 wind break Irrigation: none ❑adequate 0 inadequate 0 excessive 0 trunk wettied Recent site disturbance? Y G construction C soil disturbance 0 grade change 0 line clearing ❑site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline WI fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25°0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ❑drainage 0 shallow 0 compacted 0 droughty ❑saline 0 alkaline 0 acidic ❑small volume ❑disease center 0 history of fail 0 clay 0 expansive slope I Q ° aspect Se Obstructions: 0 lights ❑signage ❑line-of-sight G view 0 overhead lines 0 underground utilities E traffic gidjacent veg. 0 Exposure to wind: ❑single tree C below canopy G above canopy G recently exposed P'CGnndward,canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: <rn) Occurrence of snowlce storms 0 never 0 seldom jZ regularty TARGET • Use Under Tree: ❑building gparking XIraffic pedestrian 0 recreation 0 landscape 0 hardscape 0 small features 0 utility lines �n target be moved? Y d Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: 0 occasional use ❑intermittent use X frequent use 0 constant use The International Society of Arboricutture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. rT 0 TREE DEFECTS ROOT DOTS. Suspect root rot Y N bleshr000niconkibreeket prsseat Y N ID: Exposed rootr 0 severe 0 moderate V"low Uadenniost 0 severe 0 moderate Cl low 41111 Jot pry: distance from trunk Root area afledet % Barns roundet Y N Wbsn: Restricted root area: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate jai tow LEAN: S deg.from vertical 4 natural 0 unnatural 0 self-corrected Soil heartier Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil ctaddng: Y N Compounding factors: 804J1- 4/ /a/CP S,ti� � f l+J Lean sty: 0 severe 0 moderate , tiw - CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defect and rate their severity(s=severe.m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor taper Bow, sweeo Codominants/forks Muttiole attachments ! L I ►M Included bark Excessive end weight Cracks/splits � L Hanaers Girdlino Wounds/seam iM L Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket • Bleedinaisao flow ( l L L • Loose,cracked bark vA M Nesting hole/bee hive I Deaawoodistubs i ! - L B o re rs/te rm ites/a nts ICankers/mils/burls Previous failure I L HAZARD RAT1Nf Tree part most likely to fail: (c,19,..; J kil A..e Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2 6-18"(15-45 cm): Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18 30"(45-75 cm};4->3Q (75 cm) + + 3 _ Target rating. 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part 0 reduce end weight gown clean ,thin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce `Festructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: . Inspect further. 0 root crown 0 decay 0 aerial ,Pmonitc Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other: Effect on adjacent trees: 0 none Revaluate Notification: 0 owner 0 manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS • I o cvei ed /.T no' .3£`l mid / 49D Fx14,1 �� s 14.,t rt4 /0 A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas 41--ed: TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edttlon Site/Address: KZO L /3` 42¢,yA, HAZARD RATING: Aao/Loration: So,rri err :9" hiverar lei-kw./ 7424 r' xeca;Lk0 S ( + + _ = Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner: public private ,/ unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: //f 205" Inspector. itttldieey/ i¢-LsT'--/. r _iCB, Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: UA) /A)0c..4/&} Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS . Tree t: 113 Species: ELM n ) r of trunks: 1 Height 7 Spread: /O 1LS l/!.� / /7 e- Form: _ ;ereralty svmmetrc $rminer asvmmetrr ma or"symmetry _sturro sorcut _stag-needed Crown class: = dominant ?-co-dominant ❑Intermediate r suppressed Live crown ratio: 91" % Age class: ❑young gsemi-mature ❑mature ❑over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned ❑excessively thinned ❑topped ❑crown raised ❑pollarded ❑crown reduced 0 flush cuts ❑cabled/braced ,none ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: E specimen ❑heritagefiistonc ❑wildlife ❑unusual Arstreet tree ❑screen G shade ❑indigenous ❑protected by goy.ageni TREE HEALTH Foliage color. E normal ❑chlorotic E necrotic Epicormies? 1' N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: 0 normal ❑sparse Leaf size: ❑normal ❑small ❑stakes ❑wire/ties ❑signs ❑cables Annual shoot growth: ❑excellent average E poor Twig Dieback? N ❑curb/pavement ❑guards Woundwood development: ❑excellent average ❑poor 0 none otfier 1if r_,4 c.aJ Vigor class: ❑excellent ,'average ❑fair ❑poor Major pests/diseases: xi)„u .r I SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ❑residence ,commercial 0 industrial ❑park ❑open space ❑natural 0 woodland\forest Landscape type: firoarkway ❑raised bed ❑container ❑mound 0 lawn ,14 shrub border 0 wind break Irrigation: -cone ❑adequate ❑inadequate 0 excessive 0 trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y 0 construction ❑soil disturbance ❑grade change 0 line clearing 0 site clearing ▪ dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N • dripllne ve fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% • dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ❑drainage ❑shallow 0 compacted ❑droughty 0 saline 0 alkaline 0 acidic ❑small volume ❑disease center 0 history of-fail ❑clay 0 expansive 0 slope ° aspect Obstructions: 0 lights ❑signage 0 line-of-sight 0 view ❑overhead lines ❑underground utilities 0 traffic ❑adjacent veg. 0 Exposure to wind: ❑single tree C below canopy ❑above canopy ❑recently exposed ,windward,canopy edge 0 area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: (IA] Occurrence of snowrice storms 0 never 0 seldom 1 regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: 0 building 0 pricing 0 traffic 'pedestrian 0 recreation f landscape 0 hardscape 0 small features ❑utility lines Can target be moved? Y R' Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy occasional use Cl intermittent use 0 frequent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. Li r.. �. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DECTS: Suspect root rot Y N Ildoshroonikoolubreeket present Y N ID: Exposed matt ❑severe ❑moderate 0 low Uradermioet El severe O moderate ❑low 4r) float pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When Restricted root area: ❑severe 0 moderate ❑low Poteottel for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate ❑low LEAN: deg.from vertical Ziriatural ❑unnatural ❑self-corrected Soil heaving: Y Decay in plans of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding tutors: FiQ 13.41.9/ I cry 5 �G ( Lean severity: ❑severe ❑moderate g(ow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s..severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer I Bow, sweep I 1 (•,_ • Codominantsrforks I S MuttiDle attachments I Included bark 5 Excessive end weight Cracks/solits i I� M Hangers • Girdling Wounds/seam L - L L Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleedina/sap flow /_ f • _ _ tio Loose/cracked bark Nesting hole/bee hive I Deadwood/stubs L L Borers/termites/ants Cankers/galls/burls I Previous failure L_ • HAZARD RATINr • Tree part most likely to fail: bv)C / JC(.J_?a. Failure potential: 1 -low;2•medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part: 1 -<6"(15 cm);2 6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18-30"(45-75 cm);4->311"(75 cm) r _ Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use;+ I + .3 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: Al remove defective part 0 reduce end weight Xcrown clean 7kthin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce jlrestructure 0 shape r� Cable/Brace: K1 bv-q T .5.km+•r t,J/ ide I Jf ro„J Inspect further. ❑root crown G decay 0 aerial .g)Montt Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: ❑none .valuate Notification: p owner ❑manager a governing agency Date: COMMENTS � - f ocAkwe 2i-, -ea} / ! ;'0 A)PAy dArlo p)ci'ui ' ., <7" r .eon it-Mr ( /,) o? A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas l ? = TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Editio n Site.Address: :20Ge /J/ G 11" HAZARD RATING: ,1a location: 5-0,frril arc lyelt.frer,i 7.4446.Pe-c`,x 'LIC0S + ( + = • Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: 1/f 1 y/q51 Inspector. it the KEY/ .S1� If "us. Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: 1.1n(} NA) /11 Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree t: I I LI Species: EZ-I DBH: �� •oftrunrrx �U f, Height !i✓ Spread: .701 /0 $ 1 10 E /2 o -orrr.: — ;ererally syrmme,r c .:Hiner asvrnmetr, =major 3symmetr? =sr rr.o sprout G stag-headed Crown class: dominanta co-dominant ❑intermediate G suppressed Live crown ratio: -/1- % Age class. 0 young ,semi-mature ❑mature ❑over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned E excessively thinned ❑topped, crown raised ❑pollarded ❑crown reduced ❑flush cuts ❑cabled/braced O none ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: 171/4-ed 4l C ieetr rrGc ram ,/(),,r/ Special Value: ❑specimen ❑heritage/historic ❑wildlife ❑unusual 4street tree ❑screen 0 shade 0 indigenous 0 protected by gov.agenc, TREE HEALTH Foliage color. ❑normal C chlorotic ❑necrotic Epicormics? () N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: ❑normal 0 sparse Leaf size: ❑normal 0 small 0 stakes 0 wire/ties C signs 0 cables Annual shoot growth: C excellent Overage 0 poor Twig Dieback? N C curb/pavement 0 guards 'Noundwood development: 0 excellent $average 0 poor ❑none •other f,i7V/ ker_) Vigor class: 0 excellent tOverage 0 fair 0 poor Major pests/diseases: .S 1 I„r, ' FI L)Y SITE CONDITIONS Site Character 0 residence it.commercial 0 industrial 0 park 0 open space ❑natural I.:woodlandlforest Landscape type: 'parkway r raised bed ❑container ❑mound ❑lawn shrub border 0 wind break Irrigation: Anone 0 adequate 0 inadequate 0 excessive 0 trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? Y 0 construction 0 soil disturbance 0 grade change ❑line clearing 0 site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25°�25-50% 0-75°/° 75-100°/° Pavement!Hied? Y N %dripline refill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% 9'°dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50°/° 50-75% 75-100% Soli problems: ❑drainage 0 shallow 0 compacted 0 droughty 0 saline 0 alkaline 0 acidic 0 small volume 0 disease center ❑history of-fail 0 clay 0 expansive 0 slope ° aspect Obstructions: ❑lights ❑signage line-of-sight ❑view 0 overhead lines 0 underground utilities Cl traffic I.cadjacent veg. 0 Exposure to wind: 0 single tree 0 below canopy 0 