The URL can be used to link to this page

PDR2010-00001 120 DAYS = 2/15/2011 (Includes^47-Day Extension) DATE OF FILING: 12/15/2W • ., DATE MAILED: 12/16/2010 Ti x - CITY OF TIGARD . Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2010-01 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Case Numbers: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 Case Name: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS Applicant's Name/Address: Pacific Realty Assoc.,L.P. 15350 SW Sequoia Parkway, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 Owner's Name/Address: Same as Applicant Address of Property: South of SW Dartmouth Road,west of SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washington Co. Tax Assessor's Map No. 1 S136CD, Tax Lot 04200, 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101; and 2S101AB,Tax Lot 01400. A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISIONS STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 1, 2010 AND DECEMBER 13, 2010 TO RECEIVE T1=STIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS,FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE FINAL ORDER. Request: > The applicant requested Planned Development Review approval for minor modifications to an approved Planned Development (PDR2008-00001). Through Final Order No. 2009-02 PC, the Commission approved development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a 137,900 square foot Target retail building(Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings and associated surface parking,landscaping,lighting,access and utility infrastructure improvements. The approved modification will change the previously approved Target-specific color, materials, and logos of the Retail 3 building to accommodate a non-specific user to facilitate marketing of the entitlement to interested parties, since Target has decided not to locate at the subject site. [The applicant later withdrew their second modification request to add a 1,800 square foot recycling area at the rear of the site]. The project would otherwise be consistent with the Tigard Retail Center Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. The Commission heard the request at its November 1, 2010 public hearing and approved the modifications on December 13, 2010. Zone: C-G: General Commercial District with PD: Planned Development Overlay Zone and MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755 and 18.780. Action: > © Approval as Requested ❑ Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to: © Owners of Record within the Required Distance © Affected Government Agencies © Interested Parties © The Applicants and Owners The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard Permit Center at City Hall. Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON DECEMBER 16, 2010 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 4, 2011 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Review Authority is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, Oregon 97223. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON JANUARY 3, 2011. Questions: If you have any questions,please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. • • NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2010-01 PC PLANNING COMMISSION ' FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD A FINAL ORDER APPROVING A LAND USE APPLICATION FOR MINOR MODIFICATION OF DETAILED PLANS FOR THE TIGARD RETAIL CENTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT/PDR2008-00001 (COMMISSION'S FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-02 PC). THE MODIFICATIONS CHANGE THE TARGET-SPECIFIC COLOR, MATERIALS, AND LOGOS OF THE RETAIL 3 BUILDING TO ACCOMMODATE A NON-SPECIFIC USER. THE COMMISSION HEARD THE REQUEST AT ITS NOVEMBER 1, 2010 HEARING AND APPROVED THE MODIFICATION ON DECEMBER 13, 2010. THE PLANNING COMMISSION BASED ITS DECISION ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE AND PLAN SET (TIGARD RETAIL CENTER, LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MODIFICATION, AUGUST, 2010), AND THIS FINAL ORDER. 120 DAYS = 12/30/2010 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS CASE NO.: Planned Development Review(PDR) PDR2010-00001 (Minor Modification) APPLICANT/ OWNER: Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. Attention: Matt Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicant requests Planned Development Review approval for minor modifications to an approved planned development (PDR2008-00001). Through Final Order No. 2009-02 PC, the Commission approved development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a 137,900 square foot Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings and associated surface parking, landscaping, lighting, access and utility infrastructure improvements. The proposed modifications would: 1) change the approved Target-specific color, materials, and logos of the Retail 3 building to accommodate a non- specific user to facilitate marketing of the entitlement to interested parties, since Target has decided not to locate at the subject site, and 2) add a 1,800 square foot recycling area at the rear of the site. [The applicant later withdrew this second modification request]. The project would otherwise be consistent with the Tigard Retail Center Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street west of SW 72nd Avenue; Washington County Tax Map 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200; 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101;and 2S101AB,Tax Lot 01400. TIGARD RETAIL CEN'T'ER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 1 OF 13 • • ZONES/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATIONS: C-G (PD): General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations,are permitted conditionally. (PD): The property has a planned development overlay designation. The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements,which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed- use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and- ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the City through the legislative process. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755,and 18.780. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINN.,ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 2 OF 13 • • SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION The Planning Commission finds that the proposed modification of Building 3 elevations meets the applicable approval criteria of the Tigard Community Development Code and that the proposal will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City. The Planning Commission, therefore, APPROVES the requested Land Use Application. Additionally, the Commission found that Pursuant to Director's Interpretation DIR2010-00006, the Tigard Retail Center approval PDR2008-00001 (Commission's Final Order NO. 2009-02 PC) shall be effective for a period of seven years from the date of approval. The Detailed Development Plan approval shall lapse if: 1) Substantial construction of the approved Detailed Development Plan has not begun within a seven year period;or 2) Construction on the site is a departure from the approved plan. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The Planning Commission approved the proposed Tigard Retail Center Detailed Plan with Final Order No. 2009-02 PC, effective June 17, 2009. Due to the off-site transportation impacts associated with the proposed development, the decision was appealed to Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) for alleged lack of adequate notice to property owners beyond the 500-foot notice area. LUBA dismissed the late- filed local appeals and affirmed the Planning Commission's Final Order. Vicinity Information The subject 18.16-acre property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street, west of SW 72"d Avenue, and east of Hwy 217 in the Tigard Triangle. The subject site, zoned primarily C-G (PD) with a 0.45 acre parcel in the southeast corner zoned MUE, is surrounded on the north, west and east by C-G (PD) zoned land, and on the southeast by land zoned MUE. A 10.42-acre significant wetland associated with Red Rock Creek is located adjacent to the site on the west which buffers Hwy 217. Vacant developable land exists to the east adjacent on SW 72"d, which was once a part of the previous approvals on the subject site. The area to the southeast, zoned MUE, is a neighborhood in transition where a number of residences have converted to commercial uses. Proposal Description The applicant requests approval for minor modifications to an approved planned development detail plan (PDR2008-00001). The proposed modifications would 1) change the approved Target-specific color, materials, and logos of the Retail 3 building to accommodate a non-specific user to facilitate marketing of the entitlement to interested parties, since Target has decided not to locate at the subject site, and 2) add a 1,800 square foot recycling area at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with the Tigard Retail Center Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. [The applicant later withdrew this second modification request.] SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES Type III procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain predominantly discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission with appeals to the City Council. As the proposal is a modification of Planning Commission Order No. 2009-02, the appropriate review is through the Type III-PC hearing process. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICAI1ON(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 3 OF 13 • SECTION V. NOTICE AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENT The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity to provide written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. On October 8, 2010, staff posted the subject site with a notice. On October 12, 2010 the City mailed notice to neighbors within 500 feet and other interested parties. In addition, the October 14th edition of The Times included a notice of the Planning Commission hearing. Staff did not receive any written comment from neighbors or interested parties regarding this application. SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The applicable review criteria for the proposed modifications to the detailed plan, including elevation changes to Retail Building 3 and the proposed addition of a recycling storage area, are contained in Community Development Code Chapters: 18.350, Planned Developments; 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts; 18.620, Tigard Triangle Standards; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage;and 18.780, Signs. This staff report is limited to the review of these sections and contains a staff recommendation for the Commission's review and decision on the proposed modifications. Proposed Modifications to Retail Building 3 Elevations The applicant's submittal includes proposed non-specific user Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010) and the previously approved building elevations Tigard Store Design (May 18, 2009). A side by side comparison of these two sheets may be helpful to understand the proposed modifications. When comparing,please note that the order of the four views is inconsistent between the two sheets. Proposed Modification to the Site Plan for the Addition of Recycling Storage The applicant's submittal includes a Revised Detailed Development Plan (Sheet PC-1.0) that shows the location of the proposed 12' x 90' Recycling Storage Area with a 10' high CMU screen wall. [The applicant later withdrew this second modification request. Therefore, the findings in this order relating to the recycling area are no longer applicable.] 18.350— (PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS) 18.350.010 Purpose: The applicable purposes of the planned development overlay zone are addressed in Section 18.350.040.A.1.c, below. 