Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 519 - Hamrick Road Tent. Plan~~ .. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. S 1 ~~ A RESOLUTION GRANTING TENTATIVE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A LAND PAR'T`ITION AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMEN`T` (Applicant (s} :Hamrick Road Invcst~nent Coz-poz•ation } ( 37 2W01 C Tax Lots 1200 and 372W0I CA Tax Lot 3100 } Recitals 1. Applicant{s} has/have submitted an application for tentative plan approval for a land subdivisionlP.U.D. on 2.58 -acres, Iaeated East of Hamrick Road in the City of Central Point, Oregon. 2. On June 5, 2001, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted aduly-noticed public hearing on the application, at which tune it reviewed the City staff reports and heard testimony and comments on the application. Now, therefore; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A royal Criteria. The requirements for approval of land partitions and tentative plans are set forth in CPMC Title 16 and 17, relating to informational requirements, zoning, lot dimension, access, and similar requirements. Section 2. Finding and Conclusions. The Plarzr-zing Caznznission finds and determines as follows: A. Tentative Plan Requirements. The application and tentative plan are in the corect form and contain all of the information required by CPMC 16.10. B. Area and Width of Lot. This partitioning in an R-2 would create 15 residential parcels. All parcels meet the minimum area and width requirements for lots in the zone as set forth in the tentative plan P.U.D. and CPMC 17.68, and such parcels meet the general requirements for lots contained in CPMC 16.24.450. Section 3. Conditional A royal. The application for tentative plan for land partition herein is hereby approved, subject to the conditions set forth on Exhibits "A","B", "C" and "D" attached hereto by reference incorporated herein, unposed under authority of CPMC Chapter 16.36. Also Planning Commission Resolution No. ,519_ {06052001 ) allowing a 12 feet front yard setback for side landed garages, <~nd allowi~lg a 5 feet sideyarci setback for both one and two story buildings. Reconfiguring a cul-clc-sac bulb at the e~~d of Brookclale Garden, and having the ability to work with the Public Works Staff to clear up the language in the Public Works Staff Report. _ Passed by the Planning Commission and signed by ~~~e in authentication of its passage this `~ day of __ _ _ .~-.r~~~-. , 2001. ~~~ ~~~ Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City R sentative Approved by me this day of ~-v usL.. , 2001. Planning Commission Chair planning Commission Resolution No. _519 (©6052001 ) .~~ :~~ ~ >r ~ ~~ ~a ~. ~ ;.: ~.~ i~. . . ~ ~ .~ 5 ~~J 'v REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL Y 19, 1994 V• NEATHAMER ~w• s "" ay..,~•'b. • b 11ot1~! ~_~ 1- ~ I tan ~~ ~ s1rd/ I X , ~ ~~ ps~ N I h9lMI g-aht a-nti":~.. .... .. ....s;: ................. 1- !ri - 7r~i TNf1~OfoIIDG I" -~1 .~ eifa.rw~. 1~ t"d"'ba ~1 aadFy ~y„1n ~y 0 holaiaa a1 r1alyYq altwK padrtWl k Y1aKaya bw tart aF ~a11 p'+rpow~ 1w -~' k+owotat a alaulq +kr'trea pawr• M+I M ilauaNa ~ fclrw wwy aw.e..t ve1.,t,a m a.siyp ~aWa to V++~lre p.a.µai 4 MKalkway ALWnaYpa. Ar halyd« 01 a1..h,g athnM. paea,eal i"°'r°'n a agµs tuyd W `~. y aplxr tha a Y aan<ru rtco . unray r11w NaoS aM at^t a1nw a7 ainley rlaer weA pv . r ~awlary aa.a•+.r.Y.r pr ~. -•dccin an awlrp 7n l~yb."t hdldeN OA WI}Y~ 110tH apspot ' ,~ y ~, 1101LOt1~ 01 aaru.p pdM Yey DMf'OYt h hdedat ah DldtthQ nOta• 1inD v 7 ...-per ~MalfkY{hg 11°t ~+4' . t~ E a~ ~ hav.Deaa m a~althg qw ley' .. . m Yn~sal.a n a1M1y .~H.y +~ a,r+ub -'-94 +~ ~'1NitlM,g1p1111tNa aayny aa...t ilWfOat R j TENTATIVE PLAN ~~BR~Q~DALE GARDENS A PLANNED COMMUN1'TY Locatcil n fha NorNw,rtr a»-cS~rl,r or a.ctla, 1, Tc+w»hEa S7 7d+lh 21.1-a; W!![nrll~ NKt7lcR, l.11y o/ [rVitraf„~wgl Gp„u~ py~. - ARRpARED F`OR: ' li 1A~IGk 1rD,4p lNVI~T~•~1JT QpRI•gt,4Tlr7YV ro eax ~~E~ ste7x s~ara+Gao GsnJrw! 1'sphl,SG~wpo^ T7D01 ,/ ~ ~ ~~ ~ {],e' 6 bl' ~ { Q { ~ {O yr ~ - «•tue !O'rcp n ~~ f ~ ~ R»1.1]6{.66 y my rr.~.la~r.~o R1D.r~w.as ~1 I~ P1v Ntil+!]76~M rN IKIJ.1760,t0 • hvcM11711•!2lalb hY avtlrJ+136090 ~-~~+~ ~1- ~dgs cl tt~~pyyawm~nt ~-.~, v(~1rb f \ I rn°ris ~ a~ I ~ 1 -705.11' -rw.R~~aw ey.. ~~ ».w 496 br ~ {~y y {,'796 br ~ {~SF 3ROOXD~ .