above canopy ❑recently exposed Xwindward.canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: s'r..) Occurrence of snow/ice storms 0 never ❑seldom ,�9 regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: 0 building gparking C%traffic %pedestrian ❑recreation glandscape 0 hardscape ❑small features 0 utility lines Can target be moved? Y Can use be restricted? Y N • l� Occupancy: 0 occasional use 0 intermittent use frequent use 0 constant use The international Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. I TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECT Suspect root rot Y N Plusbruorniconiubractst prmat Y N ID* Exposed roots: 0 severe E moderate """ Uodernmioed: t]severe ❑moderate ❑law • .00t pruned: distance from trunk Root arse affected: X Buttress wounded: Y N Whoa Restricted rool area: ❑severe ❑moderate O low Potential for root tailors: (]severe 0 moderate 0 low LEAN: I 0 deg.from vertical -Z'na iral ❑unnatural 0 sett-corrected Sall hearing: Y Decay In plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil craciing: +0 N Compounding faders ttt /cñ / /c,r ci CP✓2J v >4�I1_r Lean savertty: 0 severe oderate 0 low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defect and rate their rity(s=severe, rn=moderate, I=low) DEFECT R00T .ROWN iUNK SCAFFOLDS 3RANCHES Poor taper I I 3ow. sweep I Coacminantsrforxs I - 1 I 1 Muttiple attacnmerrts I 1 WI } Y�,i Included bark I 1 hei L Excessive end weight Cracks/splits j L- r . Hangers I Girdling Wounds'seam L- v►1 Decay Cavity Conksimushroomsibracket Bleedinwsao flow (_ L L gib Looseicracked bark TM V►1 L- 1111, Nesting holeibee hive Deadwood/stubs } Borers'tem,tes'ants Cankers/galls/burls Previous failure L HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: tJ Jzd1 ,t 4YVc.A S Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4 -severe Inspection period: annual i biannual other Size of part: 1 <6"(15 cm);2 5-16"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18 30 (45 75 cm);4 >30"(75 cm) I + ' + 7 = Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; s 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: `remove\defective part Xreduce end weight rows clean %thin ❑raise canopy [crown reduce restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: 11 )�Cd C C11/12.,9 Inspect further ❑root crown ,�decay 0 aerial Smonitc Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other: Effect on adjacent trees: 0 none Xevaluate Notification: =owner E manager ❑governing agency Date: COMMENTS ( - /0 etc ofrs ►•-, l 4t ?od M El , 1163 -do., rk,+M3 / s'' /2 �e -� ,✓ J( , C 1J � v r r! .�, N � /Asze if 1 Jd /4.7g,ja,t4q AL015. fh,S, /y"-- GbiCyf A•c-N lit(e /OF, A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas , , TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition SiteJPddress: - rZeek 13` 4z/4-nye, HAZARD RATING: 0.iapdtocation: .Sa,.mi air :4" 4 t.,,.t,i Z 414e 3 LKO S 1— + Z + 2 _ Failure + Stte + Target _ Hazard Owner public prime unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: Inspector ie. /eK6Y f sr, s AeS, Immediate action needed Date of ast inspection: V N k1()I.t A ) Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree 1- ! (S- Species: E'2-1*'1 JSH: I of trunia: I , Height v Spread: f _�� I ''IS ( `J w Form: = generally symmetric *minor asymmetry major asymmetry E stump sprout a stag-headed Crown class: C dominant *o-dominant =intermediate ❑suppressed r Live crown ratio: '1 3 "C Age class: ❑young semi-mature =mature C over-mature/senescent Pruning history: E crown cleaned ❑excessively thinned E topped E crown raised ;-i poilarded C crown.reduced ❑flush cuts J cabled/braced Zisaone ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: C specimen 0 heritage/historic ❑wildlife ❑unusual ,;'street tree 0 screen 0 shade C indigenous ❑protected by gov.agenc TREE HEALTH Foliage color. C normal ❑chiorotic ❑necrotic Epicormics?V N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: C normal E sparse Leaf size: 7, normal ❑small/ =stakes C wireities C signs E_-;cables Annual shoot growth: C excellent 'y average C poor Twig Dieback? l `-- N C curbipavement ❑guards Ioundwood development ❑excellent average C poor C none .other__O:erre...e.j31_6:10"J 41,-- Vigor class: excellent g average ❑lair LT poor Major pests/diseases: S t,Ai, ' ,F11)( SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. !;residence commercial ❑industnal ❑park E open space ❑natural ❑woodlandlferest Landscape type: ,parkway ❑raised bed ❑container ❑mound C lawn hrub border ❑ wind break Irrigation: Zone ❑adequate C inadequate C excessive C trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? Y N C construction C soil disturbance C grade change C line clearing C site clearing %dripline paved: 0°' 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ❑drainage C shallow C compacted C droughty C saline ❑alkaline ❑acidic C small volume C disease center ❑history offal! ❑clay ❑expansive ❑slope 5 ' aspect: 5-6". Obstructions: ❑lights C signage C.line-of-sight C view C overhead lines C underground utilities a traffic Zadiacent veg. ❑ Exposure to wind: C single tree _below canopy E above canopy C recently exposed ,$windward, canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: ..S J Occurrence of snowiice storms E never ❑seldom Xregularty TARGET Use Under Tree: C building ' arking Adraffic,edestrian ❑ recreation Standscape ❑hardscape C small features C utility lines • ;an target be moved? Y Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: C occasional use C intermittent use frequent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. v TREE DEFECTS ROUT DrEFECT.s` Suspect root rot Y N kluskoomieeektreeket precut Y N ID: Exposed root= 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Uederrnioed: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low • .out pruned: distance from trunk Root area effected: Y. MUSS wounded: Y N Wine: Restricted root area: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low LEAN: deg.from vertical Anatural 0 unnatural 0 setf-corrected Soil heaving Y t bV Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil arcking: Y C darx Compounding ta 7 2Q at- T • h/?I ZM .rALQ. 5 rD✓r Lean seve ❑severe ❑moderate Flow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS i BRANCHES Poor taper Bow, sweeo I _S Codominants/forks I 17 Multiple attachment Included bark I L� L. Excessive end weight I I l I L- Cracks/splits I 1 _ t- I. Hangers I I Girdling Wounds/seam L- L 1 I (, Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket I Bleeding/sap flow I l_._ l__— � Loose/cracked bark ►H . Nesting hole/bee hive I Deadwood/stubs I Borers/termites/ants I Cankers/palls/burls I Previous failure L-- I4/1 HAZARD RATINP Tree part most likely to fail: -Illy L G n yt .(,pV1) . A.--r Failure potential: 1 -low;2•medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<ti"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size +Targe Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18-30"(45-75 cm);4->30 (75 cm) J Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: 0 remove defective part 0 reduce end weight 0 crown clean 0 thin 0 raise canopy ❑crown reduce 0 restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: . Inspect further. 0 root crown 0 decay ❑aerial 0 monitc Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adlacent trees: ❑none n evaluate Notification: ❑owner C manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS • 1 orb Zogcuf (c ?�� t fYI ,,Iwo / 5-- n10r-r-. wry ZAW Q /,k 07 P• A , 7 A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas -•-- � TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition • Site/Address: '4oG.e 42¢ KAZARD RATING: Aap/Location: SO,rrz/ air ;4" /9Licr. 4?v{i,,e6-1 2 114'ff!-1c, r-LgoS Failure + Size + target _ Ha2ard Owner public private ,/ unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating %l Date: 2(05' Inspector j #/eKEY,// sr f Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: V,/ie, )0,_r,, 1 Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree t I I Species.. .fr—Z-1`'1 H f OBH: ' j t of trunks: Heigfrt L' Spread: If 1:1S/Eft-✓ Form: .0 generally symmetric ittLminor asymmetry ❑major asymmetry ❑stump sprout E stag-headed Crown class: = dominant gi co-dominant E.intermediate E.suppressed Live crown ratio: !_r % Age class: ❑young ('semi-mature 0 mature 0 over-mature/senescent Pruning history: 0 crown cleaned 0 excessively thinned 0 topped ❑crown raised 0 pollarded 0 crown reduced 0 flush cuts 0 cabled/braced p_none ❑multiple pruning events Approx.date• Special Value: ❑specimen _,heritage/historic 0 wildlife 0 unusual ❑street tree 0 screen 0 shade 0 indigenous 0 protected by gov.agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. 0 normal 0 chlorotic 0 necrotic Epicorrnics? ()N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: 0 normal 0 sparse Leal size: 0 normal ❑small 0 stakes 0 wire/ties 0 signs 0 cables Annual shoot growth: ❑excellent Overage ❑poor Twig Dieback? N 0 curb/pavement ❑guards Yaundwood development 0 excellent 4average 0 poor ❑none other ✓P f/Jr_1;.•, Vigor class: ❑excellent average 0 fair ❑poor d Major pests/diseases: CI f Ls... it J Y SITE CONDITIONS • Site Character: ❑residence Xommercial 0 industrial 0 park 0 open space 0 natural 0 woodlandforest Landscape type: ;$parkway ❑raised bed 0 container 0 mound 0 lawn shrub border ❑ wind break Irrigation: ,none` ❑adequate ❑inadequate 0 excessive 0 trunk welded Recent site disturbance? Y constaartion ❑soil disturbance 0 grade change 0 line clearing ❑site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems:Yddrainage 0 shallow 0 compacted 0 droughty 0 saline 0 alkaline 0 acidic ❑small volume 0 disease center 0 history offal' ❑clay ❑expansive ❑slope /S— ° aspect SC Obstructions: ❑lights ❑signage 0 line-of-sight r view 0 overhead lines ❑underground utilities ❑traffic adjacent veg. ❑ Exposure to wind: E.single tree ❑below canopy ❑above canopy ❑recently exposed :windward,canopy edge 0 area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: SW Occurrence of snow/ice storms ❑never ❑seldom ,irregularly TARGET Use Under Tree: 0 building ❑parking ❑traffic .pedestrian 0 recreation landscape 0 hardscape 0 small features 0 utility lines Ian target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N , Occupancy: ,occasional use ❑intermittent use 0 frequent use 0 constant use The International Society of Arboricutture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. THEE DEFECTS ROOT DOTS: Suspect neat rot Y N Idosaroomicookitirackal prusat Y N I D Exposed roott: ❑severe ❑moderate ,4 low Ilodermlaet ❑severe O moderate ❑low • 1 pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wouaded: Y N When: Restricted roof area: ❑severe ❑moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe ❑moderate %low LEAN: l V deg.from vertical natural u unnatural 0 setf-corrected, Soil hearing: Y 15J Decay in plane of lean: Roots broken/ Y/ N) Soit cracking: Y Compounding factorr PU-0' �r d LPL" C rt-L1/&Z 77t can � :2r severe moderate low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate, I=low) 3EF=C I ROOT ;,ROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS 3RANCHES ; Poor tacer Bow. sweeo Codomrnantsrforics — Murtiole attachments L_ L_- Included bark / _ Excessive end weight 1 I M Cracks/splits ! l_ Hangers I Girdling Wounds/seam L- Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleedino/sao flow 1_oose/cracked bark rV1 L_ Nesting hoiejbee hive I Deadwcod/stubs I 1 I 1'►A I Borers/termites/ants Cankers/galls/burls ! i I Previous failure I I I L_. HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fad 2n1: / I447 , Failure potential: 1 -low;2 -medium;3•high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 <fi"(15 cm):2 6 18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential +Size of Part+Target Rating=Hard Rating 3 18 30"(45 75 cm);4 >30"(75 cm} Hazard 2 + —2_ + = S Target ratng: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3 -frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: 7 remove defective part educe nd weight � gown clean C4thin ❑raise canopy O crown reduce ,i restructure ❑shape Cable/Brace: .,Xe/ rc 1)7} t A 1�P .tn Inspect further. ,❑root crown ❑decay 0 aerial C rmonitr Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Dther. Effect on adjacent trees: ❑none Zevaivate Notification: owner E manager E governing agency Date: COMMENTS d o ep Z T 7� oNI les 1 IC( I o�. 0 L.x 9 ......,:- )"°'" A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: ./rLOCk /.7` r..24,.ara.p HAZARD RATING: Naa/Location: .e,rrii cr A" Aii ,>+re{,^it,.i 7' /rfl c J2¢rr,LKo.c —I— + I + l = _411_ Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner public prtvate unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: //f Zy7,95' Inspector. X #lekEY/ Z ST-'-1 -( ,4 g Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: Lin/1 ..v.lQ a i aJ Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree #: H 1'7 Species: EC 1 OBH: 17'I #at junks: I Height 1 L Spread: Zh' A_,1 /C' Sk)f,.,' Form: C generally symmetric .minor asymmetry 0 major asymmetry E.stump sprout C;mg-hewed Crown class: C dominant Rico-dominant ❑intermediate ❑suppressed Live crown ratio: /r % Age class: ❑young X semi-mature ❑mature ❑over-mature/senescent Pruning history: -crown cleaned ❑excessively thinned 0 topped 0 crown raised 0 pollarded 0 crown reduced 0 flush cuts 0 cabled/braced y' none 0 multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: 0 specimen 0 heritage/historic 0 wildlife 0 unusual ❑street tree 0 screen 0 shade 0 indigenous 0 protected by gov.agen TREE HEALTH Foliage color. L normal 0 chlorotic 0 necrotic Eplcormlcs? C N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: 0.normal 0 sparse Leaf size: 0 normal 0 small ❑stakes 0 wire/ties 0 signs 0 cables Annual shoot growth: 0 excellent average 0 poor Twig Dieback? V N 0 curb/pavement� 0 guards Woundwood development: C excellent t •average E.-2 poor E none Bother 1)1 .��t,.,.) 10— Vigor class: 0 excellent , average 0 fair 0 poor • L Major pests/diseases: 51/rka .14the SITE CONDITIONS Site Character: 0 residence (commercial 0 industrial 0 park 0 open space 0 natural 0 woodlandVorest Landscape type: parkway 0 raised bed 0 container 0 mound 0 lawn A shrub border 0 wind break Irrigation: ,none 0 adequate 0 inadequate 0 excessive 0 trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? Y ® 0 construction 0 soil disturbance 0 grade change 0 line clearing 0 site clearing dripline paved: t 10-25°/° 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/fill sail: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% ° dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems:%drainage 0 shallow 0 compacted 0 droughty ❑saline 0 alkaline 0 acidic 0 small volume 0 disease center 0 history of•tail 0 clay ❑expansive C slope I d ° aspect S E Obstructions: 0 lights ❑signage 0 line-of-sight 0 view E overhead lines 0 underground utilities ❑traffic ,gdjacent veg. Exposure to wind: ❑single tree `below canopy ❑above canopy ❑:recently exposed Xwindward.canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: 5J Occurrence of snowiice storms 0 never ❑seldom l 'regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: E.building 0 parking 0 traffic c pedestrian 0 recreational landscape ❑hardscape ❑small features ❑utility lines Can target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N411 Occupancy: ,j occasional use CI intermittent use ❑frequent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboricutture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. •i '; J 0 TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot Y N Muoiroorniconktrackei present Y N ID: Exposed roar 0 severe 0 moderate #ow Uederrnleet 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low • loot pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Potential for root failoro: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low LEAN:_ S deg.from vertical Anaturai 0 unnatural 0 self-corrected Soll honing: Y Degy in plane of lean: Y Raub broken Y ® Sail c addng: /Y .) Compounding fa tort ,77\—e4 /4/& /JJ 4-- y' y �1 M ,J Lean severity: 0 severe 0 moderate fow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rafe theirlJs severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor taper • I ! Bow.sweep Codominants/forics I C- Multiple attachments i t_ t Included bark L Excessive end weight Cracks/splits !_ t_- Hanaers Girdling Wounds/se-am i— Decay it Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleedina/sao flow I / _ (__ L • Loose/cracked bark lt�l Nesting hole/bee hive I 1 I Deadwood/stubs L I Borers/termites/ants Cankers/oalls/buris • I Previous failure I h4 HAZARD RAT1N1 Tree part most like y to fail: 111_( f J/VC//tJ&t Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-16-30"(45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) + I + l _ 3 Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: 0 remove defective part .reduce end weightgr crown clean ,in 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: l .'`Q f71 sal/CGV , r.-.i a Inspect further. 0 root crown 0 decay 0 aerial .monit Remove tree: Y N Replace?ni trees: YY Other N Move target Y N Effect on adlaceees: 0 none gvaluate Notification: owner 0 manager 0 governing agency Date: • COMMENTS /.o Caktd I >c .�'� ( Z et e u 'O i ; j /tap) /;JLe /or. A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition site/Address: BLDo..e /1i 424,11,no HAZARD RATING: Map/Location: fait/ o- 14" ,4 'c r {,rr,,/ Z44i LK0 S -�- + ( + Failure + S¢e + Target _ Hazard Owner public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: 11 J207 Inspector. f / KEY//4 t s m 4 Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: (1 f?t,,/ Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERIST1CF • Tree # 1 I F Species: E-041 OBH: 7" ft of bunks: 1 Height 7 0 Spread: Z f'nJ /O ' ( / / 1 Form: generally symmetric X minor asymmetry ❑major asymmetry ❑stump sprout =stag-headed Crown class: ❑ dominant , co-dominant i=:intermediate ❑suppressed Live crown ratio: % Age class: E young semi-mature ❑mature ❑over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned E excessively thinned ❑topped 0 crown raised 0 pollarded 0 crown reduced ❑flush cuts 0 cabled/braced ,one ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: 0 specimen !0 heritage/historic 0 wildlife 0 unusual 0 street tree 0 screen ❑shade 0 indigenous 0 protected by gov.agent TREE HEALTH Foliage color. 0 normal 0 chlorotic ❑necrotic Eplcormics?OY N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: ❑normal 0 sparse Leaf size: 0 normal 0 small ❑stakes ❑wire/ties ❑signs ❑cables Annual shoot growth: L excellent verage ❑poor Twig Dieback? (3 N ❑curb/pavement 0 guards Woundwood development ❑excellent %average ❑poor ❑none other 4 .,'/1.) Vigor class: ❑excellent (,.average ❑fair ❑poor Major pests/diseases: Sit kit." fAix SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ❑resioence 'Commercial 0 industrial ❑park ❑open space 0 natural ❑woodlandlforest Landscape type: 7artcway =raised bed L container ❑mound ❑lawn shrub border ❑wind break Irrigation: pdione E.adequate ❑inadequate C excessive 0 trunk welled Recent site disturbance? Y ❑construction 0 soil disturbance ❑grade change ❑line clearing ❑site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0% 10-25°/0 25-50% 50-75°/3 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: -,-drainage ❑,shallow 0 compacted J droughty a saline ❑alkaline 0 acidic ❑small volume ❑disease center 0 history of fail clay ❑expansive ❑slope /rg aspect S Obstructions: ❑lights E.signage ❑line-of-sight ❑view ❑overhead lines ❑underground utilities ❑trafficdjacent veg. ❑ Exposure to wind: ❑single tree ❑below canopy ❑above canopy ❑recently exposed *windward,canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: St. I Occurrence of snow/ice storms 0 never 0 seldom )'regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: ❑building ❑parking ❑traffic ,pedestrian 0 recreation, landscape 0 hardscape O small features 0 utility lines Can target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: Aoccasional use ❑intermittent use 0 frequent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. �i . JF. TREE DEFECTS ROOT Otttt,ia Suspect root rot Y N OilictbroornIcocititrackat present Y N ID: Exposed roars l severe E moderate 0 tow LI4errntDe t 0 severe ❑moderate ❑low eat pruned: distance from trunk Root area affect:et % Buttress woandect Y N Wber*• Restricted root area: ❑severe ❑moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate klow LEAN: deg.from vertical 5natvraJ E unnatural ❑sett-corrected Soil heaving: Y Decay in plane of lean: Y Roofs broken Y )6 Soil cracking: Y d Compounding factors: i�D 4 O&' LL1rcl.1 110 vI 71 a- /t A? m a sartty: severe moderate cw CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate)their seventy(s=severe, m=moderate,I=low) l DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS i BRANCHES =oar cer I Bow, sweep i Codominantslcncs i I I I00. Muttiole attachments (, included bark L— Excessive end weight Cracks/splits w1 - Hanaers Girdling Wounds/seam w1 l M Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleedinc/sao flow i I _ Looselcracked bars (f M . Nesting hole/bee hive I Deadwood/stubs I 13-1 4.