18.350.020 Process: A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. - At the time of the original zoning designation (1983), City Council applied the planned development overlay (PD) to a portion of the General Commercial zone in the Tigard Triangle that includes the subject site. Therefore, the applicant was required to apply for planned development review. However, the approved Detailed Plan met all of the applicable standards without variance or adjustment or the application of the Commission's discretion for those chapters that could otherwise be applied as guidelines (1'DC 18.350.070.A.3). TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 4 OF 13 • • B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development concept plan; 2. The approval of the detailed development plan; and 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. The applicant's proposed Concept and Detailed plans were approved under Planning Commission Order No. 2009-02. The planned development overlay zone (PD) already existed over the subject site. 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements: A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following: 1. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include: b) An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning principles are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed; The applicant explains the architectural style, or design concept "is still to provide buildings that establish a modern presence within a natural landscape, enhanced to provide an expression of quality enduring architecture in a sustainably responsible environment that transcends period trends to create a special shopping experience." [Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010), Tigard Store Design (May 18,2009)]. The proposed modifications pertain to removing elements of the buildings associated specifically with the Target store in order to accommodate a non-specific user: "The Retail 3 building concept proposes an architectural design of exceptional quality and construction, compatible with the Tigard Triangle Design Standards that will blend with the character of the surrounding area. The contemporary style of the architecture will create a continuous and unified composition throughout the development. Architectural design of the building entrance area allows pedestrian visibility from various points across the site. The main entry features storefront, windows, decorative lighting, and a canopy for weather protection. Pilasters add vertical elements which, along with the use of color, modulate the horizontal aspects of the building. The color palette will be comprised of warm earth- tone colors. Planters placed along the front facade provide further interest, articulation, and scale. The entry canopy, storefront, windows, lighting and planters further articulate the north (front) facade, adding pedestrian scaled interest along the front sidewalk. The front facade includes three planters strategically placed and will include native ornamental shrubs and trees. The front sidewalk will also include lit and standard bollards, benches and bicycle racks as well as lighting to illuminate the building and sidewalk. As a condition of approval, a free-standing canopy element, similar to the one proposed over the building's entrance, has been located near the right front corner of the building and a planter has also been located near the front corner of the right (west) facade. All of these design elements work together to produce a variation in texture, color, and scale to provide visual interest and a pedestrian-friendly experience." In addition, the Target building program included sustainability features addressing Site and Water, Energy Optimization, Materials and Resources, Indoor Air Quality, and other measures. The applicant states that "consistent with the spirit of sustainable development, potential Retail 3 users will be worked with to promote and encourage sustainable features in the construction and operation of the Retail 3 building at this location." TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 5 OF 13 • • c) An explanation of how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010: To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed modifications to elevations of Retail 3 are consistent with the original approval in that they provide a similar appearance through the use of building articulation, changes in materials and colors, parapets, and awnings [Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010), Tigard Store Design (May 18,2009)]. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the Concept Plan Submission Requirements address the planning objectives of the proposed modifications and the purposes of the planned development chapter. The proposed Retail 3 elevation modifications relate to the aesthetics and innovative building techniques elements of these sections. The Commission may concur that the applicant has adequately addressed these elements and that the proposed modifications are consistent with the approved Detailed Plan. Alternatively, without the prejudice of Target as the tenant for Retail 3, the Commission may wish to consider whether to require additional building articulation, materials, colors, etc., or sustainability features that were a part of the Target proposal. 18.350.070 Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria A detailed development plan may be approved only if all the following applicable criteria are met: The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan. Minor changes from the concept plan do not make the detailed plan inconsistent with the concept plan unless: a. The change increases the residential densities, increases the lot coverage by buildings or reduces the amount of parking; b. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping; c. The change involves a change in use; d. The change commits land to development which is environmentally sensitive or subject to a potential hazard; and e. The change involves a major shift in the location of buildings, proposed streets, parking.lots, landscaping or other site improvements. b. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, e.g., between single-family and multi-family residential, and residential and commercial uses; The only adjacent property with a different type of land use is located to the southeast corner of the development. Although the adjacent property is zoned MUE which allows similar commercial use, the existing use of the noted property is residential. The proposed development allows for a 20' buffer between any hard surface improvements or structures and the existing residential use property. According to the Buffer Matrix, Table 18.745.1&2, only a 10 foot buffer is required. The buffer will consist of shrub groundcover, trees, and hedges per the Buffer Matrix requirements. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 6 OF 13 • • On-site screening from view from adjoining properties of such activities as service areas, storage areas, parking lots and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: a) What needs to be screened; b) The direction from which it is needed; and c) Whether the screening needs to be year-round. The applicant states that the proposed recycling areas will be screened by a 10-foot high CMU wall. The screening would screen the area from adjoining properties to the south. In addition to the wall, landscaping is proposed between the wall and the property line, which should further screen the proposed recycling area. Response: The proposed site plan modification is for the inclusion of a screened recycling area behind Retail 3 and is consistent with the approved concept and detailed plan. No significant changes are proposed to the site plan. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, any modification of the approved Detailed Plan must be generally consistent with the approved Concept Plan. Minor changes from the Concept Plan do not make the Detailed Plan inconsistent with the Concept Plan unless (b) the change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping. The proposed recycling facility would reduce the amount of landscaping approved under Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. by 0.2%. The modification of the site plan to accommodate the proposed recycling areas is minimal and therefore generally consistent with the approved Concept Plan and may be approved. 18.520— (COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS) C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini- warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for The subject site is zoned C-G and MUE. The proposed general retail use is permitted outright in both the C-G and MUE zones. The proposed recycling area is accessory to the approved retail use and is subject to the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district. The elevation modifications are aesthetic in nature and are subject to the applicable Planned Development standards. The applicant states that the proposed modifications are still consistent with the requirements of this section. TIGARD RETAIL,CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 7 OF 13 • • 18.520.040 Development Standards All development must comply with: 1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapter 18.370; Development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.502.2. 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. The applicant has not requested any development adjustments or variances. With respect to the proposed recycling area, the applicable standards in Table 18.502.2 include: STANDARDS C-G MUE (PD) Approved Proposed Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 0 ft 0 ft. - 100ft. 80 ft. Maximum Site Coverage (PD): 85% 85% 80% 67.0% 67.2% Minimum Landscaping (PD): 15% 15% 20% 33% 32.8% The location of the proposed recycling area is in the rear yard approximately 80 feet from the southern property line, consistent with the 0 ft setback requirement. In addition, the proposed location is outside of the 50-foot wetland buffer. The proposed 1,800 square foot recycling area would minimally increase the site coverage by 0.2%. Therefore, the proposed development complies with all of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district. All other applicable standards and requirements, as reviewed in this staff report, are met or otherwise conditioned to be met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed modification of the approved Detailed Plan with the addition of the 1,800 square foot recycling area is consistent with the applicable Commercial Zoning District standards. 18.620— (TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS) 18.620.010 Purpose and Applicability A. Design principles. Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principles adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. 18.620.040 Building Design Standards All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Ground floor windows - All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 8 OF 13 • • The retail shops buildings (1 and 2) are within the required Building Setback. Approximately 58% of these building elevations facing the Dartmouth Street frontage are comprised of windows and/or doorway openings on the ground floor wall area. No changes are proposed to the approved ground floor windows within the Building Setback with this application. 