{Y.lIYUIr' _ -~- I' 1viGa nm-acc~at atr~p ~c ~ `•^ `..ir ETA'{ OIC T/X LdT I~00 M/r9M k h i ~_.! ^.. w TAS( Lo1'~G00 N.taR..~ - eahwdetpv Ta A hNiMFr•f' ' ! ~~.a• er bu VoF+ro7 caup++ea Rracx MnJ Of ~6ff MfKTa Tw~Y14g1 ygV04.7( Gpr,'4f6a TO CDR OG~A (WfU Gua 4Tr-2ao a• as a• MtH16 aalr°+eo ROCK bDORMILP a.WIUG ~ 1'~L W1'e•AG710 Flt N•lflpvT{D 80, ' STRECi SEC710N (ze• ~w~oe) 1D' lecdaa aa.rtsy aara~y aa.1a• p+a p• y~jry~Mblltp 7M~ 00~ ', a tisicd...1 uhlhy rtan+ w..r 1nay,~y -5° ~ hacotaa an NDtiYp Prhnta alaltii awr claarµ apex x hacanaa m awr~hR ~+orr1 aarr 7w oR tars r9't svi OIOTca Lak~l700 ~ Ipa Ts7 my at:q, Tac iatl woo ' ~1, ~ ~ ~ C ~~ 4]713P p{G ~( ~~~ ~ ~~ F s~ aa6 Mr 3 ,ter. atorm ~ rrb ~ no' .~ ~ W I7 I aT a~+otr..e. t0'prlwl~ ~Mr•,n~ d'P11 ia~«,wit JY t o~ Ran+l~89,60 by 7rfi!•f~6l,GY7 by Li(a).ll6130 by NrJ•!s'H0,4S by al t}d+1761.cO hV by MV. wt1 I nvhW.!?tr,~.iJ (fl^!rr f:prllYWf by aY{6dr!]6R8$ NOTES ~~ Taft Lok Maiiair O"7 ZN61G ISOO . 7.q4 Jxrp Tax Lot Nr+baP 7f 9Yi?1GA $IDt7 • Ob5 Krsa Tokal Hcrraga . 7.5q lecrv~ ~'~ 7+ - sue' Eaaia of Beal' e7 ~' ~ ' ray r S' s h a• ww r• E ~ ~ 100 i60 m6 ~t Lha Oi GLG y$ Ixp}~d h Fha 'routhwsk ue+eu w1- PM o! °.rt6t70M1 I. TOlwsth 57 "'nO` n~ ~ r ~ ~~'r'^0~ ~I~~ ~ t'1wi of Yh+ YCIipzMtla rYrk11a1~.3ocksu,~.oaity, GYegon, iLtrt~ to PI{ad 5wwy lLrrtaar qf¢. ~ s•'a-u~YOWOICwe,+i+oD4u1cMW PREP/IRED $Y7 NeakLaaser Surva ccw~wtara.saoanrruru THIS (S A ~E©UCED sra , laa. a'OI'~'MU{16 CWytO nux 30~ SautA Central ~reA l74 '~"'° ''"A'`"P"`~° ti/O~ 1, NOT r0 SCALE Xadlord pra~oa 9yb'pl ~~ A11oae rds1J ?'52-2848 LOCAL STREET SECTION 14L,Y {d~!) 732-1582 (OB' w~DE! YAOIYCI MAiD>vRt OD0.7s DiTYe xq e, 8aaz 9twe1 ~ or I ~ ~ ~ Exhibit B PI,.~NI~TIIVG DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED CUND~ONS OF.~'PROVAx, I . Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shad submit to the City a copy of the proposed covenants, conditions and xestrictions (CC&Rs) for the Braokdale Gardens PUD. 2. ~'he applicant shall comply with all requirements of affected public agencies and utilities as they pertain to the development of the Brookdale Gardens PUD. Evidence of such compliance shall be submitted to the City prior to final plat approval. 3. The applicant shall cor_oply with all federal, state and Iocal regulations, standards and requirements applicable to the development and construction of the Braokdale Gardetts PUD. H:~T'la~ningl4 S 027.tispd CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ~~hzb1~ C DE'PRRTMENT OF PUBLlC tNORKS STAFF REPORT for BROOKDALE GARDENS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TENTATIVE PLAN REVIEW PW#041(l07 Date: .fungi 5, 2001 Applicant: Hamrick Road Investment Corporation (HRlC), Post Office Box 5153, Central Point, Oregon 97502 Agent: Bob Neathamer, Neathamer Surveying, 1~5 Grape Street, Medford, Oregon 97501 Property Qwner: Project: Location: Legal: Zoning: Area: Units: Plans: Report By: Purpose Star (1200); Coryell and HRlC {1300}; and DeCarlow Humes Inc. (3149) Braokdale Gardens P.U.D. North of E. Pine Street; East of Hamrick Road, and West of Meadowbrook ©mre. T37S, R2W, Section 01C, #ax tats 1200; T37S, R2W, Section 01CA, tax lot 310x. R2 2,59 Acres (approximately). 17 spaces (15 pad lots, 1 "pocket parr`, and 1 "remnant" lot}. 1 page entitled ""I"enfative Plan Brookdale Gardens, a Planned Community', dated May S, 2401 Public Works Department Provide information to the Planning Commission and Applicant (hereinafter referred to as "Developer") regarding City Public Works Department (PWD} standards, requirements, and conditions to be included in the design and devefaprnenf of the proposed planned unit development. Gather information from the DeveloperlEngineercegarding the proposed development. Special Requirements 1. Existing -rrfrastructure: `t'he Developer shaft demonstrate that all connections to existing infrastructure (i.e. streets; water, sanitary sewer, storm drain systems; natural drainage systems; etc.,}will not interfere with or provide for the degradation of the existing effective level of service or operation of the infrastructure faalities, and #hat the existing infrastructure faalities have either adequate capaafies to aa~mmodate the #lows andlor demands imposed on ~fhe existing infrastructure as the result of the connection of the proposed development's infrastructure, or will be Improved by and at the expense of the Developer fo accommodatB the additional flaws andlor demands; while maintaining or improving the existing level of service of the affected faal'rt~r, as approved by (as applicable), the regulatory agency, utility owner, andlor property owner involved. 