— Borers'terrnitesran:s I Cankers/calls/burs Prev!ous failure I rv1 HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: ''k4. tsity ) _S/Wr 41 Failure potential: 1 -low:2-medium;3-high;4 -severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+ Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18 3tY(45 75 cm);4 >30 (75 cm) ( + + ', = Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT • Prune: E remove defective part Xreduce end weight Acrown clean /6thin a raise canopy E crown reduce i restructure E shape Cable/Brace• . Inspect further LT root crown ❑decay C aerial %monit: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: C none Xevaluate Notification: 7. cwner !i manager !governing agency Date: COMMENTS T (OCe,jC.q/ Pr, T'i ZOo /\ 61'v7/ M, 1104)- 1- 4.* /or, a,k40 Lt i'y1,%a7/ ' J 'ru • •"°"'`¢ A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: "'LOKI.' /j,G /,-/L4,1ln, HAZARD RATING: Map/Location: So12-11 o- A" 41/E;V 'r {.,,op,' 7 e?"�crr LKO S ' + Z" + Failure + Size + Target = Lazard Owner:public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: ///240f Inspector. ft 4/eK617/, J7-&- s An4B, Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: I/J41/4421..1 . } Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree 1: 1 5 Species: EL3✓1 1( n 4 1N ctw-C Sl7aat'J I r OBH: j� C#' franks: "Height � Spread: j C A. !�/ /i_1'i.s / CO C Form: ❑ generally symmetric ,minor asymmetry _major asymmetry C stump sprout C stag-headed Crown class: G dominant Aco-dominant C intermediate ❑suppressed Live crown ratio: q.1 % Age class: ❑young semi-mature ❑mature ❑over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned ❑excessively thinned ❑tapped ❑crown raised ❑pollarded ❑crown reduced ❑flush cuts ❑cabled/braced .aone ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: ❑specimen ❑heritage/historic ❑wildlife ❑unusual 0 street tree C screen 0 shade 0 indigenous ❑protected by gov.ager TREE HEALTH Foliage color. C normal ❑chlorotic 0 necrotic Epicormics?() N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: C normal ❑sparse Leaf size: ❑normal ❑small ❑stakes 0 wire/ties ❑signs ❑cables Annual shoot growth: ❑excellent gZaverage C poor Twig Dieback? N U curb/pavement ❑guards Woundwood d eve lo ment: ❑excellent averse P g u poor C noneother Vigor class: C excellent average C fair ❑poor Major pests/diseases: >' Li. 4)X SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ❑residence commercial a industrial ❑park ❑open space ❑natural C woodland forest Landscape type: ,parkway ❑raised bed ❑container C mound ❑lawn ,'l shrub border C wind break Irrigation: i gone ❑adequate ❑inadequate ❑excessive ❑trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y ❑construction ❑soil disturbance 0 grade change ❑line clearing 0 site clearing dripline paved: 0°0 10-25% 25-50°/0 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/till soil: 0°0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ❑drainage C shallow ❑compacted ❑droughty 0 saline ❑alkaline ❑acidic 0 small volume ❑disease center ❑history of fail ❑clay ❑expansive 0 slope /l? ° aspect: Obstructions: ❑lights ❑signage ❑line-of-sight ❑view ❑overhead lines ❑underground utilities ❑traffic Xadjacent veg. G Exposure to wind: ❑single tree ❑below canopy IC above canopy C recently exposed A windward,canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlce storms ❑never ❑seldom _ 'regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: ❑building ❑parking ❑traffic Aedestrian C recreation Klandscape ❑hardscape ❑small features 0 utility lines Can target be moved? Y () Can use be restricted? Y N S Occupancy: occasional use . 0 intermittent use ❑frequent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. 4 TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot Y N Mushroant/conk/bracket present Y N ID: Exposed roots: ❑severe 0 moderate slow Undermined: 0 severe 0 moderate ❑low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: °A Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted rootarea: 0 severe 0 moderate ,'low Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate 'low LEAN: 7 Q deg.from vertical l<atural 0 unnatural 0 seff-corrected Soil heaving: Y t) Decay in plane of lean N Rots broken Y iV Soil cracking: Y stip Compounding factors: 7�.P( h/ /,, Cry !d D 9/ E2.I+1S Lean severi ty: Asevere ❑moderate ❑low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) ( DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor taper Bow. sweep Codominantsforks I .44 Multiple attacnments c Included bark . Excessive end weight Cracks/splits rH Hangers S Nl A`� Girdling Wounds/seam S • Decay I I • Cavity I I hit I Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleeding/sap flow • I _ kv, L • Loose/cracked bark ioNesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs I , • Bo re rs/term ites/ants Cankers/oalls/burls Previous failure I 141 • HAZARD RAT1N(, Tree part most likely to fail: t54 /A/a..1.011"1 e l berme Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18-30"(45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) + Z + = r Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; 17 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: 0 remove defectivee part educe end weight %Crown clean ibin El raise canopy ❑crown reduce restructure CI shape Cable/Brace: )JQ10.1 (��&(tV® i q . Inspect further. ❑root crown ❑decay ❑aerial F�monit Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: ❑none evaluate Notification: E owner ❑manager r governing agency Date: COMMENTS 7 / 0cm±Ld t3►r . Zoo Alor< £�cr .0 Lad rL f-14 rat,)s , .'et) t 9/0 %5 T 1 Le y`' j,164, TA.ee 4I, /cad , i t - /,icy Los", 4 '► J A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas �� so 8ao,� q" t4® TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: !t /.0 r r IAr c 4i i L D/ I HAZARD RATING: - u 1/ � _ 0 Map/Location:�D► �F DtfiMO-1 Z41 '7r� Cox Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner: s Potential of public private n '/ unknown other part Rating Rating Date: Inspector. P( /1 cot/ /,/. . Ste? ( Az": Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: V Q4,1A) Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree *: /7 0 Species: C ts'l DBH: f S it of trunks: / Height: /I✓ Spread: Jo N I aft IT'S/ /!I iJ/6.,.3� Form: ❑ generally symmetric iinor asymmetry 0 major asymmetry ❑stump sprout a stag-headed Crown class: ❑ dominant/ ,co-dominant ❑intermediate ❑:suppressed Live crown ratio: 9 r Yt? Age class: ❑young semi-mature ❑mature ❑over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned 0 excessively thinned ❑topped 0 crown raised ❑pollarded D crown reduced ❑flush cuts 0 cabled/braced done ❑multiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: ❑specimen ❑heritage/historic ❑wildlife 0 unusual O street tree ❑screen ❑shade ❑indigenous ❑protected by goy.agen TREE HEALTH Foliage color: 0 normal ❑chlorotic ❑necrotic Epicorrnics?C.J N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: ❑normal ❑sparse Leaf size: ❑normal ❑small 0 stakes n wire/ties ❑signs ❑cables Annual shoot growth: ❑excellent Xaverage ❑poor Twig Dieback? N ❑curb/paveme t ❑guards Woundwood development: ❑excellent L�(average O poor ❑none other L0P5/ Vigor class: ❑excellent average ❑fair ❑poor Major pests/diseases: JL1 Ar E Fvt-VX SITE CONDITIONS Site Character: ❑residence ,commertial ❑industrial ❑park ❑open space ❑natural ❑woodlandlforest Landscape type: parkway ❑raised bed ❑container ❑mound ❑lawn '<shrub border ❑wind break Irrigation: kone ❑adequate ❑inadequate 0 excessive ❑trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y 65i O construction ❑soil disturbance ❑grade change ❑line clearing ❑site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0°/0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0°/° 10-25°/0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100°10 Soil problems:a drainage ❑shallow O compacted ❑,droughty ❑saline ❑alkaline G acidic 0 small volume 0 disease center ❑history of fail .0 clay D expansive ❑slope /0 ° aspect: 56 Obstructions: ❑lights ❑signage ❑line-of-sight ❑view O overhead lines ❑underground utilities ❑traffic gadjacent veg. ❑ Exposure to wind: ❑single tree ❑below canopy ❑above canopy ❑recently exposed Awindward,canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms ❑never ❑seldom a regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: O building ❑parking ❑traffic ,pedestrian ❑recreation 4tandsc,ape 0 hardscape ❑small features ❑utility lin Can target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: Xgccasional use ❑intermittent use ❑frequent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. • .- yy` TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot Y N Mushroom/conk/bracket present Y N ID: Exposed roots: ❑severe ❑moderate ❑low Undermined: ❑severe 0 moderate 0 low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: 'Ye Buttress wounded: Y N When. Restricted root area: ❑severe 0 moderate low Potential for root failure: 0 severe ❑moderate Xow LEAN: deg.from vertical ,natural 0 unnatural 0 self-corrected Soil heaving: Y Decay in plane of lean: Y © Roots broken Y Soil cracking: Y f� Compounding factors: 1 zt (trt 'lkp fV J / i'-Lean severity: ❑severe ❑moderate ow CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe, m=moderate.I=low) I DEFECT I ROOT CROWN I TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES I Poor taper I I Bow.sweep I L— C000minants/forks • I L Multiple attachments I f4/1 yv) Included bark Excessive end weight Cracksisolits _ I L vv1 Hanoers Girdling Wounds/seam 1. (r (r Decay Cavity Conks/mi ishronms/bracket • Bleedina/sao flow L-- l _ L_ Loose/cracked bark hA -I Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs rv1 L- Borers/termites/ants Cankers/oalls/burts Previous failure 1✓t HAZARD RATINS Tree part most likety to fail: 7ti'L dehrsi Failure potential: 1 -low:2-medium;3-high;4-sever Inspection period: annual biannual other Size of part: 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); 3-18-30"(45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; l + +� = -7 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: 0 remove defective part 4reduce end weight tglsrown clean ,hin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce X restructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: G�1)6 6c(sic in 77t..P__Ld Inspect further. ❑root crown ❑decay ❑aerial .l mor Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other Effect on adjacent trees: ❑none tOvaluate • Notification: 0 owner 0 manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS �' orA-4-e_ / UC�J 'c,4 /- o 1!� �O G//02-/ / )A474rice-rev. _,.4%"° "-c, A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas oBop,n.,J�� TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: rtoKK /74 —dre t0R ' HAZARD RATING: Map/Location: So fcr `l"4 /VE/YC Iiizxa..,. Cam'U e76 C ti + 3 + 3 = g Owner public c..Xelf Failure + Size + Target = Hazard private L unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: (t\l�(`7� Inspector. F< Ili C41?