2. Building facades - Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: a) a variation in building materials; b) a building off-set of at least 1 foot; c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. No building façade facing a public street extends more than 50 feet without providing building offsets and architectural design features, as well as variations in building materials. No changes are proposed for Retail 1 and 2 with this application. For Retail 3, the north (front) façade is the only façade that faces a public street. This façade has been designed to meet the design guidelines of providing architectural features at least every 50 feet with the following: The north (front) elevations provide a variety of pattern, texture, and material. Pilasters and offset corners occur in less than 50' intervals along this façade. The entry utilizes a storefront system comprised of anodized aluminum and glass, additional glazing occurs to the right and left of the entry vestibule. An EIFS (Exterior Insulated Finish System) panel wall extends to the right to emphasize entry and display user identity signage. As in the original submission, the architectural treatment continues to the sides and rear with a similar vocabulary of materials, texture, and color. No building facades extend more than 300' without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. 3. Weather protection - Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. No changes are proposed to the approved weather protection measures with this application. 4. Building Materials - Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. No change is proposed to the material pallet. 5. Roofs and roof lines - Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. False fronts and roofs are not proposed. 6. Roof-mounted equipment - All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 9 OF 13 • • All roof-mounted equipment is proposed to be screened from view of adjacent public streets by using parapets. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: 1. Zoning district regulations - Residential only developments within the C-G and MUE zones shall meet the sign requirements for the R-25 zone 18.780.130B; nonresidential developments within the C-G zone shall meet the sign requirements for the commercial zones, 18.780.130C; and non residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone,18.780.130D. In addition, sign area, height, and location standards further restrict signs in the Tigard Triangle. The proposed development site is covered by two land use districts, General Commercial (C-G) and Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The sign requirements of Commercial Zones have been met for signs in the C-G zoned portion of the site per code chapter 18.780.130C. See a more detailed code response in that section,below. No signs are proposed in the MUE portion of the site. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards continue to be met with the proposed modifications to Retail 3 elevations. 18.755—(MIXED SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING STORAGE): A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that certain new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source-separated recyclable materials prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. B. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and non- residential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for such uses. 18.755.030 Materials Accepted A. Materials accepted. Except as provided for in 18.755.040 G and I, the storage area must be able to accept at least all "principle recyclable materials" designated by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other source-separated recyclable the local government identifies by regulation. The approved development included storage areas able to accept all "principal recyclable materials" that were specific to the Target operations program. The proposed additional recycling area provides this function exterior to the Retail 3 rather than interior. 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance A. Alternative methods of compliance. An applicant shall choose one of the following four methods to demonstrate compliance: 1. Minimum standards; 2. Waste assessment; 3. Comprehensive recycling plan; or 4. Franchised hauler review and sign-off. The minimum standards method was used to adequately size the trash enclosures for the proposed retail pads for this site. The trash enclosure for the Target building was based on building specific requirements as provided by the retailer. The proposed additional recycling area is based on coordination with other retailers as a typical requirement and is proposed to maximize marketability of the Retail 3 store. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 10 OF 13 • • 18.755.050 Location, Design and Access Standards for Storage Areas A. Applicable standards. The following location, design and access standards for storage areas are applicable to all four methods of compliance, described in 18.755.040 above. B. Location standards. 1. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be collocated with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; 2. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; 3. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; 4. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; 5. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; 6. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; 7. The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. As shown on the applicant's site plan (Sheet PC-1.0) the only change proposed to the approved mixed solid waste and recycling plan is the addition of exterior recycling storage to the rear of Retail 3 off of the access road. The proposed area is consistent with the applicable location standards. C. Design standards. 1. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; 2. Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; 3. Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; 4. Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. According to the applicant's narrative, the proposed recycling area will meet Uniform Fire Code standards, will be enclosed by a 10' high split CMA screening wall, and containers (provided by tenants) will be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted, consistent with the design standards. D.Access standards. 1. Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons. However, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service; 2. Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment, considering paving, grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered; TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICAI1ON(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 11 OF 13 • • 3. Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. Access to the storage areas will not require backing out of a driveway onto a public street. Adequate turning radii are provided to allow collection vehicles to safely exit the site in a forward motion. Although the franchised hauler, Pride Disposal Company, reviewed and signed off on the approved site plan, no such review and sign-off has been submitted for the proposed additional recycling area. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed development complies with the applicable Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage standards. Although the franchised hauler, Pride Disposal Company, reviewed and signed-off on the approved trash enclosure plan, no such review and sign-off has been submitted for the proposed additional recycling area. Therefore, a condition of approval shall require the applicant to submit a letter by the franchise hauler demonstrating the location, design and access of the proposed additional recycling area is serviceable. 18.780—(SIGNS): *PD Guideline Chapter Chapter 18.780 regulates the placement, number and design criteria for signage. 18.780.130 Zoning District Regulations C. In the C-G and CBD zones. No sign shall be permitted in the C-G and CBD zones except for the following: 1. Freestanding signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties in commercial zones: The freestanding signs have been modified to remove the Target specific signage and provide signage for a non-specific use. The sign height (10 feet) and area for the proposed monument signs (66-sf per face, for a total of 264-sf for all four faces between the two signs) remains unchanged. 2. Wall Signs: No modifications are proposed to the wall signage for the retail shops buildings. As noted in the approved 2008 application, the total number and area of wall signs for the proposed retail shop buildings will be dependent on the tenant mix, but will comply with the requirements of this section. Without a user identified for Retail 3, the total number and area of wall signs for that building is also unknown at this time. FINDING: The proposed changes to the signs reviewed under the original decision relate to content only. The City does not regulate sign content. The applicant must still apply, and has stated their intention to apply for sign permits, when tenants and detailed sign designs are determined. TIGARD RETAIL CENITR MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 12 OF 13 • • SECTION VIII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS Director's Interpretation on Expiration In addition to the requested elevation and site plan modifications, the applicant has also requested an extension of Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. Staff finds that the qualifying statement in the original approval "This detailed plan approval shall be valid for 18 months from the effective date of this decision" is not supported in the Tigard Development Code. Therefore, the applicant has requested a Director's Interpretation to clarify the expiration date of the approval. Being processed as Type II decision, the Director's Interpretation is due to be issued November 16, 2010 and become effective on December 1, 2010. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission continue the November 1" hearing until December 13, 2010 for final deliberation of the proposed modifications after the Director's Interpretation is issued. Development Review Engineer Comment The City's Development Review Engineer commented that because the proposed action does not alter or affect any of the public improvements approved under the prior Planning Commission order (Final Order No. 2009-02 PC), no additional pubic improvements are required with this land use application. SECTION IX. AGENCY COMMENTS No agencies were notified as none, other than the City, has purview over the proposed modifications to the approved detailed plan. SECTION X. CONCLUSION The City of Tigard Planning Commission has APPROVED, Planned Development Review (PDR2010-00001) —TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE APPLICANT AND ALL PARTIES TO THESE PROCEEDINGS BE NOTIFIED OF THE ENTRY OF THIS ORDER. PASSED: THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010 BY THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. ,g ) i//2 - Dave Walsh,Planning mmission President Dated this 7 " day of December, 2010. • Attachments: 1 Vicinity Map 2 Preliminary Site Plan 3 Approved Elevation Drawings I:\CURPLN\Gary\Site Development and PD\PDR2010-00001(Tigard Retail Center Modification)\PDR2010-00001 PC Final Order.docx TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PAGE 13 OF 13 ENS: • .�R.�-t� � I VICINITY MAP/,li 1 II1i1 = NI g, 111 PDR2010-00001■._ el lir oilli Mr am NE . ., ._�n� II TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS NM U7:01111,lir ■+ r iip �� , _ NTA ST Ems= , ..s. . , .., ..,..,.„. 'JIM '7 II 0 III IN ' I 1 Subject Site NImI41II II u n11 g4 R' /1i il.i1:n l •-mIp•-n.i ..''.- i ' !11■ I f i ( MI. : -_ _ - -YI�Lfsi LI�F(q y 1 i `:!dill 41 4.. 40 Mi I I, +44 'II Ill NI 0 i/Pill las ...4. :II' [-I 5 Jà:!��■ VIt sc ale 1:8,000-1 In=667 h o to i �� I r �i� Map pnntetl at 01:55 NM on 20-Sep-10 ■ ii, W DATAISDEzu FROMMULTIPLESOURCES,TMECNYOFTIOARD �N I,� /(� -t� MANES NO WARRANTY.REPRESENTATION OR OUARANrEE AS TO THE y� r � I� -� CONTENT,ACCURACY,TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE h�f,�rt��y.