2. Res/rlenfal Lane: The Developer is proposing the use of public streets with a mod~ed residential lane sfreef section, a street outiet, and a private sfreef. The PWD has approved development of #his residential lane concept on Shetterwood, Griffin Creek Esta#es, Lindsey Meadows, Beall Estates tV, and Packwood Terrace Estates subdivisions. Typically residential lanes have been designed #o serve a maximum of 12 lots. The proposed layout will serve 15 lots in one direction. The Developer is proposing a `residential lane" public street with a 25- faot-wide paved secfian, wrth 2-foot-wide rotted curbs on one side of the street. The applicant has also proposed parking on one side of the street: the south side of the street. The PWD is concurring with the requirement that parking be limited to one side with a further res#ric#ion tha# ~. 4 Brookdale Gardens PFlD 7'entatrve Pfan .Revieta Pr{'D Stafj'Report Page 2 only automobiles and picie ups be allowed to park on the s#reef. We would also recommend that no parking be allowed in fhe first 400 feet ofi Brookdale Avenue from Meadawbroak Drnre, to fiacilitate vehicular taming and access movements assaaated with this intersection. We would also request that Brookdale "Avenue" be renamed as Brookdale "Lane" to coincide with the City's classifiication of the street as a `residential cane" aril not a "standard residential s#reetA. The residentia! lane standard for this proposed development with parking permitted on one side, with a rolled curblgut#er section, would have the following minimum requirements: d A 24-foot-wide paved section, wilt a 2 percen# crown ~ A 2 foot-wide rolled curb and gutter section trl A 5-foot-wide sidewalk section (6-inch thick with streng#hened edge} located on bafh sides of the s#ree# with suitable wheel chair ramps at ail intersections. Gi A 2.5 foot wide strip of land to be loco#ed behind the sidewalk far instaitation of water meter service boxes, ire hydrants, etc. ~! Requires a 45-foot-wide right-ofi way. >*i Street parking allowed on one side only. --^--~ The applicant has proposed 4.5-faa# sidewalks and a 9.5 foot meter strip which are accepfabie #o the public works department. The applicant is proposing to utilize a street cross section that has a 3frfaat wide right-of»way and which wilt be increased to meef minimum residential lane design standards when the property to the South(37 2W 04C Tax Lat 4200} is developed. Tire developer has proposed a paved section containing a 2 inch lift of asphalt versus the normally required 3 inch section. I€ development occurs to the South of Brookdale Avenue during the course of the next five years the developer of that property will be responsible for grinding & overlay of Brookdale Avenue. !f a period of frve years elapses and no development to the South of Brookdale Avenue has occurred, l3amrick Raad Investmen# Corporation will be responsible through performance bond to complete the improvements necessary to meet the requirements of a standard residential lane. It is further recommended that the minimum setback from a garage to the right-af-way shalt be 18 feet. ft is the PWD`s understanding that the 32-foot width of the east property boundary of the park is far future road purposes. Since the right-af way #or any r©ad cannectian would be either 40- ar 4~-feet-wide, #his should be ilfus#rated an the plat with the designation of the area far future road development. This wit( reduce the area available far the park from '[ f .421 square feet (sf}, to approximately 10,668 sf {with a 4U-foot right~F way) or 7(31185 sf (with a 45-footright-ofi way). ~ It is further recommended that the Developer be required to develop this street section with the development of the proposed project to the northern limits of the projec#. Barking could be made available on this short section, with a temporary concrete barrier rail or other suitable bamer placed at the nor#hem end of the parking area #o prevent vehicular access to the northl until such time as the adjoining properties are redeveloped. 