The URL can be used to link to this page

SCE1997-00001 • • 4. . 4J. II CITY OF TIOARD • Community Development Shaping (Better Community CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER a BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER Case Number(s): SIGN CODE EXCEPTION (SCE) 97-0001 Case Name(s): PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION Name of Owner: Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) Name of Applicant: Same as Owner 'Address of Applicant: 200 Market Street. Suite 700 City: Portland State: Oregon Zip: 97207 Address of Property: 11410 SW 68th Parkway City: Tigard State: Oregon Zip: 97223 Tax Map & Lot No(s).: WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. Request:—> The applicant has requested a Sign Code Exception to allow a second freestanding sign along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. Zone: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. Action: —➢ ❑ Approval as requested ❑ Approval with conditions © Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: © Owners of record within the required distance © Affected governmental agencies © The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator © The applicant and owner(s) Final Decision: ab THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON WEDNESDAY JULY 9,1991 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290 (B) and Section 18.32.370, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within ten (10) days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee(s) of $1,745.00 plus transcript costs, not in excess of $500.00. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M.ON JULY 9,1997. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER {COVER SHEET) • • BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application for a sign code exception to Tigard ) FINAL ORDER Community Development Code § 18.114.130(D)(a)(iii) to ) allow a second free-standing sign for the PERS building at SW ) SCE 97-0001 68th Parkway and Haines Street in the City of Tigard, Oregon •) (PERS) I. SUMMARY A. The applicant requests approval of an exception to the sign code to allow a second free- standing sign for the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) building. Plans and elevations of the proposed sign are in the record. It will be a triangular column in design. 1. The letters "PERS" are etched into two sides the column vertically; on one side, the street number of the property also is shown. The third side is blank. 2. As amended by the applicant at the hearing, the column would be not more than 8 feet high. Each side of the triangular column would be about two feet wide at its base. The total sign face area will be about 90 square feet, but only about 18 square feet are used. 3. The sign is proposed to be placed in a grove of trees on the site in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of SW 68th Parkway and SW Haines Street to help direct PERS members to the building from the east (Haines Street) and south(68th Parkway). B. At the public hearing in this matter and in their written report to the hearings officer, city staff recommended denial of the application, because the application does not comply with Tigard Community Development Code (CDC) § 18.114.145. The applicant asserted in written and oral testimony that an exception should be granted, based solely on CDC § 18.114.140.A. The applicant argued that the site is subject to unique conditions (principally topography, the change in grade across the site, building placement and orientation, and trees), and that PERS attracts generally older individuals who may be"directionally challenged"and need added signage to identify and get to the building. The applicant argues that signage on the building will be obstructed by topography and trees over time. C. The principal issues in this case are: 1. Whether CDC § 18.114.040(A) authorizes the granting of a sign code exception independent of CDC 18.114.045(A); and, if so, 2. Whether the facts in the record support a finding that the proposed sign code exception complies with CDC § 18.114.040(A). D. For the reasons given herein, the hearings officer concludes CDC § 18.114.040(A) does not authorize the granting of a sign code exception independent of CDC 18.114.045(A) and denies the sign code exception. Hearings Officer iicer Final Order SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 1 • • II. FINDINGS ABOUT THE SITE The hearings officer incorporates by reference the findings about the site and surroundings in Section III of the City of Tigard Staff Reported dated June 2, 1997 (the Staff Report). III. HEARING AND RECORD A. Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") received testimony at the public hearing about this application on June 9, 1997. A record of that testimony is included herein as Exhibit A (Parties of Record), Exhibit B (Taped Proceedings), and Exhibit C (Written Testimony). These exhibits are filed at Tigard City Hall. B. The hearings officer opened the hearing with required notices,disclosed that he is a member of PERS, disclosed that he visitecr the site and lives in the area, and invited objections to and questions about his site visit or relationship to the applicant. None followed. City planner Mark Roberts summarized the Staff Report. Three witnesses appeared for the applicant: Fred McDonnal (PERS Director), David Bailey (PERS Deputy Director) and Peter Daniels (construction manager for the PERS project). 1. Mr. McDonnal testified about the characteristics of the site,i.e., the change in grade from the highway and bridge approach above, the topography of the site, and the orientation of the building (with an entry facing away from 68th Parkway). He testified about the clients of PERS. He said they often have problems with accessibility; hence PERS selected a site with convenient highway access. He introduced four photographs of the building. He argued that landscaping and retained trees will obstruct views of the site. 2. Mr. Bailey testified that there is a sign ("PERS" with an arrow pointing toward the site) for westbound traffic exiting the overpass on Haines Street, and he introduced two photographs of that sign. He noted other roadside signs in the vicinity could be perceived as visual clutter. He argued there is no similar sign for traffic traveling north on 68th Parkway (i.e., after exiting southbound Interstate 5). He argued trees will block views of the building from 68th Parkway south of Haines Street. 3. Mr. Daniels testified that ODOT installed a total of four signs in the vicinity to help identify access to the PERS site: one sign for west- and eastbound traffic on Highway 99W at 68th Parkway; one for westbound traffic exiting the overpass on Haines Street; and one on the exit ramp for southbound traffic from Interstate 5 to 68th Parkway. All four signs say"PERS" and contain an arrow pointing in the appropriate direction(s). He argued a sign on the building would be obscured by retained trees and landscaping from the intersection of Haines Street and 68th Parkway. He argued nothing in CDC § 18.114.040(A) requires compliance with CDC § 18.114.045(A); and nothing in CDC § 18.114.045(A) precludes approval of a sign code exception based exclusively on CDC § 18.114.040(A). He argued that the two approaches to the site (i.e., from Haines Street off of northbound Interstate 5 and from 68th Parkway off of southbound Interstate 5) are like two accesses to the site (drawing an analogy to the circumstances that allow a second entry sign under CDC § 18.114.045(A)(2)). He agreed to limit the total height of the sign to eight feet measured from grade rather than nine feet as shown in the plans submitted with the application. Hearings Officer Final Order - SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 2 • • IV. APPLICABLE APPROVAL STANDARDS A. The applicant and city staff dispute what standards are applicable to the proposed sign code exception. The applicant asserts that a sign code exception can be based exclusively on CDC § 18.114.140(A).' City staff assert that a sign code exception must comply with one of the five standards in CDC 18.114.145(A) in addition to CDC § 18.114.140(A). B. The hearings officer finds that CDC § 18.114.040(A) on its face and read alone could be construed to authorize a sign code exception. It authorizes the hearings officer to approve an exception, and it provides a standard to evaluate such an exception, (i.e., "when the applicant demonstrates that,owing to the special or unusual circumstances relating to the design, structure or placement of the sign in relation to other structures, the literal interpretation of this chapter would interfere with the communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit"). Therefore, if the CDC contained nothing else, the hearings officer would find CDC § 18.114.040(A) is the applicable standard in this case. C. But traditional rules of legislative construction require each section of the law to be read in context and as part of the whole. When CDC § 18.114.040(A) is read in context, the hearings officer finds that it does not authorize a sign code exception independently. CDC § 18.114.045(A) clearly applies to a sign code exception. CDC § 18.114.040(A) does not waive applicability of CDC § 18.411.045(A) to a sign code exception. Therefore both sections apply to a sign code exception. D. The hearings officer finds CDC § 18.411.040(A) applies to all sign code exceptions. It contains a general standard all exceptions have to fulfill, (i.e., to be warranted by unusual circumstances). The standards in CDC § 18.114.045(A) address the particularities of the circumstances, especially the outcome (e.g., the total amount of signage or orientation of the excepted sign). An exception merely has to fulfill one of the provisions in CDC § 18.114.045(A), because the particularities of each circumstance will differ. Only one of the standards in CDC § 18.411.045(A) typically will apply in a given case. These two sections (i.e., §§ 18.114.040(A) and 18.114.045(A)) need to be read and applied together to fulfill the legislative intent reflected in the CDC generally and in this chapter particularly. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. The hearings officer finds that the sign code exception should be denied, because the applicant did not bear the burden of proving that the sign code exception complies with CDC § 18.114.045(A). B. In the interests of providing a complete decision in the event this final order is appealed to city council, the hearings officer makes the following additional findings: 1. The PERS site is subject to unusual topographic conditions and retained vegetation that do generally obscure the building from view from the routes by which most traffic will approach the building. ` The applicant concedes that the sign code exception does not comply with one of the five standards in CDC § 18.114.045(A). The exception in this case can be approved only if it can be granted exclusively under CDC § 18.114.040(A). Hearings Officer Final Order - SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 3 • • 2. However the applicant has remedied that circumstance by having ODOT place signs to direct drivers to the building from all directions. From that stand-point, the applicant has far better signage than any similarly-situated private business or public use in the area familiar to the hearings officer. 3. The hearings officer finds there is no need for a sign at the corner to direct westbound traffic on Haines Street. The ODOT sign on Haines Street west of the overpass does so adequately. An additional sign at the corner would add to the clutter and increase the competition among signs in that short stretch of roadway. 4. It is true that there is no sign to help make sure that the driver of a northbound car on 68th Parkway continues north through the intersection with Haines Street rather than turning east onto Haines Street. A driver could become confused at that point. a. But the hearings officer finds that the upper story of the PERS building is visible from the stop line for a northbound car at that intersection. A sign on the wall or roof of the building would be visible from that point. Therefore the potential for confusion could be reduced with a building-or roof-mounted sign that would comply with the CDC. b. It is possible that retained trees or new landscaping will block the view of such a sign in the future, but the evidence is not sufficient for the hearings officer to find such a sign will not be visible from the stop line at 68th Parkway and Haines Street. c. Even accepting for the sake of discussion that a sign is needed, and a sign on the wall or roof of the building would not suffice, the hearings officer is not convinced the proposed sign will best meet the need for information for a driver traveling north on 68th Parkway toward Haines Street. The best place for such a sign would be along 68th Parkway at a point far enough south of the intersection so that drivers would have time to move into the appropriate lane at the intersection (i.e., the lane for through traffic). If the proposed sign is placed in the northeast quadrant of the intersection, a driver will not be able to see it until well into the intersection. That may be too late for a driver who has already started the right-hand turning movement onto Haines Street. The hearings officer suggests the applicant consider a better location for an off-site directional sign. C. The hearings officer adopts as his own and incorporates by reference the findings about compliance with the Community Development Code and Comprehensive Plan in Section IV of the Staff Report except as expressly provided otherwise herein. VI. CONCLUSION AND DECISION A. The hearings officer concludes: 1. That the applicant has not borne the burden of proof that the proposed sign code exception is warranted under CDC § 18.114.040(A) and 18.114.045(A) 2. That the sign code exception does not comply with the applicable criteria and standards of the Community Development Code. Hearings Officer f►cer Final Order SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 4 • • B. In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the Staff Report and other reports of effect agencies and public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby denies SCE 97-0001 (PERS). DATED this 23rd day of June, 1997. "A A.Ara NY/ i Larry Epst '' City of Ti:_ - gs Officer Hearings Officer Final Order - SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 5 • • Agenda Item: 2.1 • Hearing Date: June 9. 1997 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO. THE A 1.�1► HEARING'S OFFICER CRY OF TIGARD FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON s Community A �C�un;ry SECTION I: SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST CASES: FILE NAME: PERS OFFICE SIGN CODE EXCEPTION Sign Code Exception SCE 97-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested a Sign Code Exception to allow a second freestanding sign along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. APPLICANT: Public Employees Retirement Services OWNER: Same Attention: David Bailey, Deputy Director 200 Market Street, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97207-0073 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. ZONING DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) District standards. SECTION II: STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends DENIAL, subject to the following findings contained within this report: SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 1 OF 5 ID • SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property was designated as a Commercial Professional site since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1983. Along with all properties designated Commercial Professional in the Tigard Triangle, in December of 1996 the site was re-designated with a Mixed Use Employment Zoning District Designation. Site Development Review 96-0010 was approved with conditions on June 6, 1996. The site is now nearing completion under the development approval for the PERS office use. The applicant was previously issued a sign permit for a 32 square foot freestanding sign. This sign permit was issued April 14, 1997. This sign is presently under construction. The City has no record of any other more recent land use applications for this site. • Vicinity Information: The property is adjoined by the Interstate 5 Freeway to the east and abuts the Key Bank_ facility to the north. To the south of the SW Haines Street off-ramp, the property is adjoined by a mixture of residential and commercial uses. To the west is the Oregon Education Association site. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is now mostly developed with the PERS office building. The applicant has proposed a freestanding sign along the SW 68th Parkway frontage. During the completeness review for the application, the applicant refused to provide specific findings that addressed the applicable approval criteria of Section 18.114.145. For this reason, Section 18.32 states that the Director shall find the application complete on the 31st day after the application was originally submitted. The applicant has requested an exception to this requirement to develop one (1) additional freestanding sign to have a total of two (2) freestanding signs along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. SECTION IV: APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Signs: The recently adopted Mixed Use Employment Zoning District standards requires that properties designated Mixed Use Employment comply with the signage standards of the Commercial-Professional Zoning District Section 18.114.130 (D)(a) (iii) states that one multi-faced, freestanding sign shall be permitted. The applicant was previously issued a sign permit for a 32 square foot freestanding sign. The applicant has requested an exception to develop one additional freestanding sign to have a total of two freestanding signs along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 2 OF 5 • • Sign Code Exceptions: Section 18.114.140(A) states that the Hearings Officer may grant exceptions to the requirements of this chapter when the applicant demonstrates that, owing to special or unusual circumstances relating to the design, structure or placement of the sign in relation to other structures, the literal interpretation of this chapter would interfere with the communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit The applicant provided findings related to the general standard that allows for the Sign Code Exception process. Section 18.114.145 that is reviewed below, provides the actual approval criteria that must be met in order to approve an exception to the development standards of the Sign Code. Approval Criteria for Exceptions to the Sign Code: Section 18.114.145(A) states that the Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an exception to the sign code based on findings that at least one of five criteria are satisfied. 1. The proposed exception to the height limits in the sign code is necessary to make the sign visible from the street because of the topography of the site, and/or a conforming building or sign on an adjacent property would limit the view of a sign erected on the site in conformance with Sign Code standards; Although the proposed sign is one (1)-foot above the eight (8)-foot height limit that is permitted for freestanding signage in the Mixed Use Employment Zoning District, the applicant has not proposed an exception to the height limits of the sign code within the applicant's narrative. The second freestanding sign has been proposed for additional site identification. The applicant has not proposed an exception to the allowable height limit. Without an exception, the Sign Code permits clearly identifiable wall signage on each building elevation, a freestanding sign, and a driveway entrance identification sign. For these reasons, it appears possible to provide sufficient identification of the PERS site without utilizing a Sign Code • Exception. 2. A second free standing sign is necessary to adequately identify a second entrance to a business or premises that is oriented towards a different street frontage; The site has one (1) entrance so this criteria is not found to be applicable to this request. The PERS building is generally oriented towards SW 68th Parkway that is permitted to have a freestanding sign. 3. Up to an additional 25 percent of sign area or height may be permitted when it is determined that the increase will not deter from the purpose of this chapter. This increase should be judged according to specific needs and circumstances that necessitate additional area to make the sign sufficiently legible. The increase(s) shall not conflict with any other non-dimensional standards or restrictions of this chapter. Although the proposed freestanding sign is one (1)-foot above the eight (8)-foot height limit for freestanding signage, the applicant has not requested an additional amount of sign height or area within the applicant's narrative. For this reason, it is not recommended that this criteria be found to be applicable. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 3 OF 5 • • 4. The proposed sign is consistent with the criteria set forth in Subsection 18.114.130.G of this chapter; This section refers to additional allowable sign height and area that are found to be permissible through the original design review process for the use that is developed on the property. This criteria is not found to be applicable because the applicant has requested an additional sign, not sign area, or height in excess of the minimum that is permitted. 5. The proposed exception for a second freestanding sign on an interior lot that is zoned commercial or industrial is appropriate because all of the following apply: A. The combined height of both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of the sign height normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district; B. Neither sign will pose a vision clearance problem or will project into the public right-of-way; and C. Total combined sign area for both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of what is normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district Criteria 5 is not applicable to this request because the site is a corner lot, not an interior lot, as required within the general allowance for this type of exception. Section 18.114.145(B) states that in addition to the criteria in A above, the Hearings Officer shall review all of the existing or proposed signage for the development and its relationship to the intent and purpose of this chapter. As a condition of approval, the Hearings Officer may require: 1. Removal or alteration of non-conforming signs to achieve compliance with the standards contained in this chapter; Because the facility is new and the underlying signage regulations have not been revised since the development was approved, this standard is not applicable to this request. 2. Removal or alteration of conforming signs in order to establish a consistent sign design throughout the development; and...To date, a permit for one (1) other freestanding sign has been issued for this site. The previously permitted sign is presently under construction at the time this report was prepared. This sign does not need to be removed because it complies with current sign code standards. 3. Application for sign permits for signs erected without permits or removal of such illegal signs. A recent review of City permit records indicates that only a single freestanding sign has been permitted for site signage .at this time. This permitted freestanding monument sign is presently under construction. No illegally erected signs were noted during a recent site inspection. For this reason, it is recommended that the Hearing's Officer find that this standard is not applicable to this request. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 • PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 4 OF 5 o • • SECTION V: OTHER STAFF COMMENTS No other comments or objections have been received concerning this request. SECTION VL• AGENCY COMMENTS No other comments or objections have been received concerning this request. ' 77///16(te,4 June 2. 1997 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner, AICP eet ��? ( Za 2 June 2. 1997 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdo DATE Planning Manage eta+rpinlarfc_r sc -97-01.dee STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 5 OF 5 t 2'-0' 7.1b al CURVED 9TAI1tE96 STEEL 6101 PAM. J 39'CiW'FER M. A .. .- 1 a 0 \_ i I lt x:" 4e iii S 7 di . .AEF11410 =` \ j C`3 • . • ,,.--pc-;\ ,Ili \\ ,\ l i < i I 1 '� {'11t��j,`b\ \ \ r 111, '\/1.\/../2,, i _.> ' i �; •�\' 1 <• Proposed 'J �'' I Freestanding Sign . ;y �. ' • I CJi 0 8 wMAPES STREET I PLOT PLAN CASE NO. E " H ! B i i MAP i PERS Sign Code Exception SCE 97- 0001 I 1 i , l f -1 1-11- ' . 11111�01 - •• .---11 Hi-1 r ''il 7, r--- i PINE sr l' 1 11 _ - L_ IT OP. II ai l ( - __ up p .-- 7.---- F 7 . 4 "4. ./------- , 4.E. 1 r , z 46 N , ,— cz 0.. — , 8 l . cm _____ ,/7v , c . /A — .:.,„ „:,-„, .:,,,,, SUB T - C.,_,4 ._, ,.... •.,..„• ,.,::...ir — PA , ,_, ---> „s_ y .. .,.z.,.., •.,.., cz „. ' cI c..A ' 1111111sTi 1,i E ;Ej 1 P... -c-- 111 palA it co cm r 1� 1 �� l I � f x ' 111}I 0- aU- _ 1— r 1 1 1,11_ ' . 1 ( i a '. T x l 1 � HH DARTMCLITH ST �1 U -----_____________ I — Li , i iii f r-11 1 I Vicinity Map AN SCE-97-0001 Note: Map is not to scale A Pers Sign Code Exception _ .ter', ., Agenda Item: 2.1 Hearing Date: June 9. 1997 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE HE NG'S O cin"OF T.GARO. ::.:.: Community Devetopment FOR:THE:CITY OF TIGAR0 OREGON: shapingAbetterCvmmunity: SECTION I: SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST CASES: FILE NAME: PERS OFFICE SIGN CODE EXCEPTION Sign Code Exception SCE 97-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested a Sign Code Exception to allow a second freestanding sign along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. APPLICANT: Public Employees Retirement Services OWNER: Same Attention: David Bailey, Deputy Director 200 Market Street, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97207-0073 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. ZONING DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1 S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. • APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) District standards. SECTION II: STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff.:;;recommends: DENtAL` sub'ect`::ao:<ae follow:. fndin sconta.ined: w.thin ;tis re ort: . : SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 1 OF 5 • SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property was designated as a Commercial Professional site since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1983. Along with all properties designated Commercial Professional in the Tigard Triangle, in December of 1996 the site was re-designated with a Mixed Use Employment Zoning District Designation. Site Development Review 96-0010 was approved with conditions on June 6, 1996. The site is now nearing completion under the development approval for the PERS office use. The applicant was previously issued a sign permit for a 32 square foot freestanding sign. This sign permit was issued April 14, 1997. This sign is presently under construction. The City has no record of any other more recent land use applications for this site. Vicinity Information: The property is adjoined by the Interstate 5 Freeway to the east and abuts the Key Bank facility to the north. To the south of the SW Haines Street off-ramp, the property is adjoined by a mixture of residential and commercial uses. To the west is the Oregon Education Association site. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is now mostly developed with the PERS office building. The applicant has proposed a freestanding sign along the SW 68th Parkway frontage. During the completeness review for the application, the applicant refused to provide specific findings that addressed the applicable approval criteria of Section 18.114.145. For this reason, Section 18.32 states that the Director shall find the application complete on the 31st day after the application was originally submitted. The applicant has requested an exception to this requirement to develop one (1) additional freestanding sign to have a total of two (2) freestanding signs along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. SECTION IV: APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Signs: The recently adopted Mixed Use Employment Zoning District standards requires that properties designated Mixed Use Employment comply with the signage standards of the Commercial-Professional Zoning District. Section 18.114.130 (D)(a) (iii) states that one multi-faced, freestanding sign shall be permitted. The applicant was previously issued a sign permit for a 32 square foot freestanding sign. The applicant has requested an exception to develop one additional freestanding sign to have a total of two freestanding signs along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 2 OF 5 • • Sign Code Exceptions: Section 18.114.140(A) states that the Hearings Officer may grant exceptions to the requirements of this chapter when the applicant demonstrates that, owing to special or unusual circumstances relating to the design, structure or placement of the sign in relation to other structures, the literal interpretation of this chapter would interfere with the• communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit. The applicant provided findings related to the general standard that allows for the Sign Code Exception process. Section 18.114.145 that is reviewed below, provides the actual approval criteria that must be met in order to approve an exception to the development standards of the Sign Code. Approval Criteria for Exceptions to the Sign Code: Section 18.114.145(A) states that the Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an exception to the sign code based on findings that at least one of five criteria are satisfied. 1. The proposed exception to the height limits in the sign code is necessary to make the sign visible from the street because of the topography of the site, and/or a conforming building or sign on an adjacent property would limit the view of a sign erected on the site in conformance with Sign Code standards; Although the proposed sign is one (1)-foot above the eight (8)-foot height limit that is permitted for freestanding signage in the Mixed Use Employment Zoning District, the applicant has not proposed an exception to the height limits of the sign code within the applicant's narrative. The second freestanding sign has been proposed for additional site identification. The applicant has not proposed an exception to the allowable height limit. Without an exception, the Sign Code permits clearly identifiable wall signage on each building elevation, a freestanding sign, and a driveway entrance identification sign. For these reasons, it appears possible to • provide sufficient identification of the PERS site without utilizing a Sign Code Exception. 2. A second free standing sign is necessary to adequately identify a second entrance to a business or premises that is oriented towards a different street frontage; The site has one (1) entrance so this criteria is not found to be applicable to this request. The PERS building is generally oriented towards SW 68th Parkway that is permitted to have a freestanding sign. 3. Up to an additional 25 percent of sign area or height may be permitted when it is determined that the increase will not deter from the purpose of this chapter. This increase should be judged according to specific needs and circumstances that necessitate additional area to make the sign sufficiently legible. The increase(s) shall not conflict with any other non-dimensional standards or restrictions of this chapter. Although the proposed freestanding sign is one (1)-foot above the eight (8)-foot height limit for freestanding signage, the applicant has not requested an additional amount of sign height or area within the applicant's narrative. For this reason, it is not recommended that this criteria be found to be applicable. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 3 OF 5 • • 4. The proposed sign is consistent with the criteria set forth in Subsection 18.114.130.G of this chapter; This section refers to additional allowable sign height and area that are found to be permissible through the original design review process for the use that is developed on the property. This criteria is not found to be applicable because the applicant has requested an additional sign, not sign area, or height in excess of the minimum that is permitted. 