��,' Y• DATA PROVIDED HEREIN.THE CITY OF TR3ARD SMALL ASSUME NO •r � Z� .�� -m LIABILm•FOR ANV ERRORS,OMISSgNS,OR INACCURACIES IN THE _ 1 �� LII 1I -� ' INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF NOW CAUSED. tt � �� L; !��la City of 11gard 1. 4J rwti` pp 13125 SW HaII Blvd Feet �� r n 1000 / �� N MpT NsT I��f'�� TIGA MAPS Tig53639-97223 I" 0 BIM ts` _ -lIff �i 503 639-0171 n--- 1 _ \l1` www.tigard-or.gov T I C,�R u • C1 \ I SITE DATA BUILDING DATA ML gags / c';. •i r \ •' ` I RCI I It.0D0 sr: eeettL Qra6 55* RnAN) I2DDO u1 PR[PoYO SNNAL . i 1' DA ; MIK I(101 I) SQ KS lo1K MOM AKA 161.900 01 _ % MIY J L.D1r 3 1316 n 1 I[A1a30 nON 0.05 Mx` \ m,u 1416 Mx w';:, \ ®G ZONE I MUE 20NE PARKING DATA. �, ,"I,y, I ®(GENERAL COMMERCIAL) I (MIXED USE M,Y 1 I]000 u1 BOLDING AREA) ,\\\�;.. \` ACCESS EASEMENT ROUSED 11 111 EMPLO7MENq NOTES MOARD STALLS W STALLS•\�•;.C<J:' :.. i::\` CMPACT STALLS I STALLS I ' .� • II 1I t QAww BASED a 51■Air BY YQAY 51D •::•:•:.•y::. KGE55&f STALLS 3 STALLS YOMJ4%144711.10241' ) )::::'•p—p_p. .'.'ti:. POlExnu NNR SPoSI10.wC DATED MR It)00)(QW1FD m S 10'■Q WY. ....:��I(.IH ";" L` ACC[SS 5ocS5 ` J.IY it,lOD6) TOTAL Y STALLS IuD s, / /:%\ 5lj;:;?._.p■.��..6■..D■I.S6M�■{t >i' , `� _ /_ Mn'v aAro sa)/1,00D sr PL A A �. ..i�_4f911wIMi 4 SD i /_�yt_.-..�-■ Y-Y---•.---■--.•-F--- a 511511) II2W0 ux BU5151G ARCS) / I , 1 0 = PAMSNC D5 "...1.1. SIAND51?STALLS 51 STALLS AI vLifil L `S ^ - 1.ALL CALDAA1aN$ COIL 2 Was It'll i:1:: l f ' ( '■�' -rCD� 0 GROSS=AK FOOTAGE OF C,cor 1 s,uas 3 s)aa /4/9.: / ::.....;� 1 `^: .. c W C��.�; � BI0.0NG Imm 5111 S 551 615fI115 4:-0::I•• • Ini1�A.NA^ «` +iQ:.;.:.;:7::::.:°L:.' ':.:::.:'..,:::i::..:..:...:F MQSSYL S1 115 STALLS 5ASAN0 RAm m)p,mo v f �`'P'C .':.,,,..@I{.. ••••''''''' a ......7 :'I @.: si :. (O Ian BY LY1“I'iC f '••' ...?....:1:::::::.(, '� 'w¢..'.'.� ;. .: 9 0 :.PAakMC Bawl wx,51xs v.14Y Mira 5 l.� A:. .. IALLS 9S BIn-M1n AMA) LOT 2 �► "1y"100L1q^`°`^'.'R'-«" + J � ;.:�. 0 90 PARKING STALLS CpIPACI STANDARD STALLS SOT SIAM / •' ::'�:,I r ;,,�:+1 O STALLS AM 9113'6 9'416'AS 55151 S1I1lS 115 STALLS N ( I B c! SHOO OM a'AtYE ADM lw. ACCESSIBLE STALLS 3 STALLS 1i J�N'$ i1R +i C C C i C C C I I::: T I(VIREO/KO REO/KO POOL W,COM STALLS N STALLS �':•:::1•:•:•:•:I ;10; .1..- C:- O `1L, IA00DSF RARO / / :: Q ."\\\� 1 @ I® ®`\ ��5C AM W TOTAL RAM 107/1.000 SI STALLS :::;:ti:yg. l5^ � I R iF, -"; I �1 5Y05 iw. 6]O53OFff(PRONG)w[B) ]]] 3 J] ]]]] �1i O = A M 10501 Or MgAREO PARSING m1A1 SOS 691 S,HLS Ia/,.WO Sr RAro A� "":: . 1 ti;: i= Y I.Is_ STALLS MAY CDYPLY MN THE / A :•:•: ., , Gail ]6. 9k[ M PEDESTRIAN/3 STAID51M FQ COAPMI STALLS :I•iikkA FF 6 I CccJ:1� I .I cocc Ilccc � ..'.;: 4>�a.,,,,nrtl4l G! i'� / ]� i i ]::., r TSI� ,3r , ®f ® \ 1 A 9 7.. LEGEND :.. ... .. i::•r OP 3A PROP=■6WD III .•may........ ..:.�� Ss '� ® ! '' I` .COME ur MRS s versa • / L:•:i'/� . I C C C EI,L I.:::::::«I C C C':I`- L C L i1i, �� N.\ PAOPCRIY LLNC "! ~Cs` f ©f I ® d t e 9•M. r Ty,. Q KANO 3 DUNE STALLS KR Rq ]]]] ]] ::;jp•.: J 1 / tEy ■/ }:.i,a _ =1 C C C C C11.1i l ,/, 4j/`�••,• • _ __ ■Ltt3E S'PmfS1PoY CpPACI S,HL S.POND>:>: ��-•-_ 5q•I __L a,Mme!::::::: a Mr r.-GZw, PATH s M¢SmL HALL >..; ■ '. I YYYYYY\.`\ i p COMPACTOR ... 6Cq D x ON �. MI CORRAL ):•: L. Z-� \ \. ■Y■ PP ACAVY CON ASPHALTIC Cp1[MlE PAVFY[MI is? IAMDYAPE I 9'lw. ® f .` YAW ENTRY EXIT LOT 3 •a# ; 1'?> ':� M4A1D BIFRR g/ y1 •t>:•:L.••i y ISLANDS M P It .i. -►\k�,o L ii1 a•:;•.�'.' ' 331 ]]]'+I \�\: I ; © f'�� PDXS,RIY PEAKS Ill ACC[ff 1. KISTIxO :: © �� , . I I COMMIX BY ARDIREC, C C C,1 /` •3 3 c c .. ■ ;::'' ASPHALT PAM u"isr"ux HD iF_ 'tC./L/ f �- �.:::: uBU RETAL 3 .':'`:.-.. ,r y y y ..> ■ ■ ):Bcrc1 ■ f :•i»:vi (.� )�M LASS[ i M pry OCR `- NSYAI GUARANI AREA 140111:107A1) ,I, A .R� 4 -Via ® 4WOS Iw. W.L ©' PYFN6 "R'r�^'W+ :::: ::: ' }.: E ZONE ��., + 'Yy, u'..:.,�i� l a .J .. 1suEO■.#� �r �r•. �! p ;',�flY� O=IY�LOYMEDIq o � ,f j #:�i::•:.:. 1 9r Rp6 1 ...PROPOSED•�_ TeIRx:RbI,E::::::::::::.:::::::::::.:: 9'Iro. ® -4' A 1■F i .::•i:•: FAe3i IEMC \_�ii`i:.. �:....;" :.... .ia Q1 11,.•.1.:':-i', i � �;L?;:!{.. {{ Q7L ■ O \\\��: ::"�. a �T.fII�fAA1NO SP145;;.YR ]]J.I ' nSS'PlAN1[A �65'QAff•"II .. ._RiJr%.dam I'., t::•::•:•i:•:: 7 ■ PLWI[R • STE /::; ':.. �Q$�rye\off•o...44"-- �--�y >� C+ II i A I :Ii::.. 1 ./.11' 71I C C �': :'�'.�p■ �\v ' Ir [61IN0 PiKYCNI MYAMS-N/ 745.P$'R. •I4. \��• .- �? :g 9 �' ' 6 PA37 C:1 { a.r: 111.x1 �A' SARA '::):::.'q�. 61 ..I'' ::::::::. y 111 ■ 9 y :::.gip O $M� L 6 I a. �� 6. / ;::`.% I ��}} LOT 1 -46i.' -� ..........•.....;• Nm■c tI <l:a: d :;I;.� cc c I" - -**,,,tat / .RETAIL 1 ' A.:. �:::,::: _ BGrDARY DARTMOUTH STREET s3pp YA(( .:::o:•::•::•>:•::;::\ St.00O u a y Aa le O9 y":' _ �?'.: 4.......,:::;::::::::i IMPROVEMENT SECTION �¢' 1 Firs ::Fi$v n.�C:':D,,` fa•1)6 i1t5�i�1P:::.::. ]] ] _ C ..... ® • {/.j�jii:i: ': .A l}�•.:::': - _ Vf6■Y�i:.D:?,'`:..' J —— I; 7ff�'`:;4:f+ A ` I:ij i:iiii:. C C C C [1,:: :::: L1,..,1:!: .:� P : PR SIX so )6'f RJf AR AI{ • �� ..0 :::'w...::::::::.... -NY/A[S� moo Aa [mvlY An �Cv`: 4.,;i. . �, .:.1RIAX.RhIiE:.:::;:;;.:A i>Y:i ® I{{L 5'-tY x I{ '1( 'ia RRW::�t .,y3,413 RO'' . :J]]']) 'i i'i i'i] :i:i ,:,::ii::::i'':'::;..::':::::::: 1 I w _ R PAHPNI wCALC `: 36 - M nIS c n * is G I -� I - - ARI ✓�� V [S PAKYLNI PA5£Y[Nl a r r c.e r d 1 SY ee -��'• l' a•-9rx 'H•1 le'1 5Y ♦ T i R�' d , �•� I 1 N4NfllPM !, rr . .: • . .. 35'Q j^l . . l� 1 ;l l l l l) ; ll jT 1 1 )-) O- HERMOSO WAY ) IMPROVEMENT SEC TION GRAPHIC SCALE CpTY OF TOG 6AD_ - _ Appro\red x ''Jnditionally Apprrnrad ncaaauaLC Far only the work as described in: PA usT August 5,2010 Tiro i .9MIT NO._>''DR2ol n - DOQa� REVISED DETAILED PC_1.O See Letter to: Follow DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1 1 Attach f 1 pr job-4 Date: /a - 1 -1 o - .• . . • ,, , . . . .• ....:1•,•.1.1,.i•::,....:1,, • . . . . .• : . 1 :.:.:... ... •••••••••••••••••••••••:...••••••••••••::::: 111:111:—.....111......1........11. . ....... 1 rt: '7. , '..1. .::::::: __,..ja 11111M ..., • •.,i, ••••••-• r• •r• r••••... ' '• • . .' ...:.......••••■ • •• , i 1.,...11.:1'I i t.VA I I:• . .. .... .;; .. .; • 11 .• ::i•i .. .. .• . . . ...1, . .• .... . ........ . . • maw Iiii. - „:,,,,,,,,, &matt wk.....x............:::::::1:iii;:::::::.I.: Allt ---•• -•••••••w -" .• ....d 1■Iike... ... .... , .. . . . . . :•I••,1,:k,,,•:: . • • • . . • • gli gx4tow....,..........,....................41.4.:541g..1....sizmulaaRsAmsms igiii•iii :Mi., ... . . . . . . .• , ..... . .. . . . • • ' •••• f,•;::... . • •.., •,,.. . . . . .... . . .. . . •• • • • 4 ...•::::::. • . • • • • • • • • : • . : . ........... . .. ,...,:•:::.:•,,,,..„.„...• .. D . .. . . . .. ...: . .., . ... .. .. . . .. . ... . willo .............. .. : . .. . • .....,::::.;.:::.: :.:.:::::::::::,::::::::::::::.:::: .•••• : ... • . . . . . . .r .::::::..:: ...:.:: •:... : .. .. . . .. imikx . :iib:!::::::::. - 1. .: -• , . , . . I.....!:: .:. i .I .......i '...... 2 . . . . . .. . . • CITY OF TIGARD I PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes December 13,2010 CALL TO ORDER President Walsh called the meeting to order at 7:10 pm. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall, at 13125 SW 1-Iall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Anderson; Commissioner Doherty; Commissioner Hasman; Commissioner Muldoon; Commissioner Ryan; Commissioner Schmidt; Commissioner Shavey; Commissioner Vermilyea; and President Walsh. Absent: Commissioner Doherty (left after public hearing) Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Community Development Director Susan Hartnett, Assistant Communit y Development Director; Doreen Laughlin, Sr. Administrative Specialist; and Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Darren Wyss, Senior Planner COMMUNICATIONS President Walsh explained the 10 minute delay in starting the meeting. He said this would be Jeremy Vermilyea's last meeting as a Planning Commissioner. He acknowledged and thanked him for his significant contribution as Vice President of the Planning Commission and as a high-level contributing member. He said that it's been a pleasure having served alongside him for the past several years. Vice President Vermilyea replied, "Since I'm not one given to long speeches..." [Lots of chuckles!] "...I'll just say—thank you." CONSIDER MEETING MINUTES December 6th Meeting Minutes: President Walsh asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the December 6th minutes; there being none, Walsh declared the minutes approved as submitted. 1:iLRP1\1Pn lnmg Cornatissurr i=-113 Pi;Pac-kers i2.S110-'.'1t-fq:: ;,ri'1",vzi Rcrs:PDR21t001071';lPC Mires;,12-13-11:+nc Page 1 of 6 OPENED PUBLIC HEAR President Walsh opened the public hearing and explained that this is a continuation of a prior hearing. He explained that at the last hearing on this matter (November 1'f) there were more questions the commissioners had — and it was left open. They'd said they would allow parties to present those findings and evidence in writing. That was sent to the commissioners and they are now back for deliberations only. He reminded the audience that"deliberation only" means that they will have conversation amongst the commissioners. They would not have a conversation with staff; the applicant; or anyone else. They will have their own discussion and then see if they can move on the applicant's request. CONTINUED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008-00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot "big box" Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 & 2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site [withdrawn]. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street,west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING-STATEMENTS President Walsh read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Ex-parte contacts: Commissioner Vermilyea — has had conversations with Andrew Young from Pac Trust—but on a different subject. No conversation on this subject matter. Site visitations: Commissioner Muldoon, Commissioner Hasman, and President Walsh. No challenges of the jurisdiction of the commission. No conflicts of interest. STAFF REPORT President Walsh referred to page 4 of the staff report from the November Pt hearing. He said that under the applicable review criteria for the proposed modifications to the detail plan there were elevation changes to Building 3 and a proposed additional recycling storage area. He noted that from a [December 6th] memo provided, Exhibit A, the recycling center proposal had been withdrawn. He summarized that the applicant is not asking that the commission weigh in on that issue any longer. He said the staff report is limited to review of the other sections and contains staff recommendation for the commission's review and decision on the proposed modifications only. These modifications refer to Retail building 3 elevations — basically to remove all the Target name and colors and replace it with generic earth tones. President Walsh asked Associate Planner, Gary Pagenstecher, if he'd summarized that correctly. Pagenstecher answered "Yes." At this point, President Walsh opened the meeting up for deliberations. .:I LIiPLN Yi l0 PC k-n-,.12-1.