3. Private Streef: As discussed wi#h the Developer, this private street is only for access to 15 wifh access from Brookdale t_ane. There wilt be na direct vehicular access to Hamrick Road. (# is recommended that a railed gutter section (with suitable comer radii} be installed at the end of the private drivefconnection to the radius of Brookdale Drive. The Developer has proposed to have a utility easement to be 't2 feet wide, to facilitate the placement of two or more City/BGVSA utilities within this easement, the easement would have to be a minimum of 12 feet wide. Although currently the developer is providing an easement o€ ~2 feet, should the property to the South of l~rookdale Avenue be developed the dimension of the easement wift increase ~~ Brookdale Gardens PUD Tentative Plan Reviesq PAD ,~ta~j Report Page 3 from '! 2 to 15 feet. 4. Sfreet Lfghts: The Developer has requested the use of private street fights in lieu of the standard street tights required by the City. PWD would concur with the use of private street lights on the public and private streets, as long as the street lights Installed provide the same or better illumination of the street and sidewalk areas as typically provided by the City's standard ~8t30 lumen street light, at 2U0 foot spacings. The Sfreet lights would be either privately (i.e homeowners association} owned, operated, and maintained (including power consumption costs); owned, operated, and maintained by the City at the homeowner's expense; or owned, operated, and maintained by Pa~c Power (exduding the private street}. 5. RRYIfl facilities: if the development will require the alteration or modification of existing RRV1D irrigation facilities, then the Developer should he_required to coordinate with and pertorm the required al#erationslmodihcafions to accommodate the proposed development and maintain the RRVID facilities. It is suggested that the modifications #o the RRVID faal'~ies may include developing a surface water conveyance feature that may be incorporated into the improvements of the pocket park, if feasible. 6. Ufility Easements: A dedication of a 'J D-foot wide public utility easement (PUE~ sh©uld le required of the Development's property along the adjusted right-of way on Hamrick F~oad, and adjacent to {behind) the City's right-ofarwayleasements of Brootcdale (,one, aforEg both sides of the public and pmrate street section `A` of Brookdale Lane. A ~lQ-fioot wide PUI± should also be dedicated immediately to the west of the pmrate street section B easement boundaries. The public uh7ity easements within the private street road sections shaA be changed from "public utility easement" to'CitylBGVSA easement". Any City infrastrecf ure installed outside the City's right-o€ way will require suitable easemen# dedication, meefing current minimum required easement ~nridths for infrastructure separation for installation, maintenance, ar~d repair. 7. Sight-Tria+t_gles: Pield review of the subject property's access to Meadowbrook Drive Indicates that the sight-triangles can be developed that afford the proper sight triangles for a local street connection to the collector streets. These types of Sfreet intersections require establishment and maintenance of a minimum 55-foot sight triangle. This wilt restrict development on Tots 'J and 3. It is also recommended that lots '[ and 3 take driveway access off of Meadowbrook Drive, near the northern boundary of tot 3, and the southern boundary of tot 'l, as safe driveway ingress and egress from these lots off of Brookdale Lane may not be able to be maintained. Current City standards require that the throat of the driveway be located a minimum of 25 feet from the right-of--way intersection of two-streets. Sight vision triangles at the park of 2a feet may also restrict development in these areas. 