-1 / cfri4.4 r Immediate action needed Date of last inspection. 1/Ai KAI b,I.1 Needs further inspection TREE CHARACTERISTICS Dead tree Tree#: /2( �Sp�ecies- .- _ L paY✓ .A.X , (` DBH: 55 #bf pvnla M'7_ Height:, ? Spread: L 5 1 r1'/ 12 'CI�'S /(Jr W Form: E generally symmetric 0 minor as mme ajor Y f�,m l asymmetry E stump sprout ❑stag-headed Crown class: E dominant TIchc o-dominant ❑intermediate ❑suppressed Live crown ratio: 1--d % Age class: ❑young ❑semi-mature Amature 0 over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned 0 excessively thinned 0 topped 0 crown raised 0 pollarded 0 crown reduced 0 flush cuts 0 cabled/braced none 0 muttiple pruning events Approx.dates: Special Value: 0 specimen 0 heritage/historic 0 wildlife 0 unusual 0 street tree 0 screen 0 shade 0 indigenous 0 protected by goy.agent TREE HEALTH Foliage color. 0 normal 0 chlorotic 0 necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: 0 normal 0 sparse Leaf size: 0 normal ❑small 0 stakes ❑wire/ties ❑signs ❑cables Annual shoot growth: ❑excellent average ❑poor Twig Dieback? O ❑curb/pavement ❑guards Woundwood development ❑excellent ❑average (poor ❑none ❑other • • Vigor class: ❑excellent gkverage ❑fair ❑poor Major pests/diseases: Dt7Q AAJTS (Qt.S.4.A;p of cr_bJ j i,v c O.i r.geek.r4 ✓mb c, 4 lk..Q_i / SITE CONDITIONS , Site Character. ❑residence Nommercial 0 industrial ❑park ❑open space 0 natural ❑woodlandVorest Landscape type: 0 parkway ❑raised bed ❑container , I mound 0 lawn ❑shrub border ❑wind break Irrigation: Upone ❑adequate 0 inadequate ❑excessive ❑trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y&N ❑con ruction ❑soil disturbance ❑grade change ❑line clearing ❑site clearing %dripline paved: fl° 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/fill soil: 0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ❑drainage 0 shallow ❑compacted 0;� droughty ❑saline 0 alkaline ❑acidic ❑small volume ❑disease center ❑history of fail ❑clay ❑expansive CI slope 1L� ° aspect: Se Obstructions: ❑lights ❑signage ❑line-of-sight ❑view ❑overhead lines ❑underground utilities ❑traffic $djacent veg. ❑ _ Exposure to wind: ,single tree U below canopy 0 above canopy 0 recently exposed ❑windward,canopy edge ❑area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: St../ Occurrence of snow/ice storms ❑never ❑seldom 4regularly • TARGET Use Under Tree: Kbuilding Kparking traffic ,pedestrian 0 recreation ❑landscape ❑hardscape ❑small features ❑utility tin Can target be moved? Y Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: ❑occasional use ❑intermittent use ly requent use ❑constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. 0 Z TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot© N Mushroom/conk/bracket present Y CD ID: Exposed roots ❑severe 0 moderate 'low Undermined: 0 severe 0 moderate ❑low 410 Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate ,'low LEAN: SD deg.from vertical 0 natural Kunnatural 0 self-corrected Soil heaving: Y 0 Decay in plane of lean: Q N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: 1A..12t BR St iS fio//L LL t'ai [d w l oexici aci Lean severity: evere ❑moderate 0 low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity(s=severe,m=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS I BRANCHES Poor Goer Bow,sweeo I L I S I Codominants/forks j t I Ni Muttiple attachmentsYIA Included bark Excessive end weight Cracks/soliLs I 5 I S I Hangers S I I S Girdling Wounds/seam 5 I 5 j S Decay I I I w1 Cavity II I 14 Conks/mushrooms/bracket I i Bleedinq/sao flow 1..- IA M • AKLoose/cracked bark S S I S' 4 . INesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs S I I .S S I Borers/termit an I I_ i (� I L I Cankers/aalls/b s II I Previous failure ' I I S S j S HAZARD RATING . Tree part most likely to fail: 7�,�w ( UAyI? Failure potential: I -low;2-medium;3-high;4-severe Inspection period: annual biannual _ ,l other i%t;iih'.te2AKL.4 Size of part: 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3-18-30"(45-75 cm);4 >30"(75 cm) Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; LI + 3 + = 10 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: remove defective part 0 reduce end weight ❑crown clean 0 thin 0 raise canopy 0 crown reduce 0 restructure ❑shape Cable/Brace: . Inspect further. 0 root crown ❑decay 0 aerial ,Q monitor Remove tree: 6 N Replace? / N Move target Y N Other. , Etlect on adjacent trees: 0 none devaluate Notification: 0 owner ❑manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS (le 1)& Ls(f E r`=� s /Tv p Sow y-4" g %„'f. 1uu h , �erw 0 bch4 ( ct",,,,/ i& u illrov k iso Y� S�CIt �1S 30 �� fi,,,ut_ i, th4d t (z I I I N S ov-"ak , Di Cow, a{' _ ' I ai u S 11-A4se-5 (r‘ W;i 1o°. bl a ye- ao;,1{�, zo i 411.11 p i pity. ., ' tZ.0(0,tk 1 &In14(L 5 , (� k� R ` k ;J J "' A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: .FL-OC L ) 3'to - (SR-4,4ioL. HAZARD RATING: Map/Location: S(:JT71L QF A- ` A-✓ntkA? CLr Z' sr/J ("Lars3 + 3 + 3 = IP - 1 Failure + S¢e + Target = Hazard Owner public private— — unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: 1111 i l 91 Inspector. PC. at (—Levi Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: J,J1 /Jlkiji.; Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree t 12;2- S ecies S.l fir,. _7,4 . . . .. OBH: 3 ec * nits: 5 Height 7O 1 ^Spread: 2- 1J 1-70 1 S' Sq' W I c e Form: ❑ generally symmetric ,1minor asymmetry =major asymmetry �stump sprout stag-headed Crown class: 0 dominant „ .co-dominant ❑intermediate C suppressed Live crown ratio: C7O % Age class: ❑young ❑semi-mature A.mature `over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned VNexcessivety thinned gtopped tizrown raised 0 pollarded crown reduced flush cuts 0 cabled/braced ❑none 0 multiple pruning event Approx.dates: Special Value: 0 specimen 0 heritage/historic 0 wildlife 0 unusual Astreet tree 0 screen J shade 0 indigenous 0 protected by goy.agent TREE HEALTH Foliage color. p.kiormal 0 chlorotic 0 necrotic Epicormics? 6 f N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: 0.zormal 0 sparse Leaf size: normal 0 small 0 stakes 0 wire/ties C signs ❑cables Annual shoot growth: 0 excellent average 0 poor Twig Dieback?G N 0 curb/pavementl 0 guards Woundwood development 0 excellent average 0 poor 0 none other I VI !iA.J 'it fDd-rt • Vigor class: 0 excellent gaverage ❑fair G poor fist I Major pests/diseases: r`rti.ik$:ki::" .1 141 4(j.)1J 1144�Q�skis pfri. 0" -j f iOerre ll 79 X SITE CONDITIONS I ✓✓ Site Character. 0 residence Xcommercial 0 industrial 0 park C open space 0 natural 0 woodland\forest Landscape type: 14parkrway ❑raised bed 0 container ❑mound 0 lawn 0 shrub border 0 wind break Irrigation: 'none 0 adequate 0 inadequate 0 excessive 0 trunk wettied Recent site disturbance? Y CO 0 construction 0 soil disturbance 0 grade change 0 line clearing ❑site clearing %dripllne paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50°. 50-756/0 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y C) %dripline ve fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-1006/0 %dripline grade lowered: 06/0 10-25% 25-506/0 50-75% 75-1006/0 . Soil problems:.0 drainage 0 shallow 0 compacted G droughty 0 saline 0 alkaline acidic 0 small volume 0 disease center 0 history of tail 0 clay 0 expansive gsiope C ° aspect: $t-/1,11 Iq Obstructions: 0 lights 0 signage 0 line-of-sight 0 view 0 overhead lines ❑underground utilities Xitratfic adjacent veg. 0 Exposure to wind: Ksingle tree 0 below canopy 0 above canopy 0 recently exposed 0 windward,canopy edge 0 area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: S A Occurrence of snowfice storms 0 never 0 seldom X'+regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: Vbuilding 94arking Xtratfic gPedestrian 0 recreation 0 landscape Ahardscape 0 small features 0 utility", Can target be moved? YN Can use be restricted? Y N • Occupancy: 0 occasional use 0 intermittent use Kfreauent use 0 constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. u . 3 TREE DEFECTS ROOT Ott-tt. Suspect root rot Y present Y t ID: 411 Exposed rnotr ❑severe ❑moderate ❑low Undermined: ❑severe ❑moderate ❑low Root pruned: distance from trunk Rost area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N Whim Restricteddmat area: ❑severe ❑moderate 4pVi Potential for root failure: ❑severe C moderate Klow / LEAN: `7s�0 deg.from vertical C natural (unnatural ❑setf-corrected Soil heaving: Y 'v Decay in plane of lean: Y 6 Root broken Y N Soil cracking: Y Compounding factors 1 d ��l�/v�la.Jr' by Lz 3 lfN ICS rn�r,'- i Lean seventy: A severe C moderate C low CROWN DEFECTS: rndicste presence of indrnduai defect and rate their severity is=severe. m =moderate, : DEFECT i ROOT CROWN I TRUNK f SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor acer i Bow. sweep Codominantsforxs Muttioie attachments Included bark S I Excessive end weioht S Cracks/splits S S Handers Girdling Wou n ds/seam I M Decay Cavrtv Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleedincisao flow f'Y1 Looseicracked bark I /N ftf Nesting hole:bee hive I Deadwood/stubs 11,1 lu Borersltermites/ants Cankers/calls/burls M I Previous failure /v\ I (� HAZARD RAT1N( Tree part most likely to fail: Q J K 14 / W a4 1"Lk Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-seven Inspection period: annual biannual X U other 1L lor/01.- Size of part 1 <6"(15 cm);2 618"(15-45 cm): Failure Potential + Size of Part +Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18 30 (45 75 cm);4 >3tY(75 cm) 3 + + _ Target rating: 1 -occasional use:2 intermittent use: 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part X,reduce end weight g crown clean Ethrn ❑raise canopy ❑crown reduce restructure ❑shape Cable/Brace: 7 C- t^C{i'U S 7t, 1iL/Ye T /.I e Inspect further. C root crown 0 decay C aerial /mon Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: C none A/evaluate Notification: ❑owner 0 manager ❑governing agency Date: COMMENTS,f //C Lp,f /0 f � f'-IfirtiC f /uS JD 4 " c . /Dat rS e/Z �t i;ot( c(J• ct ( / - y it, r`'t 7 r %"k4,'4u A, " /T ( / F eat S nleeCkCc herd, Crvb.iJ p0er SSfr c7U,.c Sfvr,+ dO,if`f t Ceoodt.JeccA CP )E„'.1E fi7r � -,'(0``'(.d r V ` r . 1" A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas = l oz TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition Site/Address: PIN e. f Er:u DE rcJ HAZARD RATING: 7 "-- S;PC16--5 L-� LI + -� + 3 = Ilk Map,'Locatton: .Si!?�'D - � �E>✓lX r�.?