-1::.PU- 1'fY?rr�FU-!f D R2j10,00aLi l.,TPC\I,,,,12-13 Page 2 of 6 • DELIBERATIONS • Commissioner Muldoon sees no problem with the modifications and went on to explain why. Commissioner Doherty was concerned that by going to a "generic" sort of building,perhaps the traffic information presented earlier will not properly reflect true numbers. She said this might be the case if certain retailers that draw more traffic come up. She is also concerned that the new retailer might change the ambiance. President Walsh explained that when the Commission reviewed the initial detail plan and approved that in 2009—all the traffic information was approved. That aspect was not forced to reopen so it's not part of the deliberations. Doherty said there were epic concerns about 79th(she wasn't quite sure which street) and how that backs up because of traffic going across onto Dartmouth. She said they approved it based on a certain retailer and she thinks to go from a certain retailer to a generic building— she think they should be able to reserve the right of approving it based upon what the traffic is going to be —because it could be tremendous. She said that, for the record, she believes that traffic was approved based on a certain retailer— and not an "unknown" retailer. President Walsh said a Target Super Center creates a huge amount of traffic and the offsite improvements that were included in what has been approved and what will be done if this project moves forward — those offsite improvements are pretty significant. He wondered what more might be asked. Doherty reiterated that this is an "unknown retailer" and that could totally change the entire face of the Tigard Triangle. She said she's concerned about that. Commissioner Ryan said she recalled that the offsite improvements did not include 78th. They did not cross Hwy 99W at Dartmouth— so it still can be an issue. Commissioner Vermilyea said he had basically two comments. "First of all, we're not in a position to revisit the traffic impact analysis at this time. It's not before us. We approved.the traffic impact analysis. It just happened to be a Target. I reviewed the Kittelson memo. These people are highly respected and do this for a living and their conclusion is that this is a conservative estimate based on a broad range of retail use allowed under our Development Code. It's important that we are not in a position to discriminate between uses or between types of business as long as there's not a trip of any greater level of impact mitigation that needs to be covered. Based on this —right now I'm pretty satisfied that that's not going to happen. That's the science of it. Anecdotally, I cannot imagine that there would be a use that would generate more trips for a building this size than a Target. Under any circumstances — that we would have anything going in there that would eclipse a Target. I'm comfortable approving as the current modification is proposed. Doherty doesn't agree. She said a Target isn't that big. Her concern is down the road, if there is a retailer that is going to generate a whole lot more traffic than what this says, she thinks we should be able to revisit that and have that as one of the triggers in the approval of this. Vermilvea: "Procedurally, I don't think we can do that." Doherty: "Then I'm not going to vote to approve this." Commissioner Ryan: "If a retailer moves in there that currently doesn't exist on the left side, it's going to draw a lot of people. If it's a 'Target — there's already other Targets on the left side in our region — but a retailer, for example, like Wal-Mart, which as I understand only exists on the east side right now, it's going to draw a lot of people. Question of staff by President Walsh: "There are concerns by members of the Planning Commission as to the change of name of the retailer. It's still the same use — big box store. Can any form of the statement or any form of a condition be placed into a motion on our part tonight in ruling on the request of the applicant?" 1:,111PL\Ptvxning Cnmmas,r-1'_010 PC P- ,,\12-13-10-P4-Conthm,d r;.rd R.ud PDR2010-0M01 VCPC 12.13.IQ.dx Page 3 of 6 • • Ron Bunch, Community Deve ent Director, answered that it's vet nportant to not discriminate against uses that fall into the category. It's essential to look at this within the category of a shopping center. Looking at the ITE manual, shopping centers have a defined rate of trips.This was a shopping center, and that rate was used in the report. So essentially, it falls into the "shopping center" category. He asked to please avoid the use of specific names or different types of shopping centers in this category. Shopping centers are defined specifically within the ITE manual and that's what the Kittelson Report utilized. Commissioner Shavey: "Clarification. So no matter what the retailer is, it doesn't make any difference because it's a shopping center?" Bunch used the example of H & M going into downtown Portland. It was crowded and would probably continue to be crowded —but it fell within the clothing retail kind of store. So it is in that category of a shopping center retail use. Shavey: "So this wasn't figured for a "Target" — it was figured for a "shopping center." Bunch: "Yes. The ITE Manual looked at it within the category of a shopping center." Shavey: "No matter what retailer was there, it'd be the same?" Bunch: "That's correct. The numbers of trips are very specific to a shopping center and the T 1 E Manual is what was used, yes." Vermih-ea: "If the applicant was ultimately able to find a tenant that fell outside the shopping center category that was previously approved, and that We're amending tonight, they would have to come back to the City and request a modification of the plan — correct?" Pagenstecher: "Potentially, that could happen." Walsh: "So the City of Tigard's land uses would not recognize the difference as in the I!:`E Manual? Bunch: "If, for example it came in and became an "entertainment" use, or another use, then they would have a different impact and it would be different than a shopping center." Walsh: "Would there be a trigger that would bring it back through a review process?" Bunch: "What would likely occur to trigger this is that if there is a modification that a potential buyer, or user of the site would want to modify it. Let's say, for instance, a substantial portion as a fueling station — that could do it; or an entertainment component; or if the site was utilized for office/commercial or other kinds of activities that did not fall into that shopping center or retail use kind of category. That would •represent a substantial modification and would have to come back to the Planning Commission. MOTION The following motion was made by Commissioner Vermilyea, seconded by Commissioner Hasman: 1.P.PL,\‘.Pfarminy,C,.m:ns>;;nnt.Ilif0 P(:Y.rLcn':12-13-10-PIt-Ccrntimir.1-? r Rc„€(P1311.2010-c$k01\TN,31murt,12-13-Ir1dnc • Page 4 of 6 • "I move for approval of applicate PDR2010-00001 as modified by tlOpplicant, and adoption of the findings and conditions of approval contained in the staff reports and based on the testimony that we received at the prior hearing." Staff had a question on the motion. Pagenstecher asked the commissioners to review the memo he'd distributed earlier dated December 13th (Exhibit B), and include it in the rriotion. FRIENDLY AMENDMENT by Commissioner Muldoon seconded by Commissioner Shavey: ...adds the second paragraph of the December 13th memorandum from Gary Pagenstecher to President Walsh and Conditions 1 & 2 which states: Pursuant to Director's Interpretation DIR2010-00006, the Tigard Retail Center approval PDR2008- 00001 (Commissions Final Order No. 2009-02 PC) shall be effective for a period of seven years from the date of approval. The Detailed Development Plan approval shall lapse if: 1. Substantial construction of the approved Detailed Development Plan has not begun within a seven year period; or 2. Construction on the site is a departure from the approved plan. The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote, the Commission voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Muldoon, Commissioner Ryan; Commissioner Schmidt, Commissioner Shavey, Commissioner Vermilyea, and President Walsh (8) NAYS: Commissioner Doherty (1) ABSTAINERS: None ABSENT: None At this point Commissioner Doherty excused herself as she had to leave to join a planned conference call. She stated she was not leaving in protest, but to join this call as she'd advised the commission earlier that she would need to do. WORK SESSION—ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ANALYSIS COMMITTEE Darren Wyss, Senior Planner, introduced Steve Foust, from Cogan Owens Cogan, and they both went through a PowerPoint presentation regarding the Economic Opportunity Analysis (BOA),Exhibit C. Wyss explained the purpose of the BOA for the City of Tigard: "To look at emerging trends; look at what kind of land needs those emerging trends have;look at what land we have available; and reconcile that as to what our growth scenario is going to be." DISCUSSION Some of the topics discussed were projections or assumptions that will be used for future growth; targeted "clusters;" development of Class A space; implementation policies; mixture of jobs; trends analysis; industrial lease rates;available land; zoning; acreage; etc. 1 LRPLN\Pilmensg Corrun Paz,,20 1UP(.P,c1cer!-1 2-2S-1ii-P2!-('x?n*.tIucc!-tr,+aru'Re::J P27R'01 O-O(k :`.i'Pf'_\;in::tes!2-13-2u.d Page 5of6 WRAP UP • Steve Faust wrapped up the meeting. He said Todd Chase will be present at the next meeting. They will have a conversation to bring the connection of some of the questions that had been asked together. He said they'll do their best to answer questions and come to an understanding about how this might feed in to the next step which may get to more of the detail they're looking for. After that conversation, they will develop a number of implementation policies that will eventually go into the Comprehensive Plan. They will be working on a policy level next. OTHER BUSINESS — Commissioner Vermilvea asked Commissioner Schmidt whether he is considering being the representative from the Planning Commission to the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee. Commissioner Schmidt replied that he'd been asked and will be attending the upcoming (January 5th) meeting as an observer. After that, he will let the Planning Commission know whether he will represent them or not. Commissioner Vermilyea strongly encouraged a member of the Commission (whether Commissioner Schmidt or someone else) to participate. ADJOURNMENT President Walsh adjourned the meeting at 8:46pm. � J Doreen Laughlin, Planning Co • 'scion Secretary cl/P1 q ATTEST: P si. 110 avid Walsh • • Pi22-anng C:,cx_mis.._14i,2010 VC IO.Ackct\-12-13.10-P11-Connrued-iig rd 0_I PUF- 110-Uxr.1¢`i11'i.Zilnuc::,i2-13-1:r.y+c • Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT A 1,1 . i City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Re: Tigard Retail Center Minor Modification (December 13, 2010 Hearing, Continuation from November 1, 2010 Hearing) Date: December 6, 2010 At the November 1, 2010 Planning Commission hearing, the Commission heard from staff, the applicant, and public testimony on the proposed Tigard Retail elevation modifications, and addition of a 1,800 square foot recycling area. At the request of the applicant, the Commission agreed to leave the record open for additional testimony until November 8, 2010 and continue the hearing on December 13, 2010 for deliberation only. The City received testimony from Matt Oyen with PacTrust; Steven Pfeiffer, attorney for PacTrust; Michael Lilly, attorney for Plaid Pantry; Chris Tiesler, P.E. with Kittelson Associates, and Michael Ard, P.E. with Lancaster Engineering (see attachments). Significantly, the applicant has withdrawn the proposed recycling center from its modification request, leaving only the proposed building elevation modifications for consideration by the Commission. In addition, the Commission requested staff respond to the questions raised by the Commission as recorded in the minutes and outlined below. Since most of these issues relate to the withdrawn recycling center, staff's responses are brief. The applicant's written testimony also provides responses to these questions. 1. Commissioner Doherty asked for more specifics on the design of the recycle center. Since the proposed recycling area has been withdrawn, there is no specific information that is applicable. 2. Commissioner Walsh asked for clarification on the claims raised by Mr. Lilly with regard to the code regarding lot coverage by buildings, reduced landscaping, and change of use. Since the proposed recycling area has been withdrawn, theseissue are not applicable to the proposed modification of the building elevations. 