8. Pocket Park and Landscape Buffers: The PWD is encouraged by the proposed development of the pocket park within the development, due to the limited amount of backyard space available orr the proposed lots. It is the PWD recommendation fhat these park faalities be designed, developed, and constructed by the developers (at the developer's expense} as part of the development of this project. It is our understanding that this pocket park wilt be owned and maintained by the homeowners association established with the development. J.. i6 Brvokdale Gardens PUD Tentative Plan RevieFv PWD Staff'Repor! Page 3 5. If applicable, all existing concrete, pipe, building materials, structures, dear and grub materials, and other deleterious ma#erials shall be removed from the site and either recycled or properly disposed of in accordance with the requiremer}ts of the DEQ. fi. Easements for City infrastructure (i.e. sanitary sewer, water, and storm drain (~€ applicable]} should be a minimum of '(fi-fee# wide, and should no# split Tat tines. Easements for public storm drainage, sanitary sewer, and water lines should be dedicated to the City and not lust a P.U.E. Centerline of buried infrastructure shall be aligned a minimum of fn/e (v} feet from the edge of the easement. If two nr more Ci#y owned utilities are located within an easement, then a minimum of 20-foot width for the easemen# should be required. Easement dedications in final deeds ar CC&Rs need a statement which should dearly indicate that easements must be maintained with suitable, driveable vehicular access to City public infrastructure faali#ies, as determined by the City PWD. 7. Prior to the City PWD fins! approval of the construction plans for the proposed Improvements, the fallowing should be submitted: . ~ A copy of written approva(from Fire District 3 of the final street and dratreway layout, site access, fire hydrant placement, and water system improvement plans for the proposed development. ^ The plans relating to the sanitary sewers should be approved in writing by BCVSA, and the appropriake signature blacks should be camplefed on the plans. 8. 1~reld verify a!t axis#ing infrastructure elevations and locations ('~.e. pipe inverts, curb elevations, tap of banks, c#i#ch(channel inverts, street elevations, etc.}, to which the proposed development`s infrastructure wilt connect into existing improvements, prior to final construcfion plan design and submi#tal for f;nal approval. 9. Ovefiead power Tines. if applicable, coordinate efforts with Paafic Power and Light, US West, and TCL Cable, to convert any overhead electrical power, telephone, or cable faafities within or adjoining the proposed development (excluding those major power and telephone facilities that are aligned slang Hamrick Road) to underground facilities, prior to the acceptance by the City PWD of the public improvements assoaated with the proposed development. All agresmenfs and costs associated with the conversion of these facilities from overhead #o underground . facilities, shall be by and between the utility owners and the Developer. 7 Q. The accurate locations of any existing underground and above ground public infrastructure, and the location of the associated easements with these faalities, shall be accurately portrayed (both horizontally and vertically) on the construction plans, as-built drawings, and final plat map. 9'l. The Developer's engineer or surveyor shall provide to the Public Works Department a drawing . of the recorded Final Plat map reproduced an Mylar~~and in an acceptable electronic form in AutoGAD® format. The Final Pla# shall be #ieci to a Legal Government comer and the State Plane Coordinate System. The Final Plat shall either reflect or be Later mod~ed to reflect any applicable °red-tine" changes noted in the construction "as-boil#s", at the discretion of the City Administrator or his designee. 11. if applicable, Developer shall provide a Statement of Water Rights (on a City approves form), for any affected properties. For proper#ies determined to have water rights, the developer will ~~ Brooktlale Gardens PUD 7`etrfattve Pla-s Kevtety PWD.StaffReport Page 6 coordinate with the State Watermasterthe re-allocation of any waters attached to lands no !anger irrigable as a result of the proposed development. 5#reetslTrafftc Existing Improvements - Hamrid< Road -Secondary Arterial. Gurrent ROW fit}' wide, . varying street width. Right-of Way required: 50 feet east of cen#erline. Meadowbrook Drive: Varying street widths whit BQ foal right-ofrway widths. 