5. The proposed exception for a second freestanding sign on an interior lot that is zoned commercial or industrial is appropriate because all of the following apply: A. The combined height of both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of the sign height normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district; B. Neither sign will pose a vision clearance problem or will project into the public right-of-way; and C. Total combined sign area for both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of what is normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district. Criteria 5 is not applicable to this request because the site is a corner lot, not an interior lot, as required within the general allowance for this type of exception. Section 18.114.145(B) states that in addition to the criteria in A above, the Hearings Officer shall review all of the existing or proposed signage for the development and its relationship to the intent and purpose of this chapter. As a condition of approval, the Hearings Officer may require: 1. Removal or alteration of non-conforming signs to achieve compliance with the standards contained in this chapter; Because the facility is new and the underlying signage regulations have not been revised since the development was approved, this standard is not applicable to this request. 2. Removal or alteration of conforming signs in order to establish a consistent sign design throughout the development; and...To date, a permit for one (1) other freestanding sign has been issued for this site. The previously permitted sign is presently under construction at the time this report was prepared. This sign does not need to be removed because it complies with current sign code standards. 3. Application for sign permits for signs erected without permits or removal of such illegal signs. A recent review of City permit records indicates that only a single freestanding sign has been permitted for site signage at this time. This permitted freestanding monument sign is presently under construction. No illegally erected signs were noted during a recent site inspection. For this reason, it is recommended that the Hearing's Officer find that this standard is not applicable to this request. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 4 OF 5 • S SECTION V: OTHER STAFF COMMENTS No other comments or objections have been received concerning this request. • SECTION VI: AGENCY COMMENTS No other comments or objections have been received concerning this request. / ""etIVIV June 2. 1997 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner, AICP �G1�cc WA/Let/LP- June 2. 1997 • APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdo DATE Planning Manage i:lcurpIn\ark_Asce-97-01.dec STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 5 OF 5 l . Y. t 2'-0' t 'o \ \ •'--.-..-,-..- e CUve STAINLESS STEEL p • SIGN PANEL T _ J CCN CI TE COLIJrN b �J0 [ ..s. 1 Iv ' R , 40* ' `• a, /JP o : .. iiiitr c lil S .%. / <et:, 4 4 ., 1 111 .. X ( or. ,N \\.. i n , . \ :,...,. / ,..„ I ;Ili 11410 • ! °. =� D Z 1. ... ,...-••••• • :.:... .:1 ,.....-,------... \ .01- \ \ , • .. SH ' ■1 e+ �. / 4II 1 DE „° II \/ �"' 1 I$ LTIff �7 'bi d ,' \ �, I L +' �/ 1 • Proposed �/ �, � 1.--Freestanding Sign �;' ,\:' I us ... , I • " .,',, I . 0 ( ,,,, 0 SOW' . i 8 W NAPES STREET • PLOT P L A ,( CASE NO. E X H I B ' T M ^ ,4 PERS Sign Code Exception i 1 t-� [ SCE 97- 0001 •A. . •• / — — z teI I ■�i NA ■1100° „E _ _ IIPP p .--- . te . , . •• Am= Imo SPRIJCF y • ✓ 1 ... mils simi CO CD— o { 1111011111 VI 4° 0) C SUB#T fi ,, --- K C . !.at PARcEL > co a 1 1111111 111 ,.i — els p.. B A ST CO ril e.. --c----' i 1 QI I _ i .•, 1 . ryt , o • -,---1......--, r , - - MI FE • ■._ ■• DARTMOUTH tlii U„..„. 1 1 III i ■ r Vicinity Map NA SCE 97-0001 I Note: Map is not to scale 1 Pers Sign Code Exception i • _ 4 I RSTA 7`E5 1 """`�_T--.,.,,,__„r REVISIONS; 8Y: "s I 1-. 11-7/P \\I � �rr.ru s` o �'�► ----7 0 0 0 0 1 W I / 23 o z\ c o ?,.c \ c \c o I w f1 o / c o\ c� o___A � I //\\\ \ c o \\o \\ _ c 0 o 1 1 / \ " E!J ` c c , ip c \ ,),_ c o 1 .t sb.c �o \ i__ \ . „, ( \ cs,A..# i , '\)- o 0 i , " , �► \\ � \ c o c \ \ 4/ 1 1 / c c t A wco /// y c c ......... *,9,. \\\\ii �� -VI_ c o c \ 41111W . .9 \ \ cc, \ / 1 -Lid //:.;,,,C; K :1\\0 PAP& 10 / \ / // /// / /..- :/7/:// 'V /- / / ' ',/,„ ///, ---"///,,,,,,,,./ / f � - CO\ '' \ o 0\ /' CI .....i o , :.7- / / 0,,/,/,//y //,.ry t ,s, / / /if/7/ / i CO \474.741) I I 0 ///://///: A. '1 I 11 I I I I P ri/ 4■0 Ef""' 3.- t. ■ \/ '\, Cr %It* 0.4f1"3\ SIGN Si - S W 68Th PARKWAY a ......, fwo ø 'tp i < -- .. •. it ILO A fil (MK : 4..it/40., y tl- 91z/Voti fAtiiidiNf''t.o`i kif LAST 03/13/'31/� t� 5/11f36 n4 Q tv41 �' 641.11°Q sc 1: r . 20'-0' • qP1vrt$D . Ot ,< Ot DRAW 9o' '• 4/41" Ot9Att PROJECT: 11E3256 s SI NO;TE PLAN > r-4a-o' 40 A1.1 r s • e r I E �4'CHAFFER TYP. v I CONCRETEICOLU N a' G ; 'al• .. I BRUSHED 89�IE 3 TIES•8t O.C. 4• SIGN FACE T6 THICK REVISIONS: BY: FULL HEIGHT I 11111 Ell .y S 4� 41.1 _ ��kiii- i I S.S.BENT E b•x3'x3' • iiwk\ ( )t VERICAL 4i' 4' LL 186.BOLT ivi,�i_i_ I 4 I • aa1=1�� I � SS.E�'x4'x3' I © REVEAL DETAIL hi , BRUSHED STAINLESS SS.EMBED E►5'x6'46' Q ; SIGN PACE. FULL$ice 't H (HEADED STUDS$ -I e 4'-0'x 4'-0'x l'-6' o L 4 �-CONC.FOOTING W/ 1! IS•1Y'O.C.EA WAY z CONNECTION DETAIL i- SIGN 12 - PLAN E SCALE.3'• I'-0' x$ 0 BCAI El�r1.1'-0' o ii Limo Xi 0 rumiLi4 u ACRYLIC LETTERS,IN TO 3/16 NCH . ?'-0' NICK ATTACHED WITH EPDXY.FONT TO BE FUTURA BOCK COLOR TO BE 4 PANTED'CHARCOAL'. a;i \ \ 6 ; •\ CURVED STAINLESS$TEFL, •,•. •• ' .• .••.. •..P ... SIGN PANEL •. .. ...• 4.- r CONCRETE COLUMN .•' CONCRETE COLUMN .• .• •• 34'CHAMFER TYP. )4'CHA1FER TYP. • .• S u, 3/4'RECE88ED LETTERS ., . " • FONT TO BE FUTURA BOCK • • • j....: .. • m ii 11410 • \� :: CO j. $ g • . ... . ..... 42 . . .. .. . •• • • 7 FIN GRADE FISH GRADE 8 top tAV 1 a.t.lv. • . ..• .. •.... . ...•I I I I I 1 W $ ; CONCRETE FOOTNG 1 CONCRETE FooTNG 1 1 DATE LtiST -'F- r--Nc-1 .1_ , r .1 1 , r--- 1 1 , , •'-/1f1/4 1'i'"Il- 111%4 PLATTED. 03/12/91 y1� �(�,(/�I 03/12/91 tV00 -NA� / -"� 11'1' -- AS NOTED � DRAWN: HL "_i O li l'I/ 'tW) ��I/ O 1 APPROVED: L. \_ J L J L J 411 • 41/ ' 1 /'� - PROJECT: 118296 •111 �;/jj SHEET NO: SIGN 12 - ELEVATION SIGN 12 - ELEVATION SIGN 412 - ELEVATION SN'�-2 4 ® , 1'-0 SCALE: I'-0' SCALE:T I'-0' ' 'T � OF • COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal • Notice TT 8834 P.O.BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 1 , BEAVERTON.OREGON 97075 j Legal Notice Advertising I •City of Tigard • C.1 Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • •• • • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit •Tigard,Oregon- 97223 ..t:ir A'.1%1'"i", "r fs:', •Vii; :Y 1::_o i`.rb. i 'a..._` ;:74,7�g., •Payable a•t. ' ......,N t: +vA� rKy �'J .v i. '.,, t ... ..-%.,:. 1,...;,°y' ..;` .,' •Accounts yabl :)Ttiefollowingtwill•beToonsideredbyetheTTigardHea gsOfficerOhMori=, .3 44-,; it z 4 ��., ...i ! ? "'7, ry- y,Jdae'9;19.97 st��P $t l• Civtc'Center'=.TOVi►rl'.HaI1 13125 .y1:.HaltBo tle 8,I -T1 T 5 •�cco_rax,. �'-f;i . -. o , ;,+q,1. a, gar��Oregon:Bot)%public--oral;and wn�ea:tes`� • ;it moniWia't04- iii nthlic.heaiitaiioa4liis"'matter wilt a odhch c'teci ii AFFIDAVIT OF aocordanoe'vnth the'rules of`Cha`� r '18;32`o£theTi and ` `� Q PUBLICATION .. .i� t,, ..r4''Y' .Municipa1.C•:ode;. anliules and:procedurgs of ihe:H Wings Officer.Failure to raise ii issue STATE OF OREGON, )ss iti peisori'or by letter accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) --allow the heanng authority and all'parties'to.respond pieclude`s an ap- ..pe tl,,and•failure tas ttie''•critenon froni�the Communi Develo Snyder rt 4. ..: ,�:.P7��F"�F�. ,, ! Pt I Kathy _m_ ent Code`'o Com__prehensive:Plan-at wtiich'a.colmn,eiit >IS direc ed _ being first duly sworn, depose and say,that I am the Advertisin a • Ludes an a "" 6asea oa' ��' "�'"� Ti ard-Tualatin Ti ,that,,ctntenon•,Further.informatioamaybe Director, or his principal clerk, of the g ``�" ",Di etoi�°`° ORS 193.010 obtained from=theaP1anning Division:at":13125,S:W Hall Boulevard,' a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ! s �,:,, .'. 0.?, ne p er o irculTt1gard in the g° t Y g.� ) . _7. 71.:.:•.; :i Vie:;" Ti Ore n;97223'oi>i� caltin 503 639=41 �-'� �.,��• ;8 and 193.020; published at PUBLIC'HEARING:Zt-t ` . � "•.= -7:-'�':''t 'Z _' .` ;• 1..'' aforesaid county and state; that the Code A%I�L,,Jp.'t:.'- fSIGN,CODE`EXCEPTIUN[SCE]97-0001: �� SCE 97-0001 PERS Sign z�..,,Q. rr ` PEESSIGN�COD EXCEP t t .N` �;' k�i.,. �Y •r_. �,{. ...? QN. ,,Yom ,, .;-.:}•' 'A��Si onIIr ;,:f to Lace a' . . ... �.�:' ��;�=•;_.�".�:,. a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the gn„Co E�ph' mq> p landing sign at the'. : entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and .cornerof SW Haines St eet'and,SW 68th Parkway:LOCATION:.11410 r SW 68th Parkway ;W y1S136DA;Tax Lot 00101: ZONE:Mixed.. consecutive in the following issues: :USe.Empioymen41MUkThe MUE:2oning district provides sites fo%bued`” Hess and:pirofessional services• 'he MUE,zone also provides sites for May 2 9 , 1997 major and minor"retail;and employment.uses:APPLICABLE.REVIEW CRITERI A:Comm unity Development Code Chapters 18.6 ;18.114 and ahi-1 i# Use mploymn4MUE standards:,,. @�� .� '_°'` ,:n; / ...v..,- 4 her ,... �1" Y 'i;:j�▪l]: 1 ti.. r,• 1.�� Vii'.::. t.,.... 9 h day of Diav :▪ :: 3Bmytt�=,j,; ;i: . . j r . 1-®®S!.: :..• ,:.; ziTr. Subscribed and sworn to bef a me this t _ µ"mow *; ..11.1:41:;!4,C71:-.4:. ti ^"`' I-'ic ``err 8 c+ v ziI, l,, .�y .r'�i�y : Notary lic for Orego -:".-a: =lam'FE-. .: ::�t... :I' .. :_�'' r_'', ={, _ f •• ::• My Commission Expires: 4- r;.!•'.:^',:,-t-►11111;r= :4:'" -' . ..,i ..it' ;; .'1::,.: • AFFIDAVIT `,• �:� r.:,k. �.�.,, . :,',Y.,;. '. "`_J-<:. `s,• '1 -'�;'4,( 'wi�.'��++..v t ^ ;'j. �:. :I I'?r S Y _.,. •I"1 f•._ :.:.r.: , :. .�';.k1 _ r_ ,Hbyn cam.Si. .° • ro . r., iPr..n'::. I '^ xt I 1. j .' r -. y ' I ` • ' 1, i i — 1— . , , I „~ , , , I 7 !i is ; I I I I I_ , i-' : 4 4.,'y-., _ 71:4x,-':it _:,„,-.r_.. --i-`,Tn t _-. k. '1. 11 .- t▪ ip -''C':,+y i-T"1 - [D.. .„,,,:- .:. . .. ll� ..'."'..'.. ...�' {{.,C r.i.^-'t r4 f1�y� =A -�4 b"1:;4: L_ ®�':'•�f,u.l i 1{_-� " -, ,. .,�,:A I.,...tn4 : "Y..: ` , :_a,,q--..-7-,-'-e . ....;,: ` " .'; ' '' ° • x7 iz:v'. A1cy I .i,rit� +.t }iteyoti.". .. . ' :IP .jP t�N _ -.i�' ': i. : f-. . :T18s3S a� ly199V �N_ :;auS` ,�;n. ::ir.. • . • • • �►, CITY OF TIGARD Community,DrveCopment Slzaping)1/Better Community PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE - - NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, JUNE 9. 1997 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION ESCEI 97-0001 FILE TITLE: PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION APPLICANT: Public Employees Retirement System OWNER: Same - Attention: David Bailey, Deputy Director 200 Market Street, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97207-0073 REQUEST > A Sign Code Exception request to place a second freestanding sign at the corner of SW Haines Street and SW 68th Parkway. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CCDE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 6/9/97 PUBLIC HEARING IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION R MAY 19. 1997, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUA CE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25 ) PER PAGE. OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25C) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER MARK ROBERTS. PLANNING DIVISION AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. ___ € sr —sr-____-___.--. -- \ \ \V • . .. -____. ,, 77/\ : : \ . i H x ` r SUBJECT • N 0 a PARCEL--»> �_ (J1 — i . ; .! _ _ — a.\7; • _-- i \ . van.cum sr SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 619197 PUBLIC HEARING • Agenda Item: 2.1 Hearing Date: June 9. 1997 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT `TO THE . CITY OF.TIGARD.. FARING::S::OF:FICER >» : :: Comiruii .�Develo . ent:;. FOR E::CITY .OF:TIGARD, OREGON; : : -.. Beier communitY SECTION I: SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST CASES: FILE NAME: PERS OFFICE SIGN CODE EXCEPTION Sign Code Exception SCE 97-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested a Sign Code Exception to allow a second freestanding sign along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. APPLICANT: Public Employees Retirement Services OWNER: Same Attention: David Bailey, Deputy Director 200 Market Street, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97207-0073 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. ZONING DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. APPLICABLE • REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) District standards. SECTION II: STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends::`:DENIA::L;>sub`ect: to :;the'followm fndin s` contained .within this:.: SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 1 OF 5 • • SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property was designated as a Commercial Professional site since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1983. Along with all properties designated Commercial Professional in the Tigard Triangle, in December of 1996 the site was re-designated with a Mixed Use Employment Zoning District Designation. Site Development Review 96-0010 was approved with conditions on June 6, 1996. The site is now nearing completion under the development approval for the PERS office use. The applicant was previously issued a sign permit for a 32 square foot freestanding sign. This sign permit was issued April 14, 1997. This sign is presently under construction. The City has no record of any other more recent land use applications for this site. • Vicinity Information: The property is adjoined by the Interstate 5 Freeway to the east and abuts the Key Bank facility to the north. To the south of the SW Haines Street off-ramp, the property is adjoined by a mixture of residential and commercial uses. To the west is the Oregon Education Association site. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is now mostly developed with the PERS office building. The applicant has proposed a freestanding sign along the SW 68th. Parkway frontage. During the completeness review for the application, the applicant refused to provide specific findings that addressed the applicable approval criteria of Section 18.114.145. For this reason, Section 18.32 states that the Director shall find the application complete on the 31st day after the application was originally submitted. The applicant has requested an exception to this requirement to develop one (1) additional freestanding sign to have a total of two (2) freestanding signs along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. SECTION IV: APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Signs: The recently adopted Mixed Use Employment Zoning District standards requires that properties designated Mixed Use Employment comply with the signage standards of the Commercial-Professional Zoning District. Section 18.114.130 (D)(a) (iii) states that one multi-faced, freestanding sign shall be permitted. The applicant was previously issued a sign permit for a 32 square foot freestanding sign. The applicant has requested an exception to develop one additional freestanding sign to have a total of two freestanding signs along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 2 OF 5 • • Sign Code Exceptions: Section 18.114.140(A) states that the Hearings Officer may grant exceptions to the requirements of this chapter when the applicant demonstrates that, owing to special or unusual circumstances relating to the design, structure or placement of the sign in relation to other structures, the literal interpretation of this chapter would interfere with the communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit. The applicant provided findings related to the general standard that allows for the Sign Code Exception process. Section 18.114.145 that is reviewed below, provides the actual approval criteria that must be met in order to approve an exception to the development standards of the Sign Code. Approval Criteria for Exceptions to the Sign Code: Section 18.114.145(A) states that the Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an exception to the sign code based on findings that at least one of five criteria are satisfied. 