`hrPvV 5 Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner. pu lic private x t unknown _ other Potential of part Rating Rating Date: _I i 15\9 i Inspector. Pe (4.1 ' Immediate action needed Date of last inspection: (is-)t ip k Al") Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS • -ree ft: I? Soec:e�: w 1". r ui OI3H: 34-1 # of trunia: 2- Height qQ.14,1-4-i' Spread: G1iarA't.i— 1$-1 Co:/t I l Q't4cYlvi, I 32' tNrvi'i Z,s-f Y,, ,f Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry ajcr asymmetry C stump sprout C slag-headed Crown class: C dominant Xco-dominant E intermediate C suppressed Live crown ratio: FO °/° Age class: C young ❑semi-mature frill,mature n,over-matureisenescent Pruning history: ❑crown cleaned excessively thinned popped rown raised C pollarded C crown reduced flush cuts C cabled/brace( ❑none C multiple pruning events Approx_dates: Special Value: C specimen C heritageJhistoric 'C wildlife ❑unusual g.street tree ❑screen E shade 0 indigenous ❑protected by gov.agt TREE HEALTH Foliage color cL<normal C chlorotic ❑necrotic Epicormics? 0 N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: 'normal C sparse Leaf size: orrnal C1 small C stakes ❑wire/ties C signs C cables Annual shoot growth: C excellent t ,average E poor Twig Dieback? © N ❑curb/pavement ❑guards Woundwood development C excellent Caverage 7 .poor C none 'other ELM rat) ,JOl t r I}t^ Al': Vigor class: excellent Kiverage fair ❑poor (1S Ie Msilak 11) _ e `/ r /-ei/ � Major pests,'diseases: may- ,�'" - ��(�� i�1,tl(�� f�t�a.� C�.�,P7� � �•+, SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. E residence r commercial C industrial C park C open space C natural C woodland',forest Landscape type: parkway C raised bed ❑container C1 mound ❑lawn ❑ shrub border ❑wind break Irrigation: none 17 ade sate C inadequate C excessive ❑trunk wetted Recent site disturbance? Y I ❑construction ❑soil .' i rbance ❑grade change ❑line clearing ❑site clearing %dripline paved: 0% 10-25°. 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y %dripline w/till soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% %dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100°A Soil problems: ili drainage ❑shallow C compacted E droughty ❑saline C alkaline C acidic C small volume E disease center ❑history of f C clay C expansive slope S ° aspect 5 C F40.15 Obstructions: ❑lignts ❑signage C line-of-sight C view ❑overnead lines C underground utilities Atratic adjacent veg. C Exposure to wind: j single tree E below canopy C above canopy 0 recently exposed ❑windward,canopy edge area prone to windthroti Prevailing wind direction: 4l,1 Occurrence of snow/ice storms C never ❑seldom .kregularty TARGET • • Use Under Tree: C building Xparidng Cg.traffic Kpedestrian ❑recreation ❑landscape C hardscape C small features ❑utilies Can target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: ❑occasional use C intermittent use t frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECT? ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot Y present Y © ID: • Exposed mots: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Undermined: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % But>rees wounded: Y N When: Restricted root am: 0 severe 0 moderate ciow Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate Klow LEAN: Lit) deg.from vertical 0 natural fgunnatural 0 self-corrected' Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: r N Roots broken Y f j Soil a addng: Y & J4 y p ' V �1'% i4i� '• (f1 GU a�> ► M�ti,+�' t ertty severe ❑moderate ❑low Cam oundin rs~ Ivy 4 4 can save CROWN DEFECTS: 'ndicate presence cf individual defect and rate their severity(s=severe, :r►=moderate,I=low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN I TRUNK SCAFFOLDS ! BRANCHES Poortaoer I I 1 • Sow.sweep I I I Codominants/forks . I Multiple attachments WI .. S Included bark S j Excessive end weight Cracks/solits 14,4 5 Hangers Al 5- Girdling Wounds/seam L S 3' Decayi. Cavity S . Conks/mushrooms/bracket • Bleeding/sap flow L I L Loose/cracked bark S S I Nesting hole/bee hive /1 . Deadwood/stubs vti1 5 5 Borers/termites/ants Si • Cankers/emit/burls h-I Previous failure S I S 5 . HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to tail: 17jrli r ! •Z n i--1 L t+^GS Failure potential: 1 -low;2-medium;3-high;4-seve Inspection period: annual biannual X. other At I Li.,, 4— Size of part 1 -<6"(15 cm);2-6-18"(15-45 cm); Failure Potential+Size of Part+Target Rating=Hazard Rating 3 18 3Q"(45-75 cm);4->30"(75 cm) Target rating: 1 -occasional use;2 intermittent use; y + 3 + 5 = /® ,0 3-frequent use;4-constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ❑remove defective part Areduce end weight crown clean Athin 0 raise canopy ,crown reduce krestructure 0 shape Cable/Brace: . Inspect further. 0 root crown 0 decay 0 aerial 11imr Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N More target Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: ❑none glevaluate • Notification: ❑owner ❑manager ❑governing agency Date: COMMENTS • ill v 6—:. , r e ? 111,E (tid is / e 4474 soy , . C �,Se- 40671,W 'Vt c 0 `.; 43 f v710 t7Zi# 'any pz,c: ZuoTE mojitp uidaa�y -412t-14. ..- x--- - — -- -------�` _ • , , � 1 y ,f� y Ili � rw c,s c d Af F ,s + r ' : >• r, 'if Y "�i t gA a,� »"Z'g 4 + ?�• ! 'l I(i l -!i fy,c+ lt.+ .r t 1 ti 1rR i 8i .. h. +1,11i _ 4.1.41.114.' k;• �i l Y k '1 1; }1 4�! c-'78 r - 4 • er i ;� -fir V -a..�• 7 -' . I . t'r '�:11.ti.. t� %f'Y� a, .i .)+ Is .. Yr +y.1��4i 9 r 1, j, .. • t u 4 1 ,...4.1. j ''' X t r 'a .p`"" V 1 L e -.'is,„ II - r`t . 'a F, { AFS r ��i--i�=�.7�} �i I C- $ _4. te l.i � ir.+ �E z' ,tai�r ,,I. •w 2 Y.a' 7`_i I ak' i}�- a j _• Jr r" , ir 46., ikl i' .' y , [1 1A+.w��9 ' t ti it �,' .-4; �(t' i• ;.1-. I ( Y tit%, Y, nr`�w• r I%r - _on , *�y� Y, I. 1r `.k t+"`� '< <ri!c u I�'�d Ml 1 GTrl l iy � .. Z.: iti . I- u�: 1 . III ,_ +•, � � I' ,$' Z }{{41 'Sir , '.. ;,_ _ j .'�.. i 3C 1;dI ,f 1 r"'..':.rc y l4 ^ i },}V•�' _ ate, "I .t1 !+ �1.�Fyn �'1- .. 11 S [ l�. 1, , c -1 1r 1i ,yM Y4. n 37 .t }'+ 1 ..c.F t .a.t--„, 3 - t--- it {+ __ --�._= +i'r i t- rrip � v '-. lit '( '+l- • �'2 t , •�r \ . .,^ Pl l. +V.- ice' ;- 7. fir \ ' .i1 I r t i , 1 ,, .I + i I 1 Pr ryi ,y tiZt# 'any prc quoit ..A.."' I-,- • `r �,r l,,lj i i , �, `'' 1 of 1 r_ : S I L' r 1 \,. ; , - 1.. �( ry �r. 1 - . t, ( ilk_ ' ice .�,. :.Y F -Ia rs o " • . / 1 • i t \n� ; 'ri• 5 i a� Y - . _ • • l7 -i 1 lug _ _ -- _,.t w 2. r r • —.-t 1, Che Tree#101 �• _ Root Crown • • s t: � _. vz Atli •F '1 !., e% �g� - 7 - I, -1.fr _ '*! `' ,mom '" f 40 • f. yc,. �f}• •K1'. 4 '! ;a 1tfj' ;- • • ce' f f _ Fc A 4k32 ` 9, 0 -, ti, ,'7 # * - ' tom: a F 't - S- Fy 1 P_ �••4- �•- - ''` .kl<•' L• ill. ' _ _ - l' - 1 ! 3)t tI• i •Dag.- _ - r• . 'x -. . :-., •: .`r ,i` r'i•. - y li :,,ram d`; $ stra r �,, `tom" 7 .. ).i 1 ., ,_ y,t •\• r r i*$°vim s 1 L .rz 17 1 S' Ya•�t:./s L �,'l tICy - 1' 1•MH' 1 5��C?1'� 71 7 y' R C 9 v •^ TT w I ''''':::_.--;:-..;:2W... Root Crown of Cherry Tree#102 "' ` _ ' _ 1 IS 1�In I • f- y • - �� - .. L Ill fi it4,-4 44 t. It n1 ".$F, � -. Cherry Tree -. #101 1 • • 0 ,• 4C� `r A. , I arm/branch showing decay on Big-leaf Maple #121 ..-.- - -i 7,ri -V. 4,- ''',• g....4'a; -*!-A.1•-i.;•,'*).) ,'I Jak-?...-t!•2!=.27W... - !-•'*. , ,L• -'• ' • ••., 5 ..,.,. 5-,-4•-••-• •,i,,(11/4. 5,.•,i••,,I,i.,rk.i, 4.. . V . .. ,-25 1 ._I"i5..-1,-555,-,. c-,:i . . . -,•-•- I •• - . ,,,,..7 -,.„•57•Ai' .•77-'-''_1 1 it,,-rn,t •_,- ''12,..F.‘\„ ' pr.--; .., s; . ,. ,,--,..,, ,.. •,,_,4 4 , i 4,1:7' ','1 ,?.40..,,,i,i ,,,1.. '.'.. !..;•7.. „,......7::-:;.i...... ...:;....--5 .41;••;.- . -,:i4'-'e' `.;4,1.;ili' 7"-.° .5.5•,-- - 5„... ..-. .. ,15 ,...:..•,,.-•.S;_•i.,r,li ',.5• , \.:.,..,,,,, . ;•„:„•:, ,,,:.• , r. ' •i• l'"' • 1;4, ' '. ,, * i '•:‘ .,1' ' i - 4. ,.,.r'''.' 4.4.-^ • .1,r'l :41' ! -' '...- 1-'---:•'1'-,-.. .,:' Pk?, it- " -. '• • ti C° ' :4 - -=. -,. .-- . . _ .. AN 1..:, 7,.....1;, ..,.,, .--., - -- . . . . t L.,. 'IR);%. •\..P'1".4 ,-- •. ' ../...-1'-- '.•-•:ieti-ii..,'.i=2: _. ,.,. -..:,-- - .•-•,,a. -- . •, i i „....--. •--------- .------s-iy.. '.--. - i - :,. .. -',.1,t, lir ...,-,: .-.: ..,. .„ ...--...!.,, ,,••-•. ..:. ..--... -./. . .-..,... . -_: . .-„•:,....„,,,K,,..„-x,... - . ,.„..,-L:. • ..,.. ..„... . .. .. ..... ,..„ : . , ,. ...„ ,,, . _, ,J :-...:..-.-.,-,-t.',i'tc.i,,,,,•,,,-A- .,....... ,... .1, ,.,., -;-,..4,...., -.. - . 1., :. . it • -.:• . -- ,-r ,I - -•- - -- 1 •' :I'L.V*:?.'-- -,,• . .... 1, -'• ." "-- • -•-- ' - WA' •--ii-, ' , r'!".......1.4 A.' . ---.,...- . ••... .' • . g .1, . '.1 i • ,.1.,--..-1.:.-.,Z,0-:.41.-;_. gr.. L '- .;•1 It - . - . r• -''. L.'-. :-'...4'7'. i.;:.::.,t1... -.1,:.'sj..1..., •,--'A IA .--fn:L l* • -.-..;.: -- in-lf 1 A,:ls,1 A-. kr -.4 .-.414 4 '14 t.t.- . 0.. -'7'•t: '-..t;'.1f1. - • . ;1;'i;I:.-f• 7i..; :•.1:. 11.-;,-'.'p'•l'! -e'61',„.-Tr';'..',-..01.:-...73---•:-. -." - ,.:-.':--'-'--- --;' '' V.I I.--' e : _:.„*.i...!. r, -,. •r.. .-, -.. spa . il i•• ••••-- • 411k -ke...., : : -.., -t, "'•i. , .1: •5;,;-"•,,,•4,.-4,-:•,.•,:'..:.:;':-,.', . . . -- .;:..- --•• -•_--.5'. • • ...,-1.°,,.tf,n5- •"‘I •l'• .• *.• 5.4 • •• .','...11k44 11,:• ,...• -,./'•1.-... ''' ... • '1.,k•• •...,•• :,•5".•• •75..44 ••:• • -L••-,13,5r•F-575-41i,',;•:1!--, -:•... __•: ' -.5.: __,,,-,_I-- -,..2.--:` •:•• •-,43:- .•--,1;.55.'*5 1\ .----I.'„,... .-.' - ,-.: ..-i• :..- ' .-. 'i.--,-4„._'--.„,„,' i Ab,-,t,t,.i.,-,_,:., .,.:.,.- ' ,_,.•.• ;4-,-44..i--.4'.:,,,,6,,::..,:.-., 1:::: .:-..._--,-;,-,.1-.,.i-,0.-..,.N.-s.-.;-,„.,....-... . - ....., 3.„:. .,.: ••••,--91r. ,•,.47.,6:-J. is._...= - r:-- -..--1..4 i.-:. 1-,•'•:,.....i.,,,,,,..arti4,7,•;174-,:',....,,,a1,.,,,-..t.,•:„,,:..._..,,;-„,.:.• - _..--;,...,„...... ,.. •.,•_-_ -S,',, -• ''' 6: 7.-7 '''..; . ., \ ''----, .1,-- -•••• - .:•..-..40„,...,..._. .----1. ,. 4:7..-:.-..,-,- -:-., •t.;: I.,-. ir.,.-.,.• • 5: l....,:4V-.7.,- r" - - -t:;..-.a. : .. i_•,-..,...-..-..;„,..,.1. . ...-_. . i - J: - • -, „.„ ,...,,,..i k._,.,-4._, . ..-4:„.: ?--...A:,-......_. -7 • ,•_ .4..,--,, - .,. .":,45.e...: *4'-;•,-4.1 `r- -' ' '41. '"• r. --Yr-- • s--• 1 s-,... .. .-•.:7.:,7..„:=--.._,_.... i.i..I.:",-,i.•1'4'--„--...,,.,,r-,5i.y''',r';.V..77,:,:--:7':7i„4-.:.ilv•.1I.7t•......-'i10ST.)„1i._1.:t-'k•-.l...::i,.l- ?.1.t,l•i-i:.-4 i-isi,1\-;g•%"\-.V,1fi -v-141e-1.....4_.'.-.':.•.'.., .c...,,..I.,s-.••-.:.'":':''-4;•:-F'!7:.'-..,...-..,.7.'-•I:rm. . . • P:;.....;'.•4-!-_,.7•1.t--i'*..:.;‘-';-:.-.-4t•,4.-.1,*'1.,-.D:•::-.!-,V:.1"1I-l w"mr1"-o'-:.....''-,--.:7_i-:.,r'.„.i,i.,..f...f,.t.„y;.4-.':,e•17-.,--,..gT.,:,,t.._=:._,-_::„r,',,_A:,-12.•,:,4l?:4.•,:,v,-;•!,'-.s.%'.•--••:•:',4'-'/L."•..c.'I•,.,,.•, 417,-:i.r.,,.-.e_,:•;•."....f-r.....,,/..1..,,' '-,:••-•--r-,•,p,f',.. Pt 7 - V; r i$'."••.•..„:•;:.,:••..,'.,•1)i:,.e,I,.,.A..-•;..,:.;::..1 k:4i;I-:-r•:''..6,..l.i.s.1.•.-.:;•c•I'7,.4•,•.