'I. Construction drawings for this Tentative Plan sha11 indude a Street Lighting Plan. Additional street lights will also need to be installed or existing street lights possibly modified along Meadowbrook Drive to af€ord proper lighting of the public street intersection with the proposed development. " 2. 71te Gity PWD, at the cost of the Developer, shalt evacuate the strength of the native soils and determine the street section designs far Brookdale Avenue in accordance with the City PWD Standards. Minimum street section far this street shall be as follows: - 3-inches Class "B" A.G. (After Southerly development} - 6-inches of ~"-0" crushed rock 8-inches of 4"-0" ra~tshed rock (City of Medford spedfications}, - Woven geo#extite €abric over compacted subgrade. Street Section {exduding the asphalt concrete portion) shalt be extended underneath and a minimum of two feef beyond the rolled curb and gutter section. 3. As applicable, stop signs and traffic delineation (i.e. "stop bars") shall be required and installed by the City PWD (at the Developer's expense) at the proposed development's intersection with Meadowbraok Drive. No parking signs and curb painting shalt be ins#alled by the City PWD (at fhe Developer's expense) along the first ~ 00-feet of Brookdate #.ane from the intersection wit1~ Meadowbrook Drive. Storm Drainage, irrigation improvements '!. During the design of the storm drain collection and conveyance system (SD System}, which shall provide for and convey storm water runoff from and run-on onto the proposed developmen# (either surface run-on or culvert or creelcfditch conveyance}, the Developer shall demonstrate That the storm water flows from the comple#ion of the proposed development {and at any time prior to completion of development) da not exceed predevelopment #lows; or tha# existing capacity, allowances, or provisions have been made (and approval of the applicable properties owners and regulatory agencies has been obtained}, which accommodate any additional flow which exceed predevelopment flows. The Developer and the City PWD shat! agree on the applicable run-off coefficients, curve numbers, retardance, eta., to be used in the engineering calculations. 2. 'the developer shalt develop a facility plan for the storm drain collection and conveyance system which provides for run-off €rom and run-on onto the proposed development, any €uture development ora adjacent properties, and gray areas deemed by the City that will need to tie-into fhe proposed development's storm water collection and conveyance system (i.e tax lots #o the y Broolufale Gardens PLI,(J Tentative Plan Review Pr~'D 3tafJ"Report Page 7 north and south of the proposed development}. It is our understanding that the storm drainage infrastructure within the proposed PUD will be a public sys#em, operated and maintained by the City. Storm drainage conveyance pipe stub-outs, through suitable easements in the development, will need to be provided and storm drain conveyance lines may need to be up-sized as necessary to accommodate existing and future developed property storm water nrn-o€f from the applicable fax tots (i.e. 'Area of Benefit"} located to the north and south of the proposed development. If the storm drain lines are needed to be up-sized from the size necessary to accommodate the proposed development and the storm water flaws from the existing development of the tax fats (i.e. "Area of Benefit'} north and south of the proposed development, to provide additional capacity to accommodate the pro}ected fu~.rrs developed flows of the Area of Benefit tax lots, then the PW© would propose to compensate the Developer for the upsizing above a minimum pipe size of 24-inch-diameter as per the methodology approved by the City Counal, ' 3. Developer's engineer shall provide a site drainage plan with the facilities being designed, at a minimum, #o accommodate a 9U year storm event. The SD system must be designed to adequately drain the ~ 0-year storm event without surcharging, or must be provided with adequate storage to prevent surcharging; and be designed to not impact existing public storm drainage facilities. Any primate storm drain system exceeding ~-inches in diameter shall be designed fo directly connec# to the public storm drain system (at a manhole or curb inlet only), and shall not be designed to discharge #o the street surfaces. 