1. The proposed exception to the height limits in the sign code is necessary to make the sign visible from the street because of the topography of the site, and/or a conforming building or sign on an adjacent property would limit the view of a sign erected on the site in conformance with Sign Code standards; Although the proposed sign is one (1)-foot above the eight (8)-foot height limit that is permitted for freestanding signage in the Mixed Use Employment Zoning District, the applicant has not proposed an exception to the height limits of the sign code within the applicant's narrative. The second freestanding sign has been proposed for additional site identification. The applicant has not proposed an exception to the allowable height limit. Without an exception, the Sign Code permits clearly identifiable wall signage on each building elevation, a freestanding sign, and a driveway entrance identification sign. For these reasons, it appears possible to • provide sufficient identification of the PERS site without utilizing a Sign Code Exception. 2. A second free standing sign is necessary to adequately identify a second entrance to a business or premises that is oriented towards a different street frontage; The site has one (1) entrance so this criteria is not found to be applicable to this request. The PERS building is generally oriented towards SW 68th Parkway that is permitted to have a freestanding sign. 3. Up to an additional 25 percent of sign area or height may be permitted when it is determined that the increase will not deter from the purpose of this chapter. This increase should be judged according to specific needs and circumstances that necessitate additional area to make the sign sufficiently legible. The increase(s) shall not conflict with any other non-dimensional standards or restrictions of this chapter. Although the proposed freestanding sign is one (1)-foot above the eight (8)-foot height limit for freestanding signage, the applicant has not requested an additional amount of sign height or area within the applicant's narrative. For this reason, it is not recommended that this criteria be found to be applicable. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 3 OF 5 • • 4. The proposed sign is consistent with the criteria set forth in Subsection 18.114.130.G of this chapter; This section refers to additional allowable sign height and area that are found to be permissible through the original design review process for the use that is developed on the property. This criteria is not found to be applicable because the applicant has requested an additional sign, not sign area, or height in excess of the minimum that is permitted. 5. The proposed exception for a second freestanding sign on an interior lot that is zoned commercial or industrial is appropriate because all of the following apply: A. The combined height of both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of the sign height normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district; B. Neither sign will pose a vision clearance problem or will project into the public right-of-way; and C. Total combined sign area for both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of what is normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the • same zoning district. Criteria 5 is not applicable to this request because the site is a corner lot, not an interior lot, as required within the general allowance for this type of exception. Section 18.114.145(B) states that in addition to the criteria in A above, the Hearings Officer shall review all of the existing or proposed signage for the development and its relationship to the intent and purpose of this chapter. As a condition of approval, the Hearings Officer may require: 1. Removal or alteration of non-conforming signs to achieve compliance with the standards contained in this chapter; Because the facility is new and the underlying signage regulations have not been revised since the development was approved, this standard is not applicable to this request. 2. Removal or alteration of conforming signs in order to establish a consistent sign design throughout the development; and...To date, a permit for one (1) other freestanding sign has been issued for this site. The previously permitted sign is presently under construction at the time this report was prepared. This sign does not need to be removed because it complies with current sign code standards. 3. Application for sign permits for signs erected without permits or removal of such illegal signs. A recent review of City permit records indicates that only a single freestanding sign has been permitted for site signage at this time. This permitted freestanding monument sign is presently under construction. No illegally erected signs were noted during a recent site inspection. For this reason, it is recommended that the Hearing's Officer find that this standard is not applicable to this request. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 4 OF 5 • SECTION V: OTHER STAFF COMMENTS No other comments or objections have been received concerning this request. SECTION VI: AGENCY COMMENTS No other comments or objections have been received concerning this request. ' 77,Z&.64 June 2. 1997 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner, AICP June 2. 1997 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdo DATE Planning Manage i:1wrpinlark_rlsce-97-01.dec STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 5 OF 5 T.m' r .- • • l •mac- i Q.RED STAINLESS STEEL .... I- . ' '. p .... SIGN PALL / CGNCFETE COLUMN • -- ----- I--- I � • Q .1 NI 11111111r am In or , , Lii , , ss., 1 n , , .. I , , . .. 1 ....1 %iv ,‘ I \ I ! ,.- . 11i11410 . I A \ i I, /... \ IP\ 'Ilp i 77.) .. - 10'. '. '.. 1 \\'' II co \ iI --�-- \ d • FNISH ' ,i b+ ` \ ' / I ' i f GRADE I b° II' ` N'/ I Lim I I 6 • :\ ilb \/ I b d Li 1 r + /� " / /�/ \ ` / L �/' ; . '/ I Proposed �;\)/ , , , ill'Im• 11 Freestanding Sign �;' • " %' . • ' / . \ >/' Li. • I O , _J >- .� V h. t 8 W HANES STREET PLOT PLAN ,( CASE NO. ^ H t -y- A 4 PERS Sign Code Exception ! 1 ! 11-; t SCE 97- 0001 I ► • • ,. , ' ' z POP. 11 IIII ObM. ME ST _ 1, _All 1 OP Al `1 .in IIIII MI MI alll 1 ' all 4 1 CO 0-SI2 Illajjksto I Li i IP I____S Iv , - . : N f, .. .,,, .,,,. ,„ ,,.... „ : _ .,„ :.•:, „. 1 c IO —al ci • P �� ii , .13A i ' CO -c------- I 1 I ct I I liki ' , • g 0) 145. / J C flE ■ >, DPRINCUTH i1ii (UI)1 , i f-------, III 1 ■ 1Vicinity Map N SCE 97-0001 1 Note: Map is not to scale 1 Pers Sign Code Exception • \&RL/ A� REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community DeveCopment RECEIVED PLANNING Shaping Better Community DATE: May 19,1991 MAY 2 2 1997 TO: Brian Hager,Development Review Engineer ---.1� CRY OF'TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts(x3171 Phone:[5031639-4111 Fax:(5031 684-7297 RE: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION ISM 91-0001 '` -— - --- ➢ PERS SIGN CODE EKCEPTION Q A Sign Code Exception request to place a second freestanding sign at the corner of SW Haines Street and SW 68th Parkway. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1 S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Thursday-May 29,1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: a Suaas Au, PLAt. D I I.I ✓k.stw1t Agtea, ( 7(1,,,,i A 2 AP ,ae- ('Cease provide the foliowing information)Name of Personlsl Commenting: l Phone Numbertsl: 0S I SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 6/9/97 PUBLIC HEARING • • n Atw* REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY O OF TIGARD RECEIVED PLANNING Community DeveCopment Shaping Better Community DATE: May 19,1997 MAY 1 9 1997 TO: David Scott,Building Official CITY OFTIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts(x3111 Phone:15031639-4111 Fax(50316847297 RE: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION[SCE)97-0001 ➢ PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION < A Sign Code Exception request to place a second freestanding sign at the corner of SW Haines Street and SW 68th Parkway. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Thursday-Mav29,1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond blithe above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. X Written comments provided below: 1.Y-12_,-/Z4.— N-NrAl (Tease provide the folrawing information)Name of Personis)Commenting: Phone Number(s): 1 SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 6/9/97 PUBLIC HEARING �' � RECEIVED PI. ,NNINP :II± REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD MAY 2 0 1997 Community(Development Shaping Better Community CRYOF TIGARD DATE: May 19,1991 TO: John Roy,Properly Manager FROM: Ng of Tigard Planning Owls n STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts 1x3111 Phone:(5031639-4111 Fax:(50316841291 RE: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION ISCEI 97-0001 ➢ PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION Q A Sign Code Exception request to place a second freestanding sign at the corner of SW Haines Street and SW 68th Parkway. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1 S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Thursday-May 29,1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: V � (lease pmvi�e the forrowing information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: I Phone Number(s): SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 6/9/97 PUBLIC HEARING " k 1p CITY OF TIGARD Community Development • Shaping Better Community PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION FILE NO(S): SIGN CODE EXCEPTION (SCE) 91-0001 FILE TITLE: PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION APPLICANT: Public Employees Retirement System OWNER: Same U Attention: David Bailey, Deputy Director ' 40© 200 Market Street, Suite 700 ��J Portland, OR 97207-0073 (503) 229-5643 l� o5-7575 REQUEST: A Sign Code Exception request to place a second freestanding sign at the corner of SW Haines Street and SW 68th Parkway. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. CIT: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request PHONE NUMBER: (503) DECISION MAKING BODY (T.B.A. "To Be Announced,Once Scheduled") DATE COMMENTS DUE: Thursday - May 29,1991 STAFF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 X HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: 6/9/91 TIME: 7:00 CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PROJECT RELATED COMPONENTS AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION X VICINITY MAP LANDSCAPING PLAN NARRATIVE X X ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SITE PLAN X OTHER STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts Planning Division (503) 639-4171. SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 6/9/97 PUBLIC HEARING • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • •• . • . . • • CITY OE '1 I t-..f ARO -- RI.CI: Ill Of. PAYM N1 RE.f'..; f NO 4 97 20 a CHECK A MOON r : ■."9 41 4 PE RS GASH A iY10 UN I fa. D RE 'T If if-• 0 RI:.f..3 N f'AY1 LN1 DA1E 03/27/9',! PERS REVOLVING FUND . Stif.30 I V.f 1.3N P C.1RT L. ND OR • Rr:'0a;L, it• kri AMOUNT PAID PURPOLfE Of PAYMENI nmouNI Pf110 . • I. LOND USE APPL 690. 00 .• I r • • S9 7-000 1 S I GN CODE.. •E X CEPT fL'IPPL 1CM lION FOR f IJ'f,S, :Z. 141 1:3•4 681 H PKWY 1 CiA ca)4. OR • OTAL AMOUN r PAID - • • • • • • • • • • • . •• • • - • • ifirgaptip wow '1A.a( V041,l 1/14'W; . RD CITY OF TI MM, OREGON SIGN CODE EXCEPTION APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 OR STAFF USE ONLY S - . CASE NO. 9 7 --coo OTHER CASE NOs: RECEIPT NO. Ci./- 2.9 1,36 APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: C DATE: O -9 GENERAL INFORMATION • Application elements submitted: subm itt� /•f 'i' ?OPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION l `4Ip 5.4.). CQ d KWAY / (A) Application form. (1) 1 . r (B) Owner's signature/writte :AX MAP AND TAX LOT NO. , S I ':Vg, DA 174K I..or teal authorization `s 1 i (C) Title transfer instrumen# i) SITE SIZE 1-i .c.a. Ate. h A (D) Assessor' s map ( ) PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* HERS /(E) Site plai - - - -. t) '.DDRESS PHONE /(F) Sign plan tilt-f,: : - = � _. u "/ ,ITY • ZIP \/(G) Ap licant's statement - , 1 S'Rer►�E► mr 5 M (18 copies)) ?PLICANT* 1)AuAD $.6,,“uay 'Z►t�.c-•c ix p ADDRESS 9c3c, N( K•&r- E...s, ,lop-°HONE amt-S( 4-5 k/QC i) List of property owners and ::ITY Gi2t'L.a.t►1p OSZ ZIP 97aesj •.ocsi3 addresses within 25 feet (1) •When the owner /and the applicant are different ,/ (I) Filing fee I (0 people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record ...)r a leasee in possession with written authorization DATE DE ERMINED TO BE COMPLETE:/ from the owner or an agent of the owner with written y�26 g-7 uthorization. The owner(s) must sign this in �} application the space provided on page two or • rINAL DECISION DEADLI`E: U 2-Li 7 7 • Submit a written authorization with this application. COMP. PL. N/ZONE DES,IwGNATION: . '_. PROPOSAL SUMMARY �`'�-p v✓l (t - iu if.LC- w of record of the subject property / ` The owners o_ reco 1 request a Sig Code Exception to allow ?6-.P.v. Num' r'L E'd `PI a,Ce 41A.P A ' a ca % c.� 'YKe i4e4✓1'n 7 artg2ev- _ Mauuln L mission Approval Date: S CLJ • Cab- akA2 .X.1- . eo ,� }a..c. �na►xY . e Final Approval Date : Planning Engineering Sign Permit Number and Date issued: .3739P/7? ?qv' _• -8/88 , • • I 3. List any other land use actions to be considered as part of this application: N owE • 4. Applicants: To have a complete application you will need to submit attachments described in the attached information sheet at the time you submit this application. 5. THE APPLICANTS) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: A. The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. B. If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions • and limitations of the approval. C. All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any .per;nit . issued, . based on this application, may be revoked it is found that any such statements are false. . •,;r,'t D. The applicant has read the entire " contents of the - application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements - for approving or denying the application. „-DATED this 5� day of rO//,,,,` 19 T-7 SIGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and-wife) of the ubject property: . : . • • • • • • • • • (KSL:ht/0739P/7?) - - • Q e M I LS1\D & MBA ASSOCIATES, Inc. • CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM MANAGERS RECEIVED PLANNING Three Town Center 10121 S.E. Sunnyside Road Suite 335 APR 2 4 199 Clackamas, Oregon 97015 503/654-2336 C1IYOFTtGARD FAX: 503/654-2698 April21, 1997 Mr. Mark Roberts Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 S�- RE: PERS Sign Code Exception (MS 970001) Dear Mark, As representatives for PERS, we respectfully request reconsideration of your determination that the subject sign code exception application is incomplete. We believe the application narrative has addressed the criteria mentioned in section 18.114.140A, specifically, unusual circumstances in relation to natural features of the land and the communicative function of the proposed sign. We believe that the authority of the hearings officer to grant exceptions to the requirements of the Sign Code is not limited to the usual type of exception conditions enumerated in section 18.114.145 but is broader as the language in 18.114.140A states. Our application for an exception is specifically related to the unusual type of exception conditions anticipated by the language of section 18.114.140A. Your suggestion about moving the one allowed sign to the corner of 68th and Haines plus adding prominent wall signage and driveway identification was reviewed and rejected. A large wall mounted sign on the building facing 68th would severely detract from the aesthetics of the building and the neighborhood. The suggestion may be allowable under the code, but we feel it would not be in keeping with the spirit or purpose of the sign code as written in section 18.114.010. We further believe that our design and location of the allowed sign plus this proposed second sign more fully meets the purpose and intent of the sign code in respect to: • neat, orderly, attractive appearance of the community • promote positive conditions for meeting sign users needs • prevent proliferation of signs and sign clutter • a higher standard of design and quality of materials for signs visible from the public right of way Yours truly, Pete Daniels pets sign code teoonaidetstion.wpd • April 11, 1997 CITY OF TIGARD David Bailey, Deputy Director Public Employees Retirement System OREGON 200 Market Street, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97207-0073 S�6 Re: PERS Sign Code Exception (.M{S 97-0001) Dear David: This letter is in response to your application for a Sign Code Exception. This application has been considered incomplete because the applicants narrative did not specifically address the findings the Hearing's Officer must make in order to approve this application. - The application must include findings that address the criteria contained in the Community Development Code Section 18.114.145 (see enclosure). As I've previously reviewed on two different occasions with Pete Daniels of Fletcher, Farr, Ayotte; it does not appear that this request can meet those required findings. For this reason, the City will recommend that the Hearing's Officer deny this request. In terms of addressing the visibility issue that was raised in the narrative, we would suggest placing the one (1) allowed freestanding sign on the corner of SW Haines Street and SW 68th Parkway. Where prominent wall signage is used on the building elevation facing SW 68th Parkway, motorists should be able to find the site once they reach SW 68th Parkway. A separate driveway identification sign of up to-four (4) square feet is also permitted to be constructed near the driveway entrance on SW 68th Parkway. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, • 47r244/4,4, Mark Roberts Associate Planner, AICP iAcurpImmnark_rlpersign.doc - c: MIS 97-0001 land use file • 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 • • STATEMENT FOR SIGN CODE EXCEPTION APPLICATION We are requesting that an exception to the Community Development Code of the City of Tigard be granted to allow the installation of a second free standing sign on the site of the new Oregon Public Employes Retirement System Headquarters Building, located on SW 68th Parkway adjacent to SW Haines Street. We believe this request should be approved due to the unusual topographic constraints of the project site,the most likely paths used to get to the project, and the clientele's demographics. The clientele of PERS is current or retired public employees in the State of Oregon. Most of these individuals are not from the Portland metropolitan area and are generally near retirement age. This demographic makeup creates the potential for many visitors to the site that are unfamiliar with the street system in the area, slower to read street signage, and therefore more likely to get lost trying to locate the PERS Headquarters Building. We believe the most likely travel path to the project will be from I-5, north or south,to the SW Haines Street exits and have been working with the Oregon Department of Transportation to have directional signage installed on I-5. However, as the site is generally in a depression adjacent to and immediately west of I-5 and immediately north of SW Haines Street,the building has no visibility from I-5 and minimal visibility from SW Haines. This location's unique topography creates a situation where a visitor could fail to locate the building even though they have taken the correct freeway exit. The addition of Sign#2, a landmark style sign with minimal text information,would prevent visitors arriving from this direction from missing the PERS Headquarters Building. We believe the sign proposed, as described in the accompanying drawings,while requiring an exception is consistent with the goals of Chapter 18-114 - Signs of the Community Development Code of the City of Tigard. We believe that this second sign will work in concert with the primary building identification sign proposed to be located near the shared private entry drive from SW 68th Parkway between the street and the west building elevation. Together,these signs will clearly communicate that PERS is the building occupant when approaching the site from any direction. Desi,n Pacifica International, LLC • March 24, 1997 a' Cgfse:a Statement of Sig n Designs for Permits ± PIERS Building Attached please find drawings documenting our designs for the above referenced project signage. Included are dimensioned elevation and plan views of our proposed Sign I and Sign 2;a site plan indicating sign locations;and available upon request,we have built scale models of both signs. If necessary,I would be pleased to personally present our models to The City of Tigard at any time. The documents and models indicate our use of materials indicative of the new building,i.e.: precast concrete (utilizing a similar reveal detail found within the architecture of the building), and curved aluminum sign panels attached to the precast concrete (again,similar to the curved entrance to the building). Individual cut letters are used,surface mounted flush to background (rather than floating from the surface,which can cause unsightly shadowing,and make the signs difficult to read in the summer sun). We believe our sign designs to be clean,crisp,and avoiding "trendy design"as we have focused upon"blending" the look of the signage with your architec- tural details. Here are a few other areas of importance to which are signs have been designed: Sign I: This sign is to be read from two sides,specifically to be visible by vehicular traffic from the two-lane SW 68th Parkway. The overall sign face totals 30 sq.ft.(per side). The curved sign faces emulate the architecture. Letter heights have been specified for opti- mum legibility-especially significant to the elderly population that will be visiting the building, many of which do not reside within the Portland Metro area. Sign 2: This sign is triangular in shape in order to be visible from both SW 68th Parkway and by vehicles traveling along SW Haines Street. The total sq.ft.of sign face for this sign equals an overall 32 sq.ft. However it should be noted that 16 sq.ft.of the overall 32 sq.ft.is occupied only by"precast" lettering. The precast letters will not be paint filled,thus only creating a shadow-effect(see drawings/model). It is our opinion that Sign 2 truly only occupies a total of 16 sq.ft.of sign face. Again,the use of a curved face has been designed to emulate the architecture.The tall,narrow sign will serve as a"landmark"when approaching the site.Letter heights have been specified for optimum legibility. Each sign will be surface illuminated,not internally illuminated. In addition,each sign will be landscaped around the bases,etc. Sincerely: Design Pacifica International,LLC - ---y-257-2,, /Ve.,,,t___- Todd Pierce President with attachments • • AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: THE STATE OF OREGON, ,;t R0,(3 /1'e44e-,&,..1 , '7clo We certify this instrumen to be a trw3 f ier-.rte, ctf,i2 9740`7 CopytAi, L rP recorded al;w Until a change is requested all tax t3ook -� _, Page , Fee q statements shall be sent to the following County, Oregon. address: Records of 1 L �E�V/I CHICA v• LEOhl ;NCE COMPANY gy A /,_ ✓_ .' //iI. Escrow No. 50000-6411-JY Order No. 144665 WARRANTY DEED - STATUTORY FORM (INDIVIDUAL or CORPORATION) TED L. MILLAR, WALTER A. SWAN, JR. and JOE F. BEACH JR., Trustees of the Ted L. Millar Living Trust, u/a with Ted L. Millar, dated January 31, 1990 who acquired title as TED L. MILLAR, WALTER A. SWAN, JR. and LEONARD A. FORSGREN, trustee of the TED L. MILLAR LIVING TRUST, u/a with TED L. MILLAR, dated January 31, 1990 Grantor, conveys and warrants to THE STATE OF OREGON, PUBLIC EMPLOYES' RETIREMENT BOARD Grantee, the following described real property free of encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein: (Continued) ,ar This instrument will not allow use of the property described in this instrument in violation of applicable land use laws and regulations. Before signing or accepting this instrument, the person acquiring fee title to the property should check with the appropriate city or county planning department to verify approved uses and to determine any limits on lawsuits against farming or forest practices as defined in ORS 30.930. ENCUMBRANCES: 1. The premises herein described are within and subject to the statutory powers including the power of assessment of the Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County. (Continued) The true consideration for this conveyance is $831,571.00 Dated /f `t'`'��' e � ; if a corporate grantor, it has caused its name to be signed by order of its board of directors. TED L. MI LAR LIVING T ST By:le/ - , Ted L. Millar, Trustee • STATE OF OREGON, County of ✓yf,,arAJ,n7#.d )ss. This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 19 by This instrument was acknowledged before me on March 8 , 19 96 by Ted L. Millar as Trustee of the TPd L. Millar Living Trust, n/a with Tad L. Millar, dated January 31, 1990 and who . exe ted samm el,beehal,'fof said Trust. No ' r Public for Oregon 1 /01.*, OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires -7)i.,//& /qyy ;'�`--:,'; JUDY S LEONETT1 g • +?{ NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON • ` ��MY COMMISSION EXPIRES ISSION OV. 18,BBB 1 • 111;1\1\6.\ Order No: 144665 LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land situated in the Southeast one-quarter, Section 36, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, said parcel being a part of that certain tract of land conveyed to Portland General Electric Company by Bargain and Sale Deed Recorded January 29, 1962, in Book 456, Page 433, Deed Records for Washington County, Oregon, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monument marking the East one-quarter corner of Section 36, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian; thence South 01°31' 36" West along the East line of said Section 205.82 feet to it's intersection with the Westerly right of way line of Interstate 5, said point bears South 25°22'42" West 67.01 feet from a point 160.00 feet right of Engineers Centerline Station 28+00 P.O.C. ; thence along said right of way line South 25°22'42" West 562.74 feet to a point 195.00 feet right of Engineers Centerline Station 34+00 P.O.S. ; thence continuing along said Westerly right of way line South 06°19'27" West 13 .50 feet to the true point of beginning of the hereinafter described parcel of land: thence leaving said line North 84°27'53" West 314 .61 feet; thence South 50°32'07" West 113.50 feet to a point in the Easterly right of way line of Southwest 68th Parkway, a dedicated street 60.00 feet wide; thence along said line along the arc of a non-tangent 339.50 foot radius curve right 419.05 feet through a central angle of 66°47' 12" (the chord bears South 00°35' 19" 395.73 feet) to a point of reverse curvature; thence along the arc of a tangent 256.48 foot radius curve to the left 11.03 feet through a central angle of 02°27'54" (the long chord bears South 32°44' 58" West 11.03 feet) to a point of compound curvature; thence along the arc of a tangent 46.95 foot radius curve left 101.27 feet through a central angle of 123°35'54" (the long chord bears South 30°16'57" East 82.75 feet) to a point in the North right of way line of Southwest Haines Street, 30.00 feet Northerly of (when measured at right angles) "G" line as established by the Oregon Department of Transportation and described in Recorder' s Fee No. 80022549; thence along said North right of way line North 87°55' 07" East 46.37 feet to a point in the arc of a tangent 268.73 foot radius curve to the right, said point being 30.00 feet right of Engineers Centerline Station "H" 49+99.46 P.O.C. = "G" 53+39.79 P.O.T. ; thence along the arc of said curve 20.01 feet through a central angle of 4°16' 00" (the long chord bears South 89°56'53" East 20.01 feet) to a point of tangency 30.00 feet right of Engineers Centerline Station "H" 46+81.68 P.C. ; thence South 87°48' 53" East 43 .25 feet to a point in the arc of a non-tangent 209.15 foot radius curve to the right, a radial line bears North 39°22'55" West to said point; thence Northerly and Easterly along the arc of said curve 166.64 feet through a central angle of 45°39' 05" (the long chord bears North 73°26' 36" East 162.27 feet) ; thence tangent to said curve South 83°43'48" East 51.35 feet to a point in the Westerly line of Interstate 5, as established by the Oregon Department of Transportation, said point bears North 06°19'27" East 44.17 feet from a point 150.00 feet right of Engineers Centerline Station 39+00 P.O.S. ; thence along said right of way line North 06°19'27" East 480.51 feet to the point of beginning. Encumbrances, continued • 2 . Regulations, including levies, liens, assessments, rights of way, and easements of Tualatin Valley Water District. 3 . Limited access provisions contained in Deed from the State of Oregon, by and through its State Highway Commission, which provides that no right or easement of right of access to, from or across the State Highway other than expressly therein provided for shall attach to the abutting property. Recorded: January 29, 1962 Book: 456 Page: 433 Subject to conditions and restrictions as contained therein. 4 . An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated: May 5, 1980 Recorded: May 7, 1980 Recorder's Fee No. : 80016364 In Favor Of: Portland General Electric Company For: Power lines, poles and anchors Affects: Northwesterly portion 5. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated: May 16, 1980 Recorded: June 27, 1980 Recorder' s Fee No. : 80022549 In Favor Of: State of Oregon, by and through its Department of Transportation, Highway Division For: Drainage and slopes 6. Limited access provisions contained in Deed to the State of Oregon, by and through its State Highway Commission, which provides that no right or easement of right of access to, from or across the State Highway other than expressly therein provided for shall attach to the abutting property. Recorded: December 4, 1980 Recorder's Fee No. : 80043922 7. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements, but omitting restrictions, if any, based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin, unless and only to the extent that said covenant, (a) is exempt under Chapter 42, Section 3607 of the United States Code or (b) relates to handicap but does not discriminate against handicapped persons, as contained in Contract. Recorded: February 17, 1982 Recorder's Fee No. : 82003894 (Continued) i4 • Encumbrances, continued 8. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated: February 16, 1982 Recorded: February 17, 1982 Recorder's Fee No. : 82003895 In Favor Of: Oregon Education Association, a non-profit corporation For: Sign 9. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Recorded: November 4, 1985 Recorder's Fee No. : 85044009 In Favor Of: City of Tigard For: The construction, maintenance and repair, with necessary access thereto, of a slope, cut or fill Affects: Westerly portion 10. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Recorded: December 16, 1987 Recorder's Fee No. : 87061373 In Favor Of: City of Tigard For: The construction, maintenance and repair, with necessary access thereto, of a slope, cut or fill 11. Easement Agreement, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated: August 31, 1988 Recorded: September 29, 1988 Recorder's Fee No. : 88-39456 By and Between: Westwood Holding Corporation and Portland General Electric Corporation Re-recorded: September 19, 1989 Recorder' s Fee No. : 89-44577 12. Covenants, conditions and restrictions, but omitting restrictions if any, based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin, unless and only to the extent that said covenant, (a) is exempt under Chapter 42, Section 3607 of the United States Code or (b) relates to handicap but does not discriminate against handicapped persons, imposed by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof. Recorded: September 2, 1988 Recorder's Fee No. : 88-39457 (Continued) Jill! Encumbrances, continued 13. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements, but omitting restrictions, if any, based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin, unless and only to the extent that said covenant, (a) is exempt under Chapter 42, Section 3607 of the United States Code or (b) relates to handicap but does not discriminate against handicapped persons, imposed by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof. Recorded: November 23, 1988 Recorder' s Fee No. : 88-52298 Said restrictions contain provisions for the payment of construction and maintenance costs. 14. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated: August 18, 1989 Recorded: August 25, 1989 Recorder' s Fee No. : 89-39637 For: Ingress, egress and underground utility Affects: Northerly portion 15. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated: August 19, 1989 Recorded: September 19, 1989 Recorder's Fee No. : 89-44579 In Favor Of: Adjacent property owners For: Ingress, egress and underground utility Affects: Northerly portion 16. Possible fence encroachment into property adjacent on the East, as disclosed by Survey by Jim Weddle and Assoc. , Inc. ; Dated: December 28, 1995 Number: 2450ALTA MAP FOR ASSESSMENT 11100sES ONLY c+Ulec,im 7 DO NOT RELY ON ANY OTHER USE 100 00,110.601 ;I IS�1 36AD aoo.rou.sa. 1100.1100.741. / `��\ • L -10...\11'1Z1.11la111�_..�∎lt-.l 4.6• U$LL=fT 3_/11 6.17 -67 •.a 114 1MMO 103.11 474.16 1 i : 200 100 2400 £324:. R9/4:. / 4.454 24019 0 • /al*. / . A ilk / W A �r 7 ° --- -- ----- M Y= i ;.r,1•N-c 310 ——— ' • / • • 16 fo � / . I • I ii / •. I r _r~, 1 / e • $ / • I / • 7 i •s • -! y k i I / 7 =1; p i• i gtsi PO MO • I .7 I 1 1 1,S / 4 of I / iti •• I / .i . 1 ,ik 70.34 N.•/L —" [1 ST 646.1 ' • I 1 / •23-8 I /, ill I'/ c.3IMOMT e•111437 9 1 / 1 / 314'61 / • b, r 4.�... 01 . i i 4.02 Ac. l / • (0 1 0.2301 .+ / I 4° 9. l'%% ( all Ac. :I l I / > 1 MILSTEAD 8 ASSOCIATES :I I; / • ® 1 / • n JAN 17 1S35 p 11 RECEIVED t /f FILE I / I - TAP 40• / I i•' 1 I � 1 - AO j.N ' LITM Q 01.. ... 1•+•4 17.77 1t13 AMP MOWS . 1oi3D1'6 / -. .... - I.'-/—.' as I 7'MIK v _ _ •=.T' �.cv:.$1.2• �— — — — _ — .+t61!/� .-i ce�� .-�.y,'�',+.� _ _... EE N . •• - 1 T1C S d DD .—r-P I •"7. • ( � IS I t.3.t.L34 - 15_1_ 3co • • 2 Sign 2 F'.F:::::E{'ii#:si5%,'k:.•#}:•,��,�'�•L'S'tl`:'SF:v::s:i v:'��F. ?�}'?}Y'Frti?i JrrJ.w:}'+•:;x:�F::?:::.��. p F?i:4;. . y?Sr;.'.': :,•r}.fc��f:;� .E:vy$r?: E;:: v?:Fr F .. ? ii E ''.1 q 4S..:; .i''A' •. zo c`<. N.:::;:::::;:.>,:m::::::;:::::." Co a;,.,..a. %::uA kakis}'{E::::"::'':::.'::::::0;p::.:::::::::::0:.`} „SF,3 ` r).F'.:?,�:,:.;335'?}.?? '•.A ;44 >„< ::4 ;:.;} {<#> :A4 Graphics&Signage • i3O,4:}E:C4,ldrSba:2h •/,?:E::F.•:vs: Program K:\•,:w:t#:•,�F:7y,.;:...,�$.•sa:•.?»';,o••S•+.:#, 4ohw:w.4,s:3': #::::?`E ::4<4�)S�r0,''#oivk�o3:.E.4>�'•.;":z c' • ,4 •?•.ks <'Nls<thE•?':s?%: `` Design Pacifica International, LLC. USA 'it.!.10" ' 'ra N.,Y D E S I G N a #:2 . `a.k`.V. 4 :p: ? u ur : UJF ,. ; _ 511:3 • Elevation of Face A 725 NW Flanders, Portland, OR 97209 Tel: (503)222.9494 Fax: (503)222.5191 Public Employes Retirement System/Interior Graphics&Signage Program/ a1996,Design Pacifica International,LLC. A • Sign 2 #>;i# E :;: ) #i;:fi:}f:::2}:;:�:>:?a i 4 „fI:k}:i;. Ej: 1+'•5:::i•r:k?:::is:::6::s?^?:::i k::::i::$:::>::?:m#::i:::.::.}:1: „5 3 a.i {y i+,.z;:.+•f{x;c:::.{o k#r;;.2g`i f•w:Y.i`.'•:';};}#:::'S:::s}.::`:#:: J7yn:' ,}1.'<.mqi .23,':}:.'J.k{;.'.':.:n i;v:?o#2 fnP:.:s».ti:i.<�Y:.Wi;S.%5\;•*.'co:tJ':<;. }>£.$. k k >}{?J`c; ±}, e .} ic ,::.'f i ms .n 1'f 6t $ { M1 a •" srr¢ :,,, x x} yr ; y:: kgs. nI : , ,0u•.f.»J,,,:::xn,,,,C{:', a•+..v :vf.f ,: i:'„f.,„,„' :.. a:n..., .,7..$ .%oo ,.: 4 fhK:'::»::i:>g'>a £:':i..; Y ^ff f } u£R;t.sJ Y �yY7 r}ag M. f,%y••o• n.ffi`l: f„ .,,N+ 'k k f:;:zi:y y4Yo:;s.;:"0f � x.a n y f 3 . rc3 ; .: g r %:::'s i : : :: :i;} > ' .$$F5 , A : f A:5 h;: ?0:~ ' ) sr' ' ?' c.s?a,•:,.+ C:: ' ` :: f t:yS . : • A::: x . (n :s ?z: y .n :$ .k` l,r :r:( €CefS:£rti '...� ' „.: ;... ' .%:P �xt>•: *..„.. •?3v?{ � , Y it; f•; .� ; S 2�4 � r : ' .< «#�M.4n {.' ”.?f ' 0:} • r•'S \ i :y}:`: .4 ;: J. k v:: 1v`#:: : »::# e " } , x{x” : h:} k fwo.,.}}}:}3 � F' :#> : ' ` £•'•:Jib ti: . { , 3V ;fc A n :.• • liNit C.• .? • {+;} 3 ; k3i : {y ' .it: v J ',v x. €Y r '}# h 4',': } :Si ;::;i : �: r : {; + ' \ x.1'$ K4+: w x� s .}�J.; , 2,ki ..5r :' #. ' f t f£:;5:K` ::::> .: S )Y? i" , k� n ,.�t :f :\ }}::::i:.i s : x. 3 r: ,.gger.:#0,?::':•,,,,WAWV..a: } �" rr au ^#?`ik:: :k:r E,.i i AA:i,} , $ } o ; „• ,•: • Sign 2 Face A • 2'-0""sw°g2228a°212mggrill. • kt"'.'r',t"::.�m ..9..w•V�,. �Y">r�,•0?' } +� y.�;.: QY �`•:$ f`+r'•.`:�w'r4-:Tf��#?#{. > f..4iru'.r}:jTty�. 4 �•.'tk: 'Y rocE1,�rrf ur: '4..t?3:"r.,.'':'>#i zriti4:.?iTTtr#**S .? �"::rr,•••7r.. :00.0 ♦ Ittt4. .•,Yt4��4'F.�r7'•'t: y,`.. ra!r 1;;.::.. t ..? ?.,r'., ,r>t5t„'<t• .<.;:'t `%t;� `'C`>yC\4'a 2y.,::..iTirri{F r:+�` rrrTAic:iryr..<Sr ky`.3'c..u.::;:5.M?•..:' y{T�� 'T:�; $$#� .��%#$}}a:::.{$rye$�#`::<::rTa::..:.:.fir ;i�T. 'tir:f;.,L?;nr.$•Y'r•:. i,';g#...y,^a.`,•.{; •':tCjf?# iuvG?i;:;4 r? r. > L4+.tfn,airyiT{W`.`.; Y T'k tIFiP?T??X?'” 'k�- 'c�.V ffyx: •r'${:r0r:.?.r t?:` `�v..:r: T\•0 {$ T#i:;t` "yc.,•:^.?:y'. ,5 Yxka}k'.24tt�:•A Trx; ' • Face B ��;�£��. ;�:. Face C 2'-a. M1'F �(' / 2U • P.E.R.S. Graphics&Signage • Program Plan View Design Pacifica International, LLC. USA D E S I G N • 1'•ir 'iI'ica a 5 725 NW Flanders, Portland, OR 97209 Tel: (503)222.9494 Fax:(503)222.5191 Public Employes Retirement System/Interior Graphics d Signage Program/ °1996.Design Pacifica International,LLC. • • TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE '- 18.114.148 of the regional or national business which wishes 4 `3 A list of the names and addresses of all to use a standard-sized sign; persons who are property owners of record within 250 feet of the site; 2. The administrative exception(s) will allow an unique sign of unique design or style /4. The applicant's statement; which will enhance the area or will be a visible t/ landmark; or 5. An assessor's map; and ✓ 3. One of the sign code exception criteria in ✓6: A title transfer instrument. Subsection 18.114.145.A is satisfied. . B. The proposed sign site plan shall include the E. When all of the above criteria in Subsection following information: 18.114.148.A is satisfied,the Director shall review all existing and proposed signage for the 1. The location of the proposed sign and all ✓ development as outlined in Subsection existing signs on the site; 18.114.145.B. (Ord. 89-06; Ord. 88-20) C buil2. The location of all existing and proposed v 18.114.150 Sign Code Exceptiort.Application\; dings on the site; _Submission Requirements ____-/ 3. The location of all existing and proposed ✓ A. All sign code exception applications shall be streets and rights-of-way, including names and made on forms provided by the Director and widths;and --, shall be accompanied by: 4. The location of all overhead power and ✓ 1. Copies for review by the,Director of the utility lines located on the site. ✓- sign plan(s)and any necessary data or narrative ' (number to be determined at the preapplication C. The proposed sign architectural plans shall e`)'t'� — conference), which explains how the sign plan include the following information: proposal conforms to the standards. Fifteen copies for review by the Commission of the sign 1. The sign dimensions; v� plans for sign code exception: a. Sheet size for sign drawings and sign 2. The materials and colors to be used; site plan(s) and required drawings shall preferably be drawn on sheets not tottexceed 118 3. The height of the sign above the ground; ✓ ✓ inches by 24.inches; t 4. The source •and intensity of any io. b. The scale of the sign site plan shall illumination; _ vbe an engineering scale; and 5. Construction drawings indicating size of ,/ c. All drawings of the sign elevations footings, anchorages and welds; and structural components shall be a standard , architectural scale, beinginches or -178–,, 6. The Directo C, require engineers' 1 SI inches; vi-c,h • calculations for sign construction,anchorage and ` footing requirements, including wind resistance 2. The required fee; and seismic forces, all in conformance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code in accordance with Subsection 1832.080.A. All sign 18-114 - 25 Reformatted 1994 • • TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 18.114.150 structures on or near a building shall conform to b. The proposed sign architectural the State Fire Life Safety requirements and the plans shall include the following information: Uniform Building Code requirements of the building, structure or area where it is erected; (i) The sign area dimensions; and (ii) The materials and colors to be 7. All electrical illuminated signs shall bear used; the Underwriters Laboratory label or equivalent. (Ord. 89-06; Ord. 88-20) (iii)The height of the sign above the ground; 18.114.160 Sign Permit Application Requirements / (iv) The source and intensity of any illumination; A. All applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director i and shall be (v) Construction drawings indicating accompanied by: / size of footings, anchorages and welds; 1. Two copies for review by the Director of (vi) The address of the site where the sign site plan(s) and two copies of the sign the sign(s) will be located; architectural plans: i (vii) The name, address, and phone a. The proposed sign site plan shall -'. number of the applicant; and include the follow ing information: (viii) For those cases where an (i) The location of the proposed sign existing sign is to be modified, the applicant for and all existing freestanding, wall or other a sign permit shall provide documentation or external signs on the site; verifiable proof of when a sign was erected and, / wherever possible, shall submit a copy of the (ii) The location of all existing and original sign permit; proposed buildings on the site; c. Proof of a current City business tax (iii) The location of all existing and certificate; proposed streets and rights-of-way, including names and widths; d. Proof of a U.L. or equivalent label subscriber number;and /(iv) The location of all overhead power and utility lines located on the site; e. The required fee. (Ord. 89-06; Ord. / 88-20) (v) The distance of the sign to the nearest public right(s)-of-way; • Prior Ordinance History: Ords.87-41,86-65, 86-32, 86-23, 85-32, 85-07, 84-71, 84-69, 84-61, (vi) The address of the site where 84-22,83-52. Index maps and figures pertaining the sign will be located;and to signage on Highway 217 and Interstate Highway 5 are attached to Ord. 88-20 which is (vii) The name, address and phone on file in the office of the City Recorder.• number of the applicant; /- 18-114 - 26 - Reformatted 1994 • • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY TYOFTG OF IARO Community(Development shaping (Better Community • STATE OAF O(UGON ) _ County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L Lansford, being first duly swom/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. ❑ That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED 0) PUBLIC NEARING FOR: naw.aommumontro Meter Mlle WIN Wel {erect eraread.0 ea bra.} ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council O That I served NOTICE OF(AMENDED 0) DECISION FOR: (mMINF allwnde+r) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) FINAL ORDER FOR: minenommainsourro {Oak Saraidall bsz bN..i} VCity of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ That I served OTHER NOTICE OF FOR A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTIC OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICES] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A':,h maled to eac /famed person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked ExWhli '�' the t /day o • 1997, and deposited in the United States Mail on the • 6> LE'" day of - �I __ / , '97,postage prepaid. _ 0.1 W10- • EPerso repai Notic o� 1 , Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the o2/ day of ■wriA ma , OFFICIAL SEAL ` DIANE M JELDERKS I Fig! NtJTARY pUgLIC•OgEGON �fI .f�� I �(� COMMI5S O.0461 a2, t 999 NOTARY PUBLIC OF 0; CO MY COMMISSION EXpIAi SEpTf McFR My Commission ExpI 7 qy �i HIE INFO.: fri =NM SCE-2: i CASIMM • • A, CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping A Better Community CITY OF TIGARD EXHIBIT A 'Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER a BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER Case Number(s): SIGN CODE EXCEPTION (SCE) 97-9001 Case Name(s): PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION Name of Owner: Public Employees Retirement System IPERS) Name of Applicant: Same as Owner Address of Applicant: 200 Market Street. Suite 700 City: Portland State: Oregon Zip: 97207 Address of Property: 11410 SW 68th Parkway City: Tigard State: Oregon Zip: 97223 Tax Map & Lot No(s).: WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. ReuaeSt:-> The applicant has requested a Sign Code Exception to allow a second freestanding sign along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. lone: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. Action: —> O Approval as requested 0 Approval with conditions © Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: © Owners of record within the required distance © Affected governmental agencies © The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator © The applicant and owner(s) final Decision: lb THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON WEDNESDAY JULY 9,1991 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. • The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290 (B) and Section 18.32.370, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within ten (10) days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee(s) of $1,745.00 plus transcript costs, not in excess of $500.00. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M.ON JULY 9,1991. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER (COVER SHEET} • • BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application for a sign code exception to Tigard ) F I N A L OR DER Community Development Code § 18.114.130(D)(a)(iii) to ) - allow a second free-standing sign for the PERS building at SW ) SCE 97-0001 68th Parkway and Haines Street in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (PERS) I. SUMMARY A. The applicant requests approval of an exception to the sign code to allow a second free- standing sign for the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) building. Plans and elevations of the proposed sign are in the record. It will be a triangular column in design. 1. The letters "PERS" are etched into two sides the column vertically; on one side, the street number of the property also is shown. The third side is blank. 2. As amended by the applicant at the hearing, the column would be not more than 8 feet high. Each side of the triangular column would be about two feet wide at its base. The total sign face area will be about 90 square feet,but only about 18 square feet are used. 3. The sign is proposed to be placed in a grove of trees on the site in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of SW 68th Parkway and SW Haines Street to help direct PERS members to the building from the east (Haines Street) and south(68th Parkway). B. At the public hearing in this matter and in their written report to the hearings officer, city staff recommended denial of the application, because the application does not comply with Tigard Community Development Code (CDC) § 18.114.145. The applicant asserted in written and oral testimony that an exception should be granted, based solely on CDC § 18.114.140.A. The applicant argued that the site is subject to unique conditions (principally topography, the change in grade across the site, building placement and orientation, and trees), and that PERS attracts generally older individuals who may be "directionally challenged"and need added signage to identify and get to the building. The applicant argues that signage on the building will be obstructed by topography and trees over time. C. The principal issues in this case are: 1. Whether CDC§ 18.114.040(A) authorizes the granting of a sign code exception independent of CDC 18.114.045(A); and, if so, 2. Whether the facts in the record support a finding that the proposed sign code exception complies with CDC § 18.114.040(A). • D. For the reasons given herein, the hearings officer concludes CDC § 18.114.040(A) does not authorize the granting of a sign code exception independent of CDC 18.114.045(A) and denies the sign code exception. Hearings Officer Final Order SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 1 • • 1. II. FINDINGS ABOUT THE SITh� The hearings officer incorporates by reference the findings about the site and surroundings in Section III of the City of Tigard Staff Reported dated June 2, 1997 (the Staff Report). III. HEARING AND RECORD A. Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") received testimony at the public hearing about this application on June 9, 1997. A record of that testimony is included herein as Exhibit A (Parties of Record), Exhibit B (Taped Proceedings), and Exhibit C (Written Testimony). These exhibits are filed at Tigard City Hall. B. The hearings officer opened the hearing with required notices,disclosed that he is a member of PERS, disclosed that he visited the site and lives in the area, and invited objections to and questions about his site visit or relationship to the applicant. None followed. City planner Mark Roberts summarized the Staff Report. Three witnesses appeared for the applicant: Fred McDonnal (PERS Director), David Bailey (PERS Deputy Director) and Peter Daniels (construction manager for the PERS project). 1. Mr. McDonnal testified about the characteristics of the site,i.e., the change in grade from the highway and bridge approach above, the topography of the site, and the orientation of the building (with an entry facing away from 68th Parkway). He testified about the clients of PERS. He said they often have problems with accessibility; hence PERS selected a site with convenient highway access. He introduced four photographs of the building. He argued that landscaping and retained trees will obstruct views of the site. 2. Mr. Bailey testified that there is a sign ("PERS" with an arrow pointing toward the site) for westbound traffic exiting the overpass on Haines Street, and he introduced two photographs of that sign. He noted other roadside signs in the vicinity could be perceived as visual clutter. He argued there is no similar sign for traffic traveling north on 68th Parkway (i.e., after exiting southbound Interstate 5). He argued trees will block views of the building from 68th Parkway south of Haines Street. 3. Mr. Daniels testified that ODOT installed a total of four signs in the vicinity to help identify access to the PERS site: one sign for west- and eastbound traffic on Highway 99W at 68th Parkway; one for westbound traffic exiting the overpass on Haines Street; and one on the exit ramp for southbound traffic from Interstate 5 to 68th Parkway. All four signs say "PERS" and contain an arrow pointing in the appropriate direcdon(s). He argued a sign on the building would be obscured by retained trees and landscaping from the intersection of Haines Street and 68th Parkway. He argued nothing in CDC § 18.114.040(A) requires compliance with CDC § 18.114.045(A); and nothing in CDC § 18.114.045(A) precludes approval of a sign code exception based exclusively on CDC § 18.114.040(A). He argued that the two approaches to the site (i.e., from Haines Street off of northbound Interstate 5 and from 68th Parkway off of southbound Interstate 5) are like two accesses to the site (drawing an analogy to the circumstances that allow a second entry sign under CDC § 18.114.045(A)(2)). He agreed to limit the total height of the sign to eight feet measured from grade rather than nine feet as shown in the plans submitted with the application. Hearings Officer Final Order SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 2 • • IV. APPLICABLE APPROVAL STANDARDS A. The applicant and city staff dispute what standards are applicable to the proposed sign code exception. The applicant asserts that a sign code exception can be based exclusively on CDC § 18.114.140(A).' City staff assert that a sign code exception must comply with one of the five standards in CDC 18.114.145(A) in addition to CDC§ 18.114.140(A). B. The hearings officer finds that CDC § 18.114.040(A) on its face and read alone could be construed to authorize a sign code exception. It authorizes the hearings officer to approve an exception, and it provides a standard to evaluate such an exception, (i.e., "when the applicant demonstrates that,owing to the special or unusual circumstances relating to the design, structure or placement of the sign in relation to other structures, the literal interpretation of this chapter would interfere with the communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit"). Therefore, if the CDC contained nothing else, the hearings officer would find CDC § 18.114.040(A) is the applicable standard in this case. C. But traditional rules of legislative construction require each section of the law to be read in context and as part of the whole. When CDC § 18.114.040(A) is read in context, the hearings officer finds that it does not authorize a sign code exception independently. CDC § 18.114.045(A) clearly applies to a sign code exception. CDC § 18.114.040(A) does not waive applicability of CDC § 18.411.045(A) to a sign code exception. Therefore both sections apply to a sign code exception. D. The hearings officer finds CDC§ 18.411.040(A) applies to all sign code exceptions. It contains a general standard all exceptions have to fulfill, (i.e., to be warranted by unusual circumstances). The standards in CDC § 18.114.045(A) address the particularities of the circumstances, especially the outcome (e.g., the total amount of signage or orientation of the excepted sign). An exception merely has to fulfill one of the provisions in CDC § 18.114.045(A), because the particularities of each circumstance will differ. Only one of the standards in CDC § 18.411.045(A) typically will apply in a given case. These two sections (i.e., §§ 18.114.040(A) and 18.114.045(A)) need to be read and applied together to fulfill the legislative intent reflected in the CDC generally and in this chapter particularly. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. The hearings officer finds that the sign code exception should be denied, because the applicant did not bear the burden of proving that the sign code exception complies with CDC § 18.114.045(A). B. In the interests of providing a complete decision in the event this final order is appealed to city council, the hearings officer makes the following additional findings: 1. The PERS site is subject to unusual topographic conditions and retained vegetation that do generally obscure the building from view from the routes by which most traffic will approach the building. ' The applicant concedes that the sign code exception does not comply with one of the five standards in CDC § 18.114.045(A). The exception in this case can be approved only if it can be granted exclusively under CDC § 18.114.040(A). Hearings Officer Final Order - SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 3 • • 2. However the applicant has remedied that circumstance by having ODOT place signs to direct drivers to the building from all directions. From that stand-point, the applicant has far better signage than any similarly-situated private business or public use in the area familiar to the hearings officer. 3. The hearings officer finds there is no need for a sign at the corner to direct westbound traffic on Haines Street. The ODOT sign on Haines Street west of the overpass does so adequately. An additional sign at the corner would add to the clutter and increase the competition among signs in that short stretch of roadway. 4. It is true that there is no sign to help make sure that the driver of a northbound car on 68th Parkway continues north through the intersection with Haines Street rather than turning east onto Haines Street. A driver could become confused at that point. a. But the hearings officer finds that the upper story of the PERS building is visible from the stop line for a northbound car at that intersection. A sign on the wall or roof of the building would be visible from that point. Therefore the potential for confusion could be reduced with a building-or roof-mounted sign that would comply with the CDC. b. It is possible that retained trees or new landscaping will block the view of such a sign in the future, but the evidence is not sufficient for the hearings officer to find such a sign will not be visible from the stop line at 68th Parkway and Haines Street. c. Even accepting for the sake of discussion that a sign is needed, and a sign on the wall or roof of the building would not suffice, the hearings officer is not convinced the proposed sign will best meet the need for information for a driver traveling north on 68th Parkway toward Haines Street. The best place for such a sign would be along 68th Parkway at a point far enough south of the intersection so that drivers would have time to move into the appropriate lane at the intersection (i.e., the lane for through traffic). If the proposed sign is placed in the northeast quadrant of the intersection, a driver will not be able to see it until well into the intersection. That may be too late for a driver who has already started the right-hand turning movement onto Haines Street. The hearings officer suggests the applicant consider a better location for an off-site directional sign. C. The hearings officer adopts as his own and incorporates by reference the findings about compliance with the Community Development Code and Comprehensive Plan in.Section IV of the Staff Report except as expressly provided otherwise herein. VI. CONCLUSION AND DECISION A. The hearings officer concludes: 1. That the applicant has not borne the burden of proof that the proposed sign code exception is warranted under CDC § 18.114.040(A) and 18.114.045(A) 2. That the sign code exception does not comply with the applicable criteria and standards of the Community Development Code. Hearings Officer Final Order SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page 4 • • B. In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the Staff Report and other reports of effect agencies and public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby denies SCE 97-0001 (PERS). DATED this 23rd day of June, 1997. A.ANI 5/ Larry Epst 'or City of Ti b< • 'earings Officer Hearings Officer Final Order - SCE 97-0001 (PERS) Page • • Agenda Item: 2.1 Hearing Date: June 9.1997 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE At. HEARING'S OFFICER CITY OFTIGARD FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON sIapi,g � Community SECTION I: SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST CASES: FILE NAME: PERS OFFICE SIGN CODE EXCEPTION Sign Code Exception SCE 97-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested a Sign Code Exception to allow a second freestanding sign along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. APPLICANT: Public Employees Retirement Services OWNER: Same Attention: David Bailey, Deputy Director • 200 Market Street, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97207-0073 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. ZONING DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) District standards. SECTION II: STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends DENIAL, subject to the following findings contained within this report: SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 1 OF 5 • • SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property was designated as a Commercial Professional site since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1983. Along with all properties designated Commercial Professional in the Tigard Triangle, in December of 1996 the site was re-designated with a Mixed Use Employment Zoning District Designation. Site Development Review 96-0010 was approved with conditions on June 6, 1996. The site is now nearing completion under the development approval for the PERS office use. The applicant was previously issued a sign permit for a 32 square foot freestanding sign. This sign permit was issued April 14, 1997. This sign is presently under construction. The City has no record of any other more recent land use applications for this site. • Vicinity Information: The property is adjoined by the Interstate 5 Freeway to the east and abuts the Key Bank facility to the north. To the south of the SW Haines Street off-ramp, the property is adjoined by a mixture of residential and commercial uses. To the west is the Oregon Education Association site. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is now mostly developed with the PERS office building. The applicant has proposed a freestanding sign along the SW 68th Parkway frontage. During the completeness review for the application, the applicant refused to provide specific findings that addressed the applicable approval criteria of Section 18.114.145. For this reason, Section 18.32 states that the Director shall find the application complete on the 31st day after the application was originally submitted. The applicant has requested an exception to this requirement to develop one (1) additional freestanding sign to have a total of two (2) freestanding signs along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. SECTION IV: APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Signs: The recently adopted Mixed Use Employment Zoning District standards requires that properties designated Mixed Use Employment comply with the signage standards of the Commercial-Professional Zoning District. Section 18.114.130 (D)(a) (iii) states that one multi-faced, freestanding sign shall be permitted. The applicant was previously issued a sign permit for a 32 square foot freestanding sign. The applicant has requested an exception to develop one additional freestanding sign to have a total of two freestanding signs along the site's SW 68th Parkway frontage. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 2 OF 5 • • Sign Code Exceptions: Section 18.114.140(A) states that the Hearings Officer may grant exceptions to the requirements of this chapter when the applicant demonstrates ti that, owing to special or unusual circumstances relating to the design, structure or placement of the sign in relation to other structures, the literal interpretation of this chapter would interfere with the communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit. The applicant- provided findings related to the general standard that allows for the Sign Code Exception process. Section 18.114.145 that is reviewed below, provides the actual approval criteria that must be met in order to approve an exception to the development standards of the Sign Code. Approval Criteria for Exceptions to the Sign Code: Section 18.114.145(A) states that the Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an exception to the sign code based on findings that at least one of five criteria are satisfied. 1. The proposed exception to the height limits in the sign code is necessary to make the sign visible from the street because of the topography of the site, and/or a conforming building or sign on an adjacent property would limit the view of a sign erected on the site in conformance with Sign Code standards; Although the proposed sign is one (1)-foot above the eight (8)-foot height limit that is permitted for freestanding signage in the Mixed Use Employment Zoning District, the applicant has not proposed an exception to the height limits of the sign code within the applicant's narrative. The second freestanding sign has been proposed for additional site identification. The applicant has not proposed an exception to the allowable height limit. Without an exception, the Sign Code permits clearly identifiable wall signage on each building elevation, a freestanding sign, and a driveway entrance identification sign. For these reasons, it appears possible to • provide sufficient identification of the PERS site without utilizing a Sign Code Exception. 2. A second free standing sign is necessary to adequately identify a second entrance to a business or premises that is oriented towards a different street - frontage; The site has one (1) entrance so this criteria is not found to be applicable to this request. The PERS building is generally oriented towards SW 68th Parkway that is permitted to have a freestanding sign. 3. Up to an additional 25 percent of sign area or height may be permitted when it is determined that the increase will not deter from the purpose of this chapter. This increase should be judged according to specific needs and circumstances that necessitate additional area to make the sign sufficiently legible. The increase(s) shall not conflict with any other non-dimensional standards or restrictions of this chapter. Although the proposed freestanding sign is one (1)-foot above the eight (8)-foot height limit for freestanding signage, the applicant has not requested an additional amount of sign height or area within the applicant's narrative. For this reason, it is not recommended that this criteria be found to be applicable. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 3 OF 5 • • 4. The proposed sign is consistent with the criteria set forth in Subsection 18.114.130.G of this chapter; This section refers to additional allowable sign height and area that are found to be permissible through the original design review process for the use that is developed on the property. This criteria is not found to be applicable because the applicant has requested an additional sign, not sign area, or height in excess of the minimum that is permitted. 5. The proposed exception for a second freestanding sign on an interior lot that is zoned commercial or industrial is appropriate because all of the following apply: A. The combined height of both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of the sign height normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district; B. Neither sign will pose a vision clearance problem or will project into the public right-of-way; and C. Total combined sign area for both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of what is normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district Criteria 5 is not applicable to this request because the site is a corner lot, not an interior lot, as required within the general allowance for this type of exception. Section 18.114.145(B) states that in addition to the criteria in A above, the Hearings Officer shall review all of the existing or proposed signage for the development and its relationship to the intent and purpose of this chapter. As a condition of approval, the Hearings Officer may require: 1. Removal or alteration of non-conforming signs to achieve compliance with the standards contained in this chapter; Because the facility is new and the underlying signage regulations have not been revised since the development was approved, this standard is not applicable to this request. 2. Removal or alteration of conforming signs in order to establish a consistent sign design throughout the development; and...To date, a permit for one (1) other freestanding sign has been issued for this site. The previously permitted sign is presently under construction at the time this report was prepared. This sign does not need to be removed because it complies with current sign code standards. 3. Application for sign permits for signs erected without permits or removal of such illegal signs. A recent review of City permit records indicates that only a single freestanding sign has been permitted for site signage at this time. This permitted freestanding monument sign is presently under construction. No illegally erected signs were noted during a recent site inspection. For this reason, it is recommended that the Hearing's Officer find that this standard is not applicable to this request. STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 4 OF 5 • • SECTION V: OTHER STAFF COMMENTS ., No other comments or objections have been received concerning this request. SECTION V1 AGENCY COMMENTS No other comments or objections have been received concerning this request. ' 277///de,64- June 2. 1997 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner, AICP (--rtfat Wla-e-LeS2 June 2. 1997 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdo DATE Planning Manage ck«,rpb arI_r sea-97-01.dee STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING'S OFFICER SCE 97-0001 - PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PAGE 5 OF 5 Am I 2'-ir t 111, A 6 i4 PA 42A�Eld�TEE� 81CrJ PANEL J ille N. Ecage cau* _ ----------•------ --- ------ - R40'0401Ffirt TM. 45"40 € ----t i 1.-- 77 4 . 1...-iir 1 :0 S i p AI Ze 11410 • • ij C`3 \ • III 1 ......-o---'. .\\ Z L I 1 Z i < 2 Fiam.r• ` _ ' ` •�i�/ I I ., �CliADEI ■I b `\ Vii' 1 i Cm 72 I, .N. . :1 I S 1 .. \ Ir \%/ 1. 1 I '•.b I L. R 1 D \ /' %/ Proposed \/ . / 1 I"—Freestanding Sign . •\. ��;' . \i / s, ,...\/./ , t T . 0 L... \\iii/ . I e \ ...„-- 1.-- c :.1 NI s w HuEs ter PLOT PLAN CASE NO. EXHIBIT MAP s t PERS Sign Code Exception SCE 97- 0001 --- ------- - ----- 0 - IV ii 1 IL ' 1 1-' -- 1---- 1-1 ' 1 Mr. 1111 . 1 71 I I___A A _ 01-0114111 , 1 1 sr 1 - Fri j IIIII v*S110 PI 'E i I 7 [ lig .--g011OW I 1 ,i ' . . t ' ' ' "Pio p. __ 7-1--- 7 1 , i klik; r -4- • 1 - 1 . C .•MN= .zeit _ • c lik - co sT Cl. , 11111A I 401 It 71 piNgni . i. co - • - 0) I jI= 1 curmiN I i 1 ) `O N ..... _ ,_1 I I I L_. 4ra .., _, >N :le_ 1 '---- ------ DARTMOUTH ST 0 I — ir Li 1 i I_______ I I I e FI-11 i 1 1 Vicinity Map AN SCE 97-0001 Note: Map is not to scale A Pers Sign Code Exception _ • • T 6/24/97 EXHIBIT B DAVID BAILEY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARING'S OFFICER PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM SCE 97-0001 200-MARKET STREET, SUITE 700 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION PO1TLAND OR 97207-0073 DAVID BAILEY H:\PATTY\DOCS\SCE97-01.LBS 11410 sw 68TH PARKWAY PO BOX 23700 TIGARD OR 97281 FRED MCDONNAL 11410 SW 68TH PARKWAY PO BOX 23700 TIGARD OR 97281 PETER F. DANIELS 10121 SE SUNNYSIDE ROAD CLACKAMAS OR 97015 • • • A, , . AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING a noo Community,Decrbpmmt Snaping,4(Better Community STATE of O eCOX ) - . County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L Lansford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for Th City of Tigard, Oregon. 7 e That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED 0) PUBLIC NEARING FOR: (deck aoonorlats hex IOW o, City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer O Tigard Planning Commission O Tigard City Council ❑ That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) DECISION FOR: City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) FINAL ORDER FOR: 10.....+...w..alr0. {eked loonorhts lax NINO O City of Tigard Planning Director O Tigard Hearings Officer O Tigard Planning Commission O Tigard City Council ❑ That I served OTHER NOTICE OF FOB: A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF fNAL ORDEB/OTRER NOTICES] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", w ailed_t• -�; t ' ed person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Mir o the d- .f �4, 199 and deposited in the United States Mail on the/ � d- of �,/ it ,,, /_ , 199_,postage prepaid. A. Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the of lli__ _ ,11 •/X J ' day OFFICIAL SEAL AP/it/ fi ' i ii DIANE M JELDERKS �/" NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON NOTARY PUBLIC I 0;EGON Vf / COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 142 _ f mn ffss MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07,1933 m'COWWWS10 I )I I fret 9/4 ALE INFO.. / =ISM 4e.6 471----091 =Wank (Reif15 ,gr aalteetridyz_ • • EXHIBIT A CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping A Better Community PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, . JUNE 9, 1997 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION (SCE] 97-0001 FILE TITLE: PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION APPLICANT: Public Employees Retirement System OWNER: Same Attention: David Bailey, Deputy Director 200 Market Street, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97207-0073 REQUEST > A Sign Code Exception request to place a second freestanding sign at the corner of SW Haines Street and SW 68th Parkway. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 6/9/97 PUBLIC HEARING IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE tSUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AR MAY 19. 1997, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE,FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25 ) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER MARK ROBERTS. PLANNING DIVISION AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. ;POE ,, ; ' li,' I III , , ; ; ii I - -I 1 � ■ I ' I I i ! 111-1 I AN it• MIN 111.. I j rt SUBJECT. rr t PARC --->a` rt --A1 nurA ST I 161 I 3AI I i III i I - I ; ! 1 i II IS •1•111F-1 127- „ comma/1H sr ,� I iIi►I SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 6/9/97 PUBLIC HEARING • SC5 q7 -00)1 C P6 10f I ) EXHIBIT B 1S136DA-00100 1S136DD-00800 BAY 6p6 CORPORATION FAMILY BAPTIST CHURCH BY EVERGREEN TIMBERLANDS CORP 11585 SW 67TH 400 NORTHCREEK,SUITE 700 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 3715 VORTHSIDE PARKWAY ATLANTA,GA 30327 1 S136DD-00700 1 S136DD-00100 HEALTH PHYSICS JENSEN,FRED E NORTHWEST INC 1031 SE MILL ST 11535 SW 67TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97214 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DD-00200 1S136DD-00801 LEISER,ANNE MERCER,ROSS L&VICKI L 6009 PENDLETON COURT 11535 SW 67TH PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DA-00101 1S136DA-00200 MILLAR,TED USWAN,WALTER JR NORTHLAND HOMES INC FORSGREN,LEONARD A TRUSTEE 1834 SW 58TH#202 BY WESTWOOD HOLDING CORP PORTLAND,OR 97201 3030 SW MOODY AVE PORTLAND,OR 97201 1 S136DA-02300 1 S136DD-00301 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN PETERS,ALAN CRAIG 6900 SW HAINES 233 NE HOLLADAY TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97232 • 136DA-02401 1 S136DD-00900 TIG D,CITY OF VINCENT,BRADFORD 13125 HALL 6830 SW HAINES RD • PO BOX 23 7 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 223 1S136DA-02400 WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR I David Bailey, Deputy Director 5210 SE 26TH ST Public Employees Retirement System PORTLAND,OR 97202 200 Market Street, Suite 700 Portland OR 97207-0073 . • 11.1 Illfill;1 ijil - _ 74 ____ . ,,, . , ,,,' ' 0 .. _ < •■ C CO Ei ■ q ST IP MO ■ ill I MIN CU II p Ai BAYLOR II ■ NM III 4— I ■° CLJNTON ST 0 II�1 111111 ;gip all Vicinity Map SCE 97-01/PERS NO Note: Map is not to scale NOTIFICATION MAP N . • • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS IIGARD Community/Development ShapingA Better Community DATE: May 19,1997 TO: Per Attached FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts 0x3171 Phone:(5031639-4111 Fax:(5031 684-7297 RE: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION(SCE)91-0001 ➢ PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION < A Sign Code Exception request to place a second freestanding sign at the corner of SW Haines Street and SW 68th Parkway. LOCATION: 11410 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1 S136DA, Tax Lot 00101. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. The MUE zoning district provides sites for business and professional services. The MUE zone also provides sites for major and minor retail; and employment uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.61, 18.114 and the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) standards. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Thursday-Map 29,1997. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact _ of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. • Written comments provided below: V. (Please provide the folTawing information)Name of Persons)Commenting: Phone Number[s): SCE 97-0001 PERS SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NOTICE OF 6/9/97 PUBLIC HEARING • • • - REQUEST FOR COMMENTS 1 NOTIFICATION UST FOR LAND USE a DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS >:; > :: ..>:.»::: -::>::::::::: :;:.;>::<:::::::;;>:::.CMZEN INVOLVEMENT.TEAMS >:>;;::;.:::::...:::m:wecefor:retfleirinUiusrllCRBook(si::;>:: >: CITAre>�:ICI.[El ESI;:(Wl. ... . .:. .. .:. FILE NOISI.: SC e q COO I FILE NAMEISI: PgQs 5'1'5 h jade- 6eioVem C ITY OFFICES:: : :: : : : _ ANCED PLANNING/Nadine Smith,Planning super visor MUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT.hMpennt.sv«.Technicians _POLICE DEPT./cnme Prevention Orrcer UILDING DIV./David Scott,Budding official DIGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,ovlpmm.Review Engineer _WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,Operations Manager _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder /OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,Property Manager _OTHER S : :.>> > E IAL D TRIC : : ` : SP : : :: >. : : :.> _TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE _TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT _UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY Fire Marshall Administrative Office Julia Huffman/SWM Program Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N.First Street (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 ::; :>:: > :>. :::>:;: LOCAL AND STATEJURISDI TI NS': <'• : `.' . ;: CITY OF BEAVERTON _CITY OF TUALATIN _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS PO Box 4755 Planning Director 2501 SW First Avenue 775 Summer Street,NE • Beaverton,OR 97076 • PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem,OR 97310-1337 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 _Larry Conrad,Senior Planner _OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. Mike Matteucci,Neighbdrd.Coord. METRO _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street,NE 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 _CITY OF DURHAM Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 City Manager US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. PO Box 23483 _Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. 333 SW First Avenue Durham,OR 97281-3483 _Mel Huie,Greensp aces Coordinator(CPA's2OA's) 1175 Court Street,NE PO Box 2946 Salem,OR 97310-0590 Portland,OR 97208-2946 _CITY OF KING CITY _METRO AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION City Manager 800 NE Oregon Street _OREGON DEPT.OF TRANS.(ODOT) WASHINGTON COUNTY 15300 SW 116th Avenue Building#16,Suite 540 Aeronautics Division Dept.of Land Use&Trans. King City,OR 97224 Portland,OR 97232-2109 Attn: Tom Highland,Planning 155 N.First Avenue 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO _OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 Planning Director Bonneville Power Administration • PO Box 369 PO Box 3621 _ODOT,REGION 1 _Brent Curtis(CPA's) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Routing TTRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera Sonya Kazen,Dvlpmt.Rev.coord. _Scott King(CPA's) Portland,OR 97208-3621 123 NW Flanders _Mike Borreson(Engineer) _CITY OF PORTLAND Portland,OR 97209-4037 _Jim Tice(IGA's) David Knowles,Planning Bureau Dir. _OREGON,DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY _Tom Harry(Current PI.Apps.) Portland Building 106,Rm.1002 811 SW Sixth Avenue _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A _Phil Healy(Current PI.Apps.) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland,OR 97204 Jane Estes,Permll Spectatst Portland,OR 97204 PO Box 25412 Portland,OR 97298-0412 :UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPEeIAL A&ENBI S , :> <:>: : >>>>:>`:>:<> > >>: <;> _BURLINGTON NORTHERN R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.(R/R) _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Administrative Office Jason Hewitt Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Michael Kiser,Project Planner 1313 W.11th Street Twin Oaks Technology Center 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard 710 NE Holladay Street Vancouver,WA 98660-3000 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Portland,OR 97232 Portland,OR 97232 Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 _COLUMBIA CABLE COMPANY _TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON _US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Craig Eyestone _NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY Linda Peterson Pete Nelson 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Scott Palmer 3500 SW Bond Street 421 SW Oak Street Beaverton,OR 97005 220 SW Second Avenue Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97204 Portland,OR 97209-3991 _GENERAL TELEPHONE Paul Koft,Engineering _PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY MC: 0R030546 Brian Moore ' Tigard,OR 97281-3416 14655 SW Old Scholls Ferry Road Beaverton,OR 97007 h:(pattylmasters\rfcnotire.mst 2-May-97 •