•,1:,•-'+..•L-..fT.:;•.t.'..tI...k=`",4yr‘4t;,',:jr„,i.;rw:,-,:....t„,,"-t5-5i--iwl1.--t4,i).l-3.ic,''..',1'-1„'::,'3,k•...•,1;(:'.1..:.pi*\/.j.,r.--.;4:g,...'':.,.-,.,,r'F.1-..,-.'.-..':•:Y..',,-.'...•Ii,.t-..:\•"v_,4=.,;:'':,7•2.';'._:.-q"''et,„;.i,l'--ll'-;,:'-p i'!.-I:.I 7!t-.f-,,;:-i,'•-l.-.1'?,-4•.:r'1.e,:.,•.1.:.'.:•4 4.•-,.-l.gi,•'3-:.l'.;'...,.-•.•_,..-...•-2.7,....--4,-'.7-..-•-....-....L-':•ii"-..-.'-.-:..w;.•77.','--._,`-JLK',-...•14,::7 I-i-',----..=,-:A V..:2...:-:.;,,.;t.":.:&..7)7'.;.„.7:#.7-[.r_,..'.,T•',c.._.,-...l-is.-;'.'4---*IsIk;-:--t1-:.r5--'s,.,,:';-'.'_`'.;,--1-,2:''._--;',--'-,l1.1...-1.-11-,43"-:'..-.:,,:,"„.±.-k•'.:;.._.q;,'.:1.-_,_:.-7:'„'..S•._.:r 5:-......,....-:.5:.....7--1..:,;„!.lr.-,":o-4-..;.7.•.-".'i1-,t..T--,.k..,1...l_--.t.'.--'.1:--,-74cZ-.Z.-,.7'.i-:.--:,-t:,:.;.41.,,7.-,i.--...,7',,....,...-74,.k;,1:3.t,-.'..7.,.4.•..,.'-.:.41,t01L.-.,,7.;-:!.-.':'-;:!.-.1,,Y.-..... • '..,- - -,..- Ajor ..t. _ „ :: 'AI L . !---17--T'reFit. . ' - ''.t" 'i' c • . . - 1 ' - . I 41,. .., i,,,, , I,A, ., .,0 0.,.1 .,,,,r..,-.:,,i',-,,,,.ii-;. ,.,'•_ _. ..•.,,:;:!, _.::::-,.-,,.5,.. -R.. ,,,,',;1 41- 4,- • . $ •-,ge,t ' I''7.• '1-t.'Ne'...1 ' ''', , . 1'7- .i.tVOL_Jr.;•3,g:-.., •..00- .47,0"'••.4.: ,,.•45?„•iir- !?•"-7,?-4,61. ••A.5.'.4 ,,•4,11 .,r,r.;.,,,,,,,.. fd:., ,•-,,,,A...,,,.....:3,.....?,.44t2.-4-' . ,,-- -73,,;,..;:yi.95:5;•,t,..,tit.7--',k ,,, , .I... . : PO'i.. Wr'. 4•"': .1' :4‘V ';'.1V;71...'.17,.65::';:'' :4:'..r ":".-- ..' .70 t 4,:. .g,..kri),' ? ' 1..1714 ,- ..re'r'''':'j'.'''''....''-;.,', i'..-..,'''-:..'..1f;''''.....::'';4'4•0;4S.'1..4 A ....' ' ., ,c 4,...4-,.,,, ,,.-,---_P. i:i-t- i. ,).4.7.1.(.1.-f.i.P4,Si... . ...; -,:..)....-41.. `4i4.4-.1.2: k li".' ' .4,k.•,,r Nip-.:; ,,4-iiii•-1, f,:41,,Y,,,,-,4,4,1-*-_--- -•• -.••-"--q•-•P.F-41,&- n.. ',- :.• F'74.1 •--li;.- itii'.•••••1.,‘: '''':•'; '• f4:1.;:.1, '7.'-.1.',..-**.44..,•:.•'- .:,. .',';'-?•: -T,F-'.. .-- -.. 1..A:'"....irti.,..4..,O....!110 ' -Fi.,,..4.--.,,,,5,.,;-_ ,, .-i,... - . .,-,-..,:r:,1;-::.. . .? . " -..-i-•,c... .,..-. , ,.:,.....•-•, ' •• - .,...-„Ip : '-'-.-,• f ., ,t_d_s.:,„ • I IL ,.4! ,i- . 1, .,...q„: ..:,..,1„. ,.. ,•,! .,,V• 1.3„, A :,•7?,2110,,,) .;r ,.0 4,,It ,,.., i ,,.; .,,,,,,x,y.it..., _,,.,., , •., , . & , .*#,- '-vi„-i-11; -....., - ;.A -,,-„,/.., . ' , ."',4V •,;.- - r :,,,.,,, !','i,.".,,!'-', .-.;.,-;:•1,.•\it'-.4.4:,,,:- .. . . • -•-• 1 , .' • ' .." re' r,-."*.;'-'-" I)':Ft tt...r',41; ci fr-c•i•r" I.-- -. • -"''' .A0'.; , :- : .•:. "iiR:414-1,''f,"-;,.• •4 ;'.''' ••••41 4.. . '''.'.141'' .' 1.-. ..---. •-...' •-.... '' •'3. ' ' •' •• ''.41. •‘:.1 AT j•.,• - .11,1,,. ita- --s....,. 100,-e.-..-: '- x,-T,--41:i. .:. ,... k . • •.,.. .r :)4 terit. ...,;,',1•.• '..-- I!.: 1: ' -A., Natj 4' 1 -, f-`,)-9 :.-'1;• ,.,- ;; 1 . .. ,.. ..,„rly,. • : i ii!..-A•4-7,....ii, . •-:. .. , --,7:.:-..., :, - .,-.. - , - - •4', ..,..,-. , . ,....,, :AL • ;,:t1. ,y, -,-c.. •,.- ,..-_,-..., .....-,. . .- -,.. ---.;-„,-„tr•4.-.1.:-.tr.-1=:;-. ' • , , .,_ Mr,...., *pp • . 1 . - At' 1.1“,•••• • • • ••'. 5 5.1•'' •, -4,:..; 4-'•:•:.•--, - . .• • --;.-.-• •441,,,r- -' '5. •-• • , .-4 .-":.1;,..•••y4',II,):' - - •*,•4,1. ,-,,, ''-•-•••5".•'1.5*.X.' 1,5•.!, l'.-11- :5'.5.....•- - .9.. ,_-.,. „. ,.. --.-.-.-1,,f..w.I.1.-;.„`Ai•,;,. -,-t.t..4• ...:,. p,. -: :.. , i4•,•••'`5.i7.i •... ..: -.-•. -"--:..7-,7..-.7.4,-;:::.._-_---'•-4,-,.2.' A.4 .“-P,..-,- . / 1o1 / Y ...-,-'..''•.,-.--•..._,,I.••±•,-.. _.‘.. ._....1..1,. • ••• ,....„‘.. .r '•; ,,::-.;tri::::::-.:1-':.--: ..-.'/ .5- '/.1 5-'.1,• l• - - • -•.;,-, ",-?1,••••;55., -wl•-.-.---,-. '5.,,•.• -,,--•,, •••••••••• _ .,.. ....• . - ,,,:_,:&-,J,1_- -..:,'..:.,-. i k _ ..:0- - • ,- -tv:.• • • ‘• • •-• - • • --:- .".A.----z",:L4•04-. 4. , 4,r :-..,1 /kr ..".„.-'. .....!.i •.. -• • . ,•:...:7-r,::...:-_-_,,.,?i,--i.,..:r...',A.,6,...--.:.--:--:;•?.•- •- --':- _ - ...: ' -.T12.. ..:::3-vj 1.S., 5-- t:- 4,-7,. •1= - , ..- A . • ' -L-, - . :..,.. ..'is.1,__!-1.: 24i.v."',-,..-":..:',.---7:1,,:-L'- ` -•, ..tli ._ +-.:.:4-'-''f.,1:707'..:,i'Z*. '-'40:41. .k:.) • '1.4. -'- - '-;.g. _47. --, v...._•_,-_--- - - Arm/branch of Big-leaf Maple resting on Willow#121 & #124 . „.„, :_,...n.5.-.......7.-..:8,D.J---- :,..-.-- •s.. ''..;.-..0,,',,..•_ .. -;•:,7-4-. -.. .i.,--.. 1.•-,;...,, ,- .-w,.. 2 .4tL,-1,t;-.-..._•-;,_ ,-,,. •. ___ -,'.-, • - .. .. , i r.itoc.-- .---..-.7, .,.i. ...A:'':4.S-- -- ' ;1",...4-411-' -. 7'C'4"':44.--s-'•'''.- :--..4-'''':'•*....'P--•-•:-.•-:: ' '.i '-'.-'''.. ' • '''' .--'.•.-'?i' .-0,\'711-f-,--. ,-.1: -..,• ' -c•'...14.11_,•'-; . .1-.-:-Fls ?''-'•lsr,;',.---.. ;•''1.4----'', ..;:: ';'-'.'i ,.. ',11s-i,,`:;., i.'•••':-;4;',' 1 ... ' -::f*:v -;•-•;.; .'- '77:A.: "--4.: '•,.w. . , ---..• ‘--•_3-,,-, - r._-,1--- -- i. -, ; ;In-. -;•,-,-,;.•••-,-„,. . -",.t.,..4.reti,-,. ,. f v."..z. ...,,,..---.w.,:..,;,..A. _...- ..,,.5,,,,,., .:...,i,iii-,'...,5,..,:::,...i."," ' . ••••,,•5, •I-•=, •... ,A-v, -A .....--, .;.,,,.i.ki dc..;,,,•.....i.f..-:... :, . . -, • k..-..,,..--.,..q',- €11,"'e.• 'N ;'!;:c. 7.? . ' • .1.....-4,,, i',-,...,--•'.--.,,,_"-, :,--..,..... 'i..•, ...gail't- ',.) ,:„.z.*T"-.!?,774 lit_40,1•,*ifi,%. •,'. :5 )rs:544V4t...*:-:5 1•. l'Itti 't•i°•05-.,-;,-:•:.'xi A,.. . .,-. ,..A.,-.,„......,. . -_,•-,5„--.,-,,,..-„,::-„,-...:,r,:, v...-..,„. ot_...v.,.,....., -..,.::•• ...,,,.. ..... ...„•„_,„,•• • • ,,,,.,,,,-....., ,......1,4 .' I ./.:36:4., :r..'' ,.., ,,,,:r.;`,..'...; --.%-- . . . .'Art..'-1.; J 737.. „vat,. .•'•.• - . ,:..--i..-4*•v,,...,.... _', .,.-- - r,C."';'..-Lii-,19.,-r'"T.,4,-, si•i -,,.:.......,...1..) . „.,,...,,‘,...,:..t% ...........„..... .,,. _,....1‘..,,... t..„..,,..„),....,,,..„,,, . .,.. : _:., i:,... ..,._.7,0...:::.,,.-,••,,t..A -.,.. .:-.,•,,..1,..?.'..;-',.'I. ...•- ‘..?, ,31-. -1--ki-,- 'i.- ii..z'..-A•,-.;.,:.:!',7-:-.7'.=.4-. •,,..- -.;m:...,. i' •-4,11,:i°' . . ..1 ,. .,,A.:!".7.r,_.7 --•:.- ..",.' . ., ii-r..:_A_1 ..' , .-. " g7.p;V• Al,--•N,•.• , '5,frk•-•- 5•••Nk•i:d-.4-., ....5-,•, )•,F.-z..1••.5A'•"•.. -- !.ie-., ,': '.--,.74.,, - • ....4.,1t....,11-.--.. .!....,- .:-:, %,-1-.4,tiJ.,,:-,',.'Y.:0i-,..' k..--•i!.--•-. -...----:-...--.. • 31--!''-..kti,.''.'W.,- :Qtv-.:7 -4-7.--...1r_. .- :- .1,i.-'..7, - .1/4_.:n..i.---..- .,-;-..--r:. -.....-_,,,,...:,....,,,,....k,..,,,-.,-:., ..,...„.--a,;:.•;',-.,„,.- .-=- ,i.7. ••,..,-,*;.,"-• ,.--:, • :• Arm/branch of Big-leaf g..i.,-,,mo. .!L. A', -'- `r,,,,....;,... , •-; -, * •,,• .0, - • ..• ' '1 -. g,,'•'• -.., . ...A..,...:2.._ 7, .,:..P.- 5-.E,•-•.••71141%--a,or- --'1".•,,....._. ;- 5,,t . - 5 .(,•-• •••••,-•4:, • '=!' • ' - -,-- -,••,.'1.ti5.:-‘'71:f, .,-.,,,.' .L' -.:q 1*.• ?Li51/4A.;•,11•'-',;,;•:: , 1.,.,..-„, , j. .,,-_,,f• e•. ••,, •,,; N1/4;., ,,„. •.57.74,,,* -f-- Maple showing decay#121 7:1 ..., . 4...J.i...L. . ., . - -,., .,._, .: - .. .- - -. -- a-._.-- • ..... -:. ...AW.;:--; • ' '..7.7 -rv'j Is.-J _'7- . -7-:-..:. ' s -- ..'' • :•,.....-. - -,..- '-',L,-.... ,. A.,,:-).•- • ;--.2,- ..'.d.i.- .4-- ....11 :-.':-.,Y- . •-•-•, -. .ucli, ...iL•a.,,., L1 _ti‘,.., . • .4. ,..1.. AVM-, wser-'1-.,- --i--0--.• 1 3-'''. , -t••••- - ----- - . '-'....- • ---k. i' 1 ''P-.4..-i f:',,„1. '' '1"' '• tA,-;':4,14,y4E,‘ . •• •'-••-...*";-;','''....•- .•,r• . .7.121,.. ,-. •• . .5*.1 r.;.-.,,..!f. 15 *,••r*-,11* , )!.. ,..',1, V -5.,1:,,75*• - v_..... -.4.0N-. '..„. ..-_,-,, ..i, .••••. •-..-.,,,. • •kl,. .•'i,,.;; , '-'ij -'1,...-''‘V---'-,4:-•;.1- ,... 3-4'. 't. -004-, ,,. 4 ,i4i, ',.4\1;7 4...-. -...., .A..... No, 17 5_,_1'5'....."4; . '4'''q . ...„..,.. ri . w__...,..i.;,„,__,...,,,,,„:.. ,,i .," ,....1.,...14,..1.... ...t. i,..Z•Z;_:-5'5-45-, :W16, ,-1-.•,,i,N•11.f•7.. ,,7,5•.i.. I k\ •r::. - ' •- Arrt-L .:.,- '. r,-,,..4rivi-: ..-.. „, -. .-'. " .,- ',.' .1' -s-4 41.,•-''.:i i7 -•••• ' .,-• ,,,••' -,IN-.4 c-1-,t.,....: .1r,'-.•'`.- .. .' •-•-•1' ,g1',-;...'''''.-..-1.1441, ig 1....1 4.,., VA", I '.-g-...';..', ••••• '-1,.,.'''-1?..'2'3..- . :.:,..'1.07%;-. • I ' ' ',.., ,; -.F.,...;•; . i' r,•1'47,:e;, " .4'4 . 11--r• .,."-. :.'.V=, --, F..-,44,-,; '--ir• ---. ..-• • , •'. I ',. :,F. *.- ,. Li. ;,.:;........z- .. .J.-, - • -- . : ..-•-• ,., ,, ,c..-: • 7 ''.--1..,. ,c-•:*". -..•- :-.1.-.• ,2•- ; . - ' -.4. ..ii .,..,,, ,..,,, is._ _ , .. • ip.10).:-.4.• .1.:. ,,--..,. J ;" ;1.7.r05111.;.kil.t.t ...' .. 1-,• .14 I ' AAA` 47.3...-,-, -.i•*11.I i:".--'..4-''' .; 4,____. '' .. '' .1,'-1....,..O. ..:..'‘,': :---- ,,:-1,A4P.-,4 ••••1•51,17 ... • 1 ,„ti,k,i_.',.•:.11•4 W.:-. .4 ..-i.!.. .,••••••",•'.... • .-_ 5 , 5. -7------ - .,. , .i•••S- -:•"•,. •1 i•-, ‘tr .01..4063,--tlif .--a-,:r.-_?•:., -4,,1-,.., _.. . .1, i. T-'---. ':'• . : -.‘.:. ,...',,' .',1 ;T:r-1.7,•.:.4 - , s ' ' . "t"-'41' • - :-..8.4 0 4 6 ,,: .• • .., •;,...,.. ...,:;,-. fr•'.,1:-1.//'.. , lr- -7, • ...-,\L'er 1 1j;-=:i'l 'i p • . 1 tpi, • it,:. .• i.A., -'...„.; ,,,,..iii.ii.4..., ...v.ca,---,,, ,lb • . • ,*54,,,':/‘--.•-•PE• ,, 5,145, ,5 , . ut. V c 4.11 •• k"uce./, . g-5. " . ••- .,•5 AZ 2•5*•:‘ -' - • - • Meeting Minutes • Date/Time: Thursday,November 18, 1999, 7:00 PM Location: Lakewood Center Community Room 380 S. State Street Lake Oswego,OR 97035 Topic: Block 136 Redevelopment—Neighborhood Meeting Attendance: Twenty (20) area residents were in attendance (see attached sign-up sheet). Project Team in Attendance: Barry Cain, President, Gramor Oregon, Inc. Matt Grady, Project Manager, Gramor Oregon, Inc. Ted Argo, Rowhome Architect,ARGO/Architect Carl Springer, Traffic Engineer, DKS & Associates Michael Lee, Retail Building Architect, Sienna Architecture Company Mike Diamond, Real Estate Investment Group George Diamond, Real Estate Investment Group Kristin Farrell, Administrative Assistant, Gramor Oregon, Inc. • Meeting began at 7:00 PM Barry Cain welcomed the guests and turned the meeting over to Matt Grady. Matt Grady explained the purpose of the meeting was to fulfill the City of Lake Oswego's formal neighborhood meeting requirements and more importantly to communicate with the community and to gain their input about the development proposal. Matt introduced the project team and turned the presentation over Ted Argo to explain the site layout and the rowhome component. Questions and Answers: Rowhomes and General Site Plan: • Is there a main level of retail underneath the rowhomes or is it just three story rowhomes? (Ted Argo) No main level retail space. Three story rowhomes, with a living space at the ground level. • Is there a connection between this project and the city's Millenium Park project? Will they be designed the same? • EXHIBIT 57 LU 00-0007 Page l of 5 1 �t .f 7 (Jim Bolland, First Addition Chairperson)There is no overall plan. No cohesion between these blocks and an overall plan. • • Is there a representative