4: Roof drains and underdrains shall not be directly connected #o public storm drain lines, and shalt drain either to an on-site private storm drain system or discharge through a City approved 'pop-up drain" located in the landscape area behind tl~e City's sidewalk. 5. Prior to City PWD construction plan~review, the Developer shall provide the City PWD with a complete set of hydrologic and hydraulic calculations and profile plots for sizing the SD system, which shall incorporate the use of the City PWD's rainfallrntensity curve, and City approved run-off coeffiicients, curare numbers, retardance, pipe roughness coefficients, etc., that are used in the engineering calculations. 6. Storm drain pipe materials shah be PVC, H©PE, or reinforced concrete, with water tight joints meeting the requirements of ASTM D3212, F477, and C-~4~31VI, as applicable. Provide ~na-efe (in areas within the rights-o# way) orsand-cement siuny (in areas outside the rights-of way) ~~ encasement where required in areas of minimum cover. 7. If inlets/catch basins are to exceed X4.5 feet in depth from the tip of the Inlet to the bottom of the catch basin, then the inlets and catch basins shall be designed to afford suitable "man' entry for maintenancelcleahing purposes. 8. Developer's engineer sha{I provide hydrology and hydraulic calculations and flow line plots for private and public storm drains. Plot HGl_ on profile ar provide a separate profile drawing that indicates the HGL on the profile. Pipes should maintain cleansing veloaty (minimum 2.4 feet per second) and have adequate capacities without surcharging during the design storm. 9. The Developer may wish to incorporate the use of a perforated SD sys#em. If so, then the perforated storm drain system shalt be designed to have adequate capacities to: 2~ Brookdale gardens I'UD T"errtative Plan Review PWD Stafj'Report Page 8 ~1 Canvey the collec#ed groundwa#er and storm wafer with fhe minimum cleaning velocities and without surcharging the collect#on and conveyance piping; and ~ Minimize sifts, sands, gravels, and fines migra#ion from the native soils into the SD system. The plotted HGl~ shalt include both the groundwater infiltration, and the storm wa#er tort-off and run-oft inflows #nto the SD system. 'i 0. Maintain a minimum U.2-foot drop between inlet and outlet pipe inverts in manholes and curb 'rnlefs, unless flow through veloaties during fhe design storm event exceed 3.0 feat per second fps). if flaw velocities exceed 3.0 fps anti the inlet pipe is in relatively direc# {i.e. i80 ~ 5 degree) harizonfaf alignmen# with fhe outlet pipe, #hen as. a minimum, the pipe slope shat! be maintained #hrough fhe base of fhe manhole or curb inlet. if flaw vetoaties exceed 3.D fps, and there is other than relatively direct horizontal alignment between the inlet and outlet pipes, then a minir~num of a 0.7-foot drop between inlet and outlet pipe inverts in manholes or curb inle# must be maintained. A bof#om channel shat! be formed in the manhole or curb inlet base to mitigate #ransifional fosses and enhance flow through fhe manhole or curb inlet, 'l'l. Sheet flow surfaces drainage from fhe property onto fhe public rights-of way or +~nfo nesghl~oring properties is unacceptable. Sheet flaw surface drainage towards the Hamrick Road righ#-ofi-way is unacceptable. Sanitary Sewer 9. All sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system (SS System} design, construc#ion and testing shalt conf©rrn to the s#andards and guidelines of the Qregon DEQ, ~ 990 APWA Standards,.Oregan Ghapfer, Bear Creek Valley Sani#ary Authority (BCVSA), and the City PVYI~ Standards, where applicable. 2. The construction plans and fhe as-buil# drawings shall identify lateral stationing for construction of sewer laterals. 