here from the City? No, not that we know of. • Will this block be completed before the others or at the same time? Barry Cain) It is a possibility that this will be done before the other blocks. • Where exactly is the parking garage? (Ted Argo) On Block 138, not 136. Tonight we are discussing Block 136 only and at a later date, Block 138 will be discussed. • I understood there would be different architectural styles to choose from? Arts & Crafts for example? (Ted Argo) Yes, there are several architectural styles to choose from. No "metal" roofs, only wood or tile or an alternative roof material. • Stucco stands the test of time. Why not stucco? • (Phillip Perotta, Attendee) Addressed the audience explaining differences between old vs. new stucco in terms of durability and changes in construction techniques. • Will the residents pay CAM Charges? (Matt Grady) Yes. We want to ensure that this will be a well-maintained and beautiful project. • What will happen to the existing trees? (Ted Argo) The trees are being looked into right now by an arborist. • Are you aware of the new tree ordinance? (Ted Argo) Actually, I think that has been the closing statement to every meeting we've had. • Has there been any traffic studies done on how this will affect the neighborhood? (Matt Grady) Carl Springer of DKS & Associates will discuss the traffic study later in this presentation. A Page 2 of 5 ; ; : •x • What niche are you marketing the rowhomes to? (Barry• Cain) To those people desiring to have little to no yard maintenance and wanting to be close to city services. The rowhomes are in$225,000 to $275,000 price range. • How will this development affect the school district? (Matt Grady) We don't know yet, however part of our planning process is to contact service providers including the school district to understand the impacts. (Attendee) The school districts projection over the next ten years is that they will ::a,e :o decline enrollment. • Do you have a projected completion date? (Matt Grady) The application is to be submitted in mid-December or January. Allow approximately four months for staff reports, public hearings, etc. Construction to start, June or July 2000. Opening to be early 2001. Retail/Office Building: Michael Lee provided a description of the office/retail building located on the corner of "A" Avenue and Second Street. • What type of retail? (Michael Lee) Since the building is small we'll probably have tenants leasing spaces between 1,000-1,500 sf. (Barry Cain) Such uses will include food service, gift and others providing a wide range of possibilities. • How much are the rents going to be? Can you give us an estimate? (Barry Cain) Small shop space in Portland/Metro area is typically $20-$25 psf NNN. I would probably be the same for Lake Oswego. • The pillars are concrete and metal? I thought you were trying to keep with natural materials? Also, I thought no flat roofs? (Michael Lee) Flat roof is acceptable with use of all brick. We wanted to achieve a quality material product with an older look and intricate details and lots of character. • Quality materials are great, but why not have rooflines? Maybe rooflines that matches more with the rowhomes rooflines. This look you're presenting doesn't have that "Lake Oswego feel". This looks more like Kruse Way. The rowhomes Page3of5 0449 and retail building look so opposite. We want the "Village look", like where • Starbucks is now. (Barry Cain) We actually presented rooflines to the City at one point and we're told that's not what they were looking for. This is actually our second try. Is the consensus that everyone prefers the "Village" look? (Many in the audience raised their hands). • The buildings are beautifully detailed, but just not for here. People want to tear down industrial looking buildings and put up "Village" looking buildings. (Jim Bolland) Gramor is required by the City to hold this meeting and to return minutes of this meeting to the City. We will also be giving meeting minutes to the City. Gramor, the city and the NAC chairs have been meeting informally on a monthly basis for a while now, and are just beginning the formal process. This developer is very responsive. • We want that "CarmeUCannon Beach look". The "Lake Oswego Look" is known around the country. Kathy Kerl in the City Planners office has a book that displays this look. It shows what we want. This is a lake community, not city and definitely not commercial. (Barry Cain) We appreciate your input and comments. We'll now regroup and come back with another try. • I really like the buildings, the awnings. Are there already retailers interested in • the project? (Barry Cain) Yes. • Will the sidewalk be the same throughout all blocks? (Matt Grady) Yes, we are following standard. We do have the flexibility to make some design changes. Traffic Analysis: Carl Springer presented the existing traffic conditions around Block 136 and provided an overview of future conditions with and without the 136 project. Carl also talked about possible traffic calming devices to be installed along Evergreen to maintain the low traffic volumes and reduce possible cut-through traffic. • How will added traffic affect Lakewood Blvd.? (Carl Springer) There was not a specific study done for that block, however Evergreen was studied and I think that it can be estimated from Evergreen Street that Lakewood Blvd. be less affected. • Page4of5 s r , 'ILI) • I'm not buying into these numbers. A lot of cars use Evergreen simply as a cut- • off route. (Carl Springer) We're considering other traffic calming methods such as semi-diverters. Like that at South Shore. Even if 50% used it is effective. (Jim Bolland) City has agreed to whatever "Traffic Calming Methods" may happen. As part of the development agreement with Gramor, traffic calming methods will be timed along with the project not at some later date. • Where would semi-diverter be located? (Carl Springer)Not decided at this point. • What about traffic circles? (Carl Springer) Looked at, but their purpose it to slow traffic not reduce it. • I'm worried that if you place obstacles on Evergreen it will only divert them to Lake Bay Road. (Carl Springer) Our goal is to use devices or diversion to decrease traffic not to displace it. So we'll keep an eye out for those types of things. Set up monitoring systems and • we'll only do what works. (Jim Bolland) The developer is only required to do a traffic study for immediate areas effected by the development, however they expanded their study to include other areas. Siting a David Evans (1991) study with included all downtown, the city must do a new comprehensive downtown traffic study. However, I understand the concerns of everyone that it is important to have the traffic mitigation done at the time of the development. • When will the widening of Evergreen be done? (Matt Grady) We're not widening Evergreen for our development. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:45 PM Respectfully Submitted by: Kristin Farrell, Gramor Oregon, Inc. To the best of our knowledge,this is an accurate summary of the discussions that occurred during this meeting. Page5of5 5Z I 0 • • Cs fib/ •gF0 1S 71N/V1 OSZ1/ 7J'//fl -9/Y5oJ l 6zzv '' /mil/AC .,7)17 ) ,,I2y . -)' _._ -'41'\u g..1-7-' Ms c .-I51JJi M iti'Pt f Tv)/ r az.3 77 p'/ 3y9/ L/a1/ -,- ' Od ./ -7""!7 4/ /— _A oz. (7 07 4 " '+7 c1 WL� (72 -/ NA AS'OLb .U, _j a7),7'-)1:1dl c41C - ovm . 7.4c,___ _.7- i 7 'k-O.Z6 .67 7 .-- ' /'-'--- - -7 .--3 c--/aCii r-r----d-"Woyyjr(7-77 76:f Z Z - ,V. 7 )7 C Pz- 6 " 9 -cr -721.!--P •/,2 -r croz- r-77-1-"'f" • - •-L-1-)--111,-- (-) s_ 9 1-^b( „ A„ -i. 5 i, -1-E)9 kf{1 I 9, 19)yawri5% 1 62,:72/_...9e9 1-7 Z --(17r y.5 d'iivi-(-- -2,71 -..",:ipsq -24((,01-- JV- 2/O� S1 • Q•7 iry Ay_gpvy h 177 wlnycvsf' Ci I—1 0 -", cri'C11o1 f Www)(7)/491j 'YY 7/31 1i 1� 7 C 9 `0 - 7 [ A .Pot. rf ``a—r�—�• c I INOII4Ii1'1;.1.1. SuRI(IUV MWVAI | - . NAME �ADDRESS -__� T«m--�P�ONE^ - \ �]\ �� - ^ � - ' `#�, -_ ^^^~ - - ` - -'_ - - - '----- r'--' - - r --- --' ------' --r- - / | __-- - _ ---�-__- � -- -- ! / . ' ~ " Meeting Minutes Date/Time: Tuesday,January 4, 2000, 7:00 PM Location: Lakewood Center,Community Room 380 S. State Street • Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Topic: Revised Retail/Office Building Elevations Block 136 Redevelopment—Neighborhood Meeting Attendance: Twelve (12) area residents were in attendance (see attached sign- up sheet). Project Team in Attendance: Barry Cain. President. Gramor Oregon, Inc. Mart Grady. Project Manager, Gramor Oregon. Inc. Michael Lee, Retail Building Architect, Sienna Architecture Company Mike Diamond, Real Estate Investment Group Mark Hansen, Leasing Agent, Gramor Oregon, Inc. Kristin Farrell, Administrative Assistant, Gramor Oregon, Inc. Meeting began at approximately 7:07 PM Matt Grady welcomed the guests and explained the purpose of this follow up neighborhood meeting was to address the concerns of the neighbors who attended the November 18th, 1999 meeting. Matt turned the meeting over to Michael Lee who explained the revised elevations of the retail/office building. (Michael Lee) Changes in the revised elevations include new roof forms to break up the • roofline. This creates what looks like several individual buildings, giving the "Lake Oswego Look" as described by the neighbors of the previous meeting. An ornate clock tower has been added. Windows were split and windowsills were added. Building corners were given a "cut corner" look. A concrete roofing material resembling slate shingle can be used. A 20' wide side park that flows from the building through to the row homes. Storefront was added along this park area. No square footage changes were made. Those in attendance who spoke up agreed the revised elevations were exactly what they had in mind and they are now eager for this project to be underway. They appreciated Gramor's fast response to their concerns. Matt Grady briefly detailed the eventual bid process to those who wanted to know when this project could begin. The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:35 PM Respectfully Submitted by: r'1,1,41 ,r,>' 7 '�✓� ii Kristin Farrell, Gramor Oregon, Inc. To the best of our knowledge,this is an accurate summary of the discussions that occurred during this meeting. EXHIBIT 58 LU 00-0007 a 4 • • • NAME ADDRESS TE1..E1'tilZNE _ o 8 - - o , / -2q5 5 ad r XG (. 3‘ - 77• ' ' - GO E,1(►s 1-0 -- (, -6. -?703 - 't4 I„v 4,, 4CL - C1.10 A A Lc,. -- -.6> ^ 5Sp 3 .9�� __ 95 �5L..3 t49-tt, f�vc. i3rs.,,v-t-e., oe, (170c1C0 COI b - 3Z91 'f ri c````�t 17 S r 7 k c..to IC. ief L,o., S 7d 3 j ___f a' - /5'6 6 V-z 300gar_loff..../ el`. ,‘.40. 7 3 4,5- 77 . Y te1 I. I__ • • • 4 ./ i1