3. The City upon compte#ian of initial construction plan review and preliminary approval, will forward the plans fo BCVSA for completion of the review process. Upon cample#ion of the review by BCVSA, completion of final revisions to the plans by the Developer's engineer, and following the lino! approval and signature on the construction plans by BCVSA, the Public Works Director will approve fhe plans in final form. 4. Alf testing and video inspection of fines and manholes shall be done in accordance with BGVSA requirements, at Developer's expense. The beveloper shalt provide BCVSA and fhe City with test reports, TV reports and cert~cation of the sewer system construction prior #o final acceptance. Water System -- F.adsting '(6-inch-diameter wafer line tnstatled #n Hamrick Road and ~(2-inch-diameter Meadowbrootc Drive. '[. The water system shalt be designed fa provide the required firs flow demand capacities for fhe proposed devslapmer~t, which meet Fire District 3 requiremsrtts, wi#h fire hydran# placement as E.. 2 ~ Braof~'ale Gardens PUD Tentative Plan Review PWD Staff Report Page 9 approved by the City PWD and Fre Distric# 3. Maximum spacing of fire hydrants shalt be 30f3 feet, unless otherwise approved by Fire District Na. 3 and City PWD. The water system shall be of reinfiorced flaw ~"laaped~} design, with valved connections 4#aps) #o the existing fit-ir~ch- diameterwaterlines in NfeadowbroolC Drnre and the 9 6-inch~ameter fine in Hamrick Road. Water ser+tice Patera{ connection stationing and size shat) fie provided on construction plans and as-bunt drawings. 2. Developer shall comply with Oregon Health Division (OHD} artd City rerluirernents for bac(cflow prevention. 3. Water service meter boxes shall be City PWD speafied `Christy' brand meter boxes, that accommodate fhe Senses touch-read equipment. City PWD will perform a1! "hoY connections to active water lines (including service la#eral #aps}, untess otherwise approved by the Public Works Director. Site work, Grading, and Utility Plans 1. Grading plans shou{d have origirrallexisting grades and final grades plotted on the plan. Typically, existing grade contour fines are dashed and screened back, and final grade contour lines are overlaid on tap of the existing grades and are in a heavier tine width and solid. Contour lines should be Iabe(ed with elevatiarls. 2. Ail structures shall have roof drains, area drains, and/or crawl spaces with positive drainage away from the building. 3. Provide City with a utility plan approved by each utility company which reflects all utility line bcatians, crossings, transformer locations, valves, etc. 4. Utility locations must be accurately included on the as-built drawings, or as a separate set of drawings attached to the as-built drawings. 5. All fill placed in development shalt be engineered fill that is suitably placed and compacted in accordance with City PWD and current adopted UBC standards, except for the upper 1.5-fioot of till placed outside of public rights-of--way and that does not underlie buildings, structures, or vehicular aa~ss ways or parking areas. ~~ :: {{ :, # '3 i 3 ~ l" 4 ~~ i'; ,~L .. 3' ~- ~,~,. ~:_ Ni. -_ - -r"Y~ Exh~b~t D ~+~1 .. . . - .,_~. `a -. F'RIVATF~~PARK , ~~.L ~u.~ ..... _ r~ ~~y ' ~ ~:, , ~~-~_ ' 2'RESE~PuarTO~v 36"REOWC30D sl 5 ~.~ ~r ~ ~ ~~ ,r ~ _ r~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ IFOR FUTURE STREET ~~ ~ -- 14 ~ 13 1 , .. ., , ri~ ,~ _ ~ ~. r`•' •-^" - '-'' • .•r, r ~'""^` n ; { _. ~ ~ r,1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ /~`~ ' ~ ~ In ' . . - ~ ~~" _ _ _~ + ~ ` ( , ;,` ' ~ ,~ 00 4,256 SF 4,256 ~ -fi ' '' ~ ":; ~ ` f,: ~\~ 1 - --?~'` ..fit ~~~'~/ ` tir-~. ~~ . ~ ~~ r ~ ~ _ ..1 .... -~.. _ L, ~ . i ~ ~ ^es ~.i .. 1 .... .- ~ - -- - . ~ : .~.~ ~ .. s '~ l - .f '-fem. `v ... . r ~ f I( ~': N ~3R 0 OKDAL~' GARDENS 30' N ~ N ~ N .r ~_ _ -_ S89'37'1 BROOKDALE A V.,~'NUE - KNUCKLE' TURNAROUND SCALE: 1 "=50' 52' R/W ~ 6' 20' 20' 6' ~ z 3.5'4 5' 2' 18' ~ 18 ` 2' 5'1.5' 4 . . r3., CONCRETE ~ a, SIDEWALK l/2 MOUNTABLE CURB ~ do GUTTER SLOPE 3.DQ9: SLOPE 3.00.-~. ~ 1 ;~ ~~ ~~ SUBGRADE -COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM 6" OF 3/4"(OSHD) CRUSHED ROCK (MIN.} OF 95% AASI~TO T-99-86(D) COMPACTED TO 95~ OSHD (MIN.} LINO GTF-200 WOVEN 8" OF 4" MINUS CRUSHED ROCK GEOTEXTILE FABRIC WELL COMPACTED OR APPROVED EQ. STREET SECTION (40' WIDE) 36' R/W ~ 6' 20` 10' W ~ z a 1.54 5' 2' 18, ~ ~, 1' .~ O . a n. CONCRETE 3" of Ci,gss "C' n a SIDEWALK ASFH/~T4C MOUNTABLE CURB corrcRE~ f & G.~~--SLOPE 3.a0~ 3 00~-,-_ r, 1, 1~ I - - g ~ ---i SUBGRADE - COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM 6" OF 3/4"(OSHD) CRUSHED ROCK (MIN.) OF 95~ AASHTO T--99---86(D) COMPACTEp TO 9S~ OSHD (MIN.) LINQ GTF---200 WOVEN 8" OF 4" MINU5 CRUSHED ROCK GEOTEXTILE FABRIC WELIw COMPACTED OR APPROVED EQ. STREET SECTION (~o' WIDE) BROOKDA~E' GARD~'NS BROOKDALE A V.~`NUB scA~E: ~ "=10'