3. Commissioner Vermilyea would like staffs' take on how the ITE Manual comes into play and what would trigger a major modification - particularly when it comes to traffic and the impact on the community. He would like an analysis of what triggers the need to revisit the Kittelson Report and the traffic impact requirements set forth in the last approvals, if anything. Generally, the ITE Trip Generation manual is a standard reference used to estimate trip generation for a wide variety of land use types and characteristics. Trip generation is estimated using some kind of proxy variable for size, the most common being square footage. Trip estimates are provided for various timeframes (e.g., weekday daily, weekday p.m. peak hour, Saturday peak hour, etc). Most cities, including 'Tigard, require traffic impact studies when a specific estimated trip generation trigger is reached. Virtually all jurisdictions throughout the country rely on the Trip Generation manual as a starting point for estimating trip generation, though they frequently allow alternative estimates if applicants have an independent trip generation study. Chris Tiesler with Kittelson and Associates prepared a memo to help capture the trip generation rate that was utilized for the original analysis and the questions posed by the Planning Commission as it relates to the change from Target as the potential end user of the Retail 3 building (see attachment 4). Michael Ard with Lancaster provides information suggesting that a different ITE code is applicable to the subject development (see attachment 5). 4. Commissioner Walsh asked what the issues are with regard to an alternative location to the west of Retail 3. Since the proposed recycling area has been withdrawn, there has been no consideration of alternative locations. 5. Commissioner Muldoon would like an itemization of sustainability features of the previously approved Target Store. The sustainability features are itemized in the applicant's submittal and the Staff Report for the Concept Plan (page 10). The proposed features were identified in the applicant's response to how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter. However, these items are not required by any condition of approval in the Final Order as there is no specific standard that requires them. Therefore, the building's end user will not be required to include the listed features, but will be encouraged to, as stated in the applicant's letter (Pg 2, #4). Attachments: 1. Michael J. Lilly Letter, dated November 8,2010 2. PacTrust Letter, dated November 8, 2010 3. Steven Pfeiffer Letter, dated November 8,2010 4. Kittelson & Associates Memorandum, dated November 8, 2010 5. Lancaster Engineering Letter, dated November 5, 2010 I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2010 PC Packets\12-13-10-PH-Continued-Tigard Retail PDR2010-00001 EXHIBIT B City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: President Dave Walsh and Planning Commission Members From: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Re: Tigard Retail Center Minor Modification (December 13, 2010 Hearing, Continuation from November 1, 2010 Hearing) Date: December 13, 2010 The applicant has requested, and the Staff Recommendation to the Planning Commission anticipated, that the Commission's Minor Modification Final Order include a reference to the Director's Interpretation (DIR 2010-00006) that establishes the validity period for the original Tigard Retail Center approval for PDR2008- 00001 (Commission's Final Order NO. 2009-02 PC). The Commission's Final Order could state that: Pursuant to Director's Interpretation DIR2010-00006, the Tigard Retail Center approval PDR2008-00001 (Commission's Final Order NO. 2009-02 PC) shall be effective for a period of seven years from the date of approval. The Detailed Development Plan approval shall lapse if: 1. Substantial construction of the approved Detailed Development Plan has not begun within a seven year period; or 2. Construction on the site is a departure from the approved plan. Note: Validity of the Minor Modification is the same as for the original approval. • • • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I crlloAmo I,Patricia L. Lunsford,being first duly sworn/affirm,on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Assistant for the City of Tigard,Washington County,Oregon and that I served the following: {Check Appropnare Box(s)Below} © NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR PDR2010-00001/TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS (File No./Name Reference) ❑ AMENDED NOTICE HEARING BODY: HEARING DATE: ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director El Tigard Hearings Officer ® Tigard Planning Commission (12/13/2010) El Tigard City Council A copy of the said notice being hereto attached,marked Exhibit"A",and by reference made a part hereof,was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s),marked Exhibit"B", and by reference made a part hereof, on December 16,2010,and deposited in the United States Mail on December 16,2010,postage prepaid. •/ '1,' ( - . ,40 / . .41 AlA if, (Person that Pre..,' otic, STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ss. City of Tigard Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the / f' day of i4C14&e ,2010. OFFICIAL SEAL ^ry SHIRLEY L TREAT / / ) '4-� NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ! 4 !j ''. COMMISSION NO.418777 i ', MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 25,2011 Ni ARY PUB C OF ORE G N My Commission Expires: Lila y/1 120 DAYS = 2/15/2011 (Includes a 47-Day Extension) DATE OF FILING: 12/15/2. • EXHIBIT A DATE MAILED: 12/16/2010 e4 CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2010-01 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Case Numbers: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 Case Name: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS Applicant's Name/Address: Pacific Realty Assoc.,L.P. 15350 SW Sequoia Parkway, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 Owner's Name/Address: Same as Applicant Address of Property: South of SW Dartmouth Road,west of SW 72°`'Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washington Co. Tax Assessor's Map No. 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200, 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101;and 2S101AB,Tax Lot 01400. A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISIONS STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 1, 2010 AND DECEMBER 13, 2010 TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS,FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE FINAL ORDER. Request: D The applicant requested Planned Development Review approval for minor modifications to an approved Planned Development (PDR2008-00001). Through Final Order No. 2009-02 PC, the Commission approved development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a 137,900 square foot Target retail building(Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings and associated surface parking,landscaping,lighting,access and utility infrastructure improvements. The approved modification will change the previously approved Target-specific color, materials, and logos of the Retail 3 building to accommodate a non-specific user to facilitate marketing of the entitlement to interested parties, since Target has decided not to locate at the subject site. [The applicant later withdrew their second modification request to add a 1,800 square foot recycling area at the rear of the site]. The project would otherwise be consistent with the Tigard Retail Center Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. The Commission heard the request at its November 1, 2010 public hearing and approved the modifications on December 13,2010. Zone: C-G: General Commercial District with PD: Planned Development Overlay Zone and MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755 and 18.780. Action: D © Approval as Requested ❑ Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to: © Owners of Record within the Required Distance © Affected Government Agencies © Interested Parties © The Applicants and Owners The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard Permit Center at City Hall. Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON DECEMBER 16, 2010 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 1,2011 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Review Authority is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, Oregon 97223. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON DECEMBER 31, 2010. Questions: • If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. • • NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2010-01 PC PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON `t A FINAL ORDER APPROVING A LAND USE APPLICATION FOR MINOR MODIFICATION OF DETAILED PLANS FOR THE TIGARD RETAIL CENTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT/PDR2008-00001 (COMMISSION'S FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-02 PC). THE MODIFICATIONS CHANGE THE TARGET-SPECIFIC COLOR, MATERIALS, AND LOGOS OF THE RETAIL 3 BUILDING TO ACCOMMODATE A NON-SPECIFIC USER. THE COMMISSION HEARD THE REQUEST AT ITS NOVEMBER 1, 2010 HEARING AND APPROVED THE MODIFICATION ON DECEMBER 13, 2010. THE PLANNING COMMISSION BASED ITS DECISION ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE AND PLAN SET (TIGARD RETAIL CENTER, LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MODIFICATION, AUGUST, 2010), • AND THIS FINAL ORDER. 120 DAYS = 12/30/2010 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS CASE NO.: Planned Development Review (PDR) PDR2010-00001 Minor Modification) APPLICANT/ OWNER: Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. Attention: Matt Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicant requests Planned Development Review approval for minor modifications to an approved planned development (PDR2008-00001). Through Final Order No. 2009-02 PC, the Commission approved development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a 137,900 square foot Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings and associated surface parking, landscaping, lighting, access and utility infrastructure improvements. The proposed modifications would: 1) change the approved Target-specific color, materials, and logos of the Retail 3 building to accommodate a non- specific user to facilitate marketing of the entitlement to interested parties, since Target has decided not to locate at the subject site, and 2) add a 1,800 square foot recycling area at the rear of the site. [The applicant later withdrew this second modification request]. The project would otherwise be consistent with the Tigard Retail Center Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street west of SW 72nd Avenue; Washington County Tax Map 1 S136CD, Tax Lot 04200; 2S101 BA, Tax Lot 00101;and 2S101AB,Tax Lot 01400. 1IGARll RIs"I'AI1.CENTER MODI1:1CA17ON(1'1)R2010-00001)PC FINAI.ORDER NO.10-01 PC 1?AGI?1 OF 13 • • ZONES/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATIONS: C-G (PD): General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. (PD): The property has a planned development overlay designation. The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed- use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 • units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and- ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate infra-district pedestrian and transit trios even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the City t=hough the legislative process. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755, and 18.780. TIGARID RI CENTER MODIFICAITON(PDR2010-))001)PC I1NAI,ORDI sR NO.10-01 VC PAG I s 2 OF 13 • • SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION The Planning Commission finds that the proposed modification of Building 3 elevations meets the applicable approval criteria of the Tigard Community Development Code and that the proposal will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City. The Planning Commission, therefore, APPROVES the requested Land Use Application. • Additionally, the Commission found that Pursuant to Director's Interpretation DIR2010-00006, the Tigard Retail Center approval PDR2008-00001 (Commission's Final Order NO. 2009-02 PC) shall be effective for a period of seven years from the date of approval. The Detailed Development Plan approval shall lapse if: 1) Substantial construction of the approved Detailed Development Plan has not begun within a seven year period;or 2) Construction on the site is a departure from the approved plan. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The Planning Commission approved the proposed Tigard Retail Center Detailed Plan with Final Order No. 2009-02 PC, effective June 17, 2009. Due to the off-site transportation impacts associated with the proposed development, the decision was appealed to Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) for alleged lack of adequate notice to property owners beyond the 500-foot notice area. LUBA dismissed the late- filed local appeals and affirmed the Planning Commission's Final Order. Vicinity Information The subject 18.16-acre property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street, west of SW 72nd Avenue, and east of Hwy 217 in the Tigard Triangle. The subject site, zoned primarily C-G (PD) with a 0.45 acre parcel in the southeast corner zoned MUE, is surrounded on the north, west and east by C-G (PD) zoned land, and on the southeast by land zoned MUE. A 10.42-acre significant wetland associated with Red Rock Creek is located adjacent to the site on the west which buffers Hwy 217. Vacant developable land exists to the east adjacent on SW 72nd, which was once a part of the previous approvals on the subject site. The area to the southeast, zoned MUE, is a neighborhood in transition where a number of residences have converted to commercial uses. Proposal Description The applicant requests approval for minor modifications to an approved planned development detail plan (PDR2008-00001). The proposed modifications would 1) change the approved Target-specific color, materials, and logos of the Retail 3 building to accommodate a non-specific user to facilitate marketing of the entitlement to interested parties, since Target has decided not to locate at the subject site, and 2) add a 1,800 square foot recycling area at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with the Tigard Retail Center Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. [The applicant later withdrew this second modification request.] SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES Type III procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain predominantly discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission with appeals to the City Council. As the proposal is a modification of Planning Commission Order No. 2009-02,the appropriate review is through the Type III-PC hearing process. TIGARD RIM\II,CIiN'1'I.R I■IODII:ICAT ION(PDR20 1 0-01 00 1)PC 1'INAI,ORDIQ:R NO.10-01 PC PAGE 3 OF 13 • • SECTION V. NOTICE AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENT The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity to provide written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. On October 8, 2010, staff posted the subject site with a notice. On October 12, 2010 the City mailed notice to neighbors within 500 feet and other interested parties. In addition, the October 14th edition of The Times included a notice of the Planning Commission hearing. Staff did not receive any written comment from neighbors or interested parties regarding this application. SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The applicable review criteria for the proposed modifications to the detailed plan, including elevation changes to Retail Building 3 and the proposed addition of a recycling storage area, are contained in Community Development Code Chapters: 18.350, Planned Developments; 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts; 18.620, Tigard Triangle Standards; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage; and 18.780, Signs. This staff report is limited to the review of these sections and contains a staff recommendation for the Commission's review and decision on the proposed modifications. Proposed Modifications to Retail Building 3 Elevations The applicant's submittal includes proposed non-specific user Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010) and the previously approved building elevations Tigard Store Design (May 18, 2009). A side by side comparison of these two sheets may be helpful to understand the proposed modifications. When comparing,please note that the order of the four views is inconsistent between the two sheets. Proposed Modification to the Site Plan for the Addition of Recycling Storage The applicant's submittal includes a Revised Detailed Development Plan (Sheet PC-1.0) that shows the location of the proposed 12' x 90' Recycling Storage Area with a 10' high CMU screen wall. [The applicant later withdrew this second modification request. Therefore, the findings in this order relating to the recycling area are no longer applicable.] 18.350 — (PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS) 18.350.010 Purpose: The applicable purposes of the planned development overlay zone are addressed in Section 18.350.040.A.1.c, below. 18.350.020 Process: A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. At the time of the original zoning designation (1983), City Council applied the planned development overlay (PD) to a portion of the General Commercial zone in the Tigard Triangle that includes the subject site. Therefore, the applicant was required to apply for planned development review. However, the approved Detailed Plan met all of the applicable standards without variance or adjustment or the application of the Commission's discretion for those chapters that could otherwise be applied as guidelines (TDC 18.350.070.A.3). TIGARD RI:I AIL CI,NT]..R MODIFICATION(PI)R2010-000(1)PC FINAL OR1)1,R NO.10-01 PC PAGI s 4 OF 13 • B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development concept plan; 2. The approval of the detailed development plan; and 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. The applicant's proposed Concept and Detailed plans were approved under Planning Commission Order No. 2009-02. The planned development overlay zone (PD) already existed over the subject site. 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements: A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following: 1. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include: b) An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning principles are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed; The applicant explains the architectural style, or design concept "is still to provide buildings that establish a modern presence within a natural landscape, enhanced to provide an expression of quality enduring architecture in a sustainably responsible environment that transcends period trends to create a special shopping experience." [Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010), Tigard Store Design (May 18, 2009)]. The proposed modifications pertain to removing elements of the buildings associated specifically with the Target store in order to accommodate a non-specific user: "The Retail 3 building concept proposes an architectural design of exceptional quality and construction,compatible with the Tigard Triangle Design Standards that will blend with the character of the surrounding area. The contemporary style of the architecture will create a continuous and unified composition throughout the development. Architectural design of the building entrance area allows pedestrian visibility from various points across the site. The main entry features storefront, windows, decorative lighting, and a canopy for weather protection. Pilasters add vertical elements which, along with the use of color, modulate the horizontal aspects of the building. The color palette will be comprised of warm earth- tone colors. Planters placed along the front facade provide further interest, articulation, and scale. The entry canopy, storefront, windows, lighting and planters further articulate the north (front) facade, adding pedestrian scaled interest along the front sidewalk. The front facade includes three planters strategically placed and will include native ornamental shrubs and trees. The front sidewalk will also include lit and standard bollards, benches and bicycle racks as well as lighting to illuminate the building and sidewalk. As a condition of approval, a free-standing canopy element, similar to the one proposed over the building's entrance, has been located near the right front corner of the building and a planter has also been located near the front corner of the right (west) facade. All of these design elements work together to produce a variation in texture, color, and scale to provide visual interest and a pedestrian-friendly experience." In addition, the Target building program included sustainability features addressing Site and Water, Energy Optimization, Materials and Resources, Indoor Air Quality, and other measures. The applicant states that "consistent with the spirit of sustainable development, potential Retail 3 users will be worked with to promote and encourage sustainable features in the construction and operation of the Retail 3 building at this location." TIGARD Rls1'A1],CIE.N'1'IsR MO1IIFICAIION(Pl)R2010-00001)PC FINAL 012.1)1qt.NO.10-01 PC PAGE 5 OF 13 • • c) An explanation of how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010: To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed modifications to elevations of Retail 3 are consistent with the original approval in that they provide a similar appearance through the use of building articulation, changes in materials and colors, parapets, and awnings [Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010), Tigard Store Design (May 18, 2009)]. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the Concept Plan Submission Requirements address the planning objectives of the proposed modifications and the purposes of the planned development chapter. The proposed Retail 3 elevation modifications relate to the aesthetics and innovative building techniques elements of these sections. The Commission may concur that the applicant has adequately addressed these elements and that the proposed modifications are consistent with the approved Detailed Plan. Alternatively, without the prejudice of Target as the tenant for Retail 3, the Commission may wish to consider whether to require additional building articulation, materials, colors, etc., or sustainability features that were a part of the Target proposal. 18.350.070 Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria A detailed development plan may be approved only if all the following applicable criteria are met: The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan. Minor changes from the concept plan do not make the detailed plan inconsistent with the concept plan unless: a. The change increases the residential densities, increases the lot coverage by buildings or reduces the amount of parking; b. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping; c. The change involves a change in use; d. The change commits land to development which is environmentally sensitive or subject to a potential hazard; and e. The change involves a major shift in the location of buildings, proposed streets, parking lots, landscaping or other site improvements. b. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, e.g., between single-family and multi-family residential, and residential and commercial uses; The only adjacent property with a different type of land use is located to the southeast corner of the development. Although the adjacent property is zoned MUE which allows similar commercial use, the existing use of the noted property is residential. The proposed development allows for a 20' buffer between any hard surface improvements or structures and the existing residential use property. According to the Buffer Matrix, Table 18.745.1&2, only a 10 foot buffer is required. The buffer will consist of shrub groundcover, trees, and hedges per the Buffer Matrix requirements. TIGARD RIr;1'A11.CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00001)PC:FINAL ORDI;R NO.10-01 PC PAGE 6 00 13 . . On-site screening from view from adjoining properties of such activities as service areas, storage areas, parking lots and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: a) What needs to be screened; b) The direction from which it is needed; and c) Whether the screening needs to be year-round. The applicant states that the proposed recycling areas will be screened by a 10-foot high CMU wall. The screening would screen the area from adjoining properties to the south. In addition to the wall, landscaping is proposed between the wall and the property line, which should further screen the proposed recycling area. Response: The proposed site plan modification is for the inclusion of a screened recycling area behind Retail 3 and is consistent with the approved concept and detailed plan. No significant changes are proposed to the site plan. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, any modification of the approved Detailed Plan must be generally consistent with the approved Concept Plan. Minor changes from the Concept Plan do not make the Detailed Plan inconsistent with the Concept Plan unless (b) the change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping. The proposed recycling facility would reduce the amount of landscaping approved under Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. by 0.2%. The modification of the site plan to accommodate the proposed recycling areas is minimal and therefore generally consistent with the approved Concept Plan and may be approved. 18.520— COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini- warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for The subject site is zoned C-G and MUE. The proposed general retail use is permitted outright in both the C-G and MUE zones. The proposed recycling area is accessory to the approved retail use and is subject to the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district. The elevation modifications are aesthetic in nature and are subject to the applicable Planned Development standards. The applicant states that the proposed modifications are still consistent with the requirements of this section. TIGARD RI:1'AIL CI?NTER moDII:IC.VI ION(PI)R2010-(X)001)PC RINAI,ORDIiR NO.10-01 PC PAGIi 7 OF 13 • S 18.520.040 Development Standards All development must comply with: 1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapter 18.370; Development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.502.2. 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. The applicant has not requested any development adjustments or variances. With respect to the proposed recycling area, the applicable standards in Table 18.502.2 include: STANDARDS C-G MUE (PD) Approved Proposed Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 0 ft 0 ft. - 100ft. 80 ft. Maximum Site Coverage (PD): 85% 85% 80% 67.0% 67.2% Minimum Landscaping (PD): 15% 15% 20% 33% 32.8% The location of the proposed recycling area is in the rear yard approximately 80 feet from the southern property line, consistent with the 0 ft setback requirement. In addition, the proposed location is outside of the 50-foot wetland buffer. The proposed 1,800 square foot recycling area would minimally increase the site coverage by 0.2%. Therefore, the proposed development complies with all of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district. All other applicable standards and requirements, as reviewed in this staff report, are met or otherwise conditioned to be met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed modification of the approved Detailed Plan with the addition of the 1,800 square foot recycling area is consistent with the applicable Commercial Zoning District standards. 18.620 — (TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS 18.620.010 Purpose and Applicability A. Design principles. Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principles adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. 18.620.040 Building Design Standards All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Ground floor windows - All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. TIGARD RI TAII.C:I NmR MODIFICA'17ON(PDR2010-00001)PC FINAL OR1)1iR NO.10-01 PC PAGE 8 OF 13 • • The retail shops buildings (1 and 2) are within the required Building Setback. Approximately 58% of these building elevations facing the Dartmouth Street frontage are comprised of windows and/or doorway openings on the ground floor wall area. No changes are proposed to the approved ground floor windows within the Building Setback with this application. 2. Building facades - Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: a) a variation in building materials; b) a building off-set of at least 1 foot; c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. No building facade facing a public street extends more than 50 feet without providing building offsets and architectural design features, as well as variations in building materials. No changes are proposed for Retail 1 and 2 with this application. For Retail 3, the north (front) facade is the only facade that faces a public street. This facade has been designed to meet the design guidelines of providing architectural features at least every 50 feet with the following: The north (front) elevations provide a variety of pattern, texture, and material. Pilasters and offset corners occur in less than 50' intervals along this facade. The entry utilizes a storefront system comprised of anodized aluminum and glass, additional glazing occurs to the right and left of the entry vestibule. An EIFS (Exterior Insulated Finish System) panel wall extends to the right to emphasize entry and display user identity signage. As in the original submission, the architectural treatment continues to the sides and rear with a similar vocabulary of materials, texture, and color. No building facades extend more than 300' without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. 3. Weather protection - Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. No changes are proposed to the approved weather protection measures with this application. 4. Building Materials - Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. No change is proposed to the material pallet. 5. Roofs and roof lines - Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. False fronts and roofs are not proposed. 6. Roof-mounted equipment - All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. "11GARll RI'1'i I1.CENTER MODI1qCAITON(VIR201(4IX)0)1)PC FINAL ORII.R.NO.10-01 YC PAGE 9 OF 13 • • All roof-mounted equipment is proposed to be screened from view of adjacent public streets by using parapets. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: 1. Zoning district regulations - Residential only developments within the C-G and MUE zones shall meet the sign requirements for the R-25 zone 18.780.130B; nonresidential developments within the C-G zone shall meet the sign requirements for the commercial zones, 18.780.130C; and non residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone,18.780.130D. In addition, sign area, height, and location standards further restrict signs in the Tigard Triangle. The proposed development site is covered by two land use districts, General Commercial (C-G) and Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The sign requirements of Commercial Zones have been met for signs in the C-G zoned portion of the site per code chapter 18.780.130C. See a more detailed code response in that section, below. No signs are proposed in the MUE portion of the site. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards continue to be met with the proposed modifications to Retail 3 elevations. 18.755 — MIXED SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING STORAGE : A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that certain new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source-separated recyclable materials prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. B. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and non- residential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for such uses. 18.755.030 Materials Accepted A. Materials accepted. Except as provided for in 18.755.040 G and I, the storage area must . be able to accept at least all "principle recyclable materials" designated by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other source-separated recyclable the local government identifies by regulation. The approved development included storage areas able to accept all "principal recyclable materials" that were specific to the Target operations program. The proposed additional recycling area provides this function exterior to the Retail 3 rather than interior. 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance A. Alternative methods of compliance. An applicant shall choose one of the following four methods to demonstrate compliance: 1. Minimum standards; 2. Waste assessment; 3. Comprehensive recycling plan; or 4. Franchised hauler review and sign-off. The minimum standards method was used to adequately size the trash enclosures for the proposed retail pads for this site. The trash enclosure for the Target building was based on building specific requirements as provided by the retailer. The proposed additional recycling area is based on coordination with other retailers as a typical requirement and is proposed to maximize marketability of the Retail 3 store. TIGARI)IZI:I'AIL CI N1I R MO1.)I1OICA'ITON(PIR2010-00001)PC IFINAl.ORIFiR NO.10-01 PC PAGI.10 01:13 • • 18.755.050 Location, Design and Access Standards for Storage Areas A. Applicable standards. The following location, design and access standards for storage areas are applicable to all four methods of compliance, described in 18.755.040 above. B. Location standards. 1. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be collocated with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; 2. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; 3. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; 4. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; 5. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; 6. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; 7. The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. As shown on the applicant's site plan (Sheet PC-1.0) the only change proposed to the approved mixed solid waste and recycling plan is the addition of exterior recycling storage to the rear of Retail 3 off of the access road. The proposed area is consistent with the applicable location standards. C. Design standards. 1. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; 2. Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; 3. Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; 4. Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. According to the applicant's narrative, the proposed recycling area will meet Uniform Fire Code standards, will be enclosed by a 10' high split CMA screening wall, and containers (provided by tenants) will be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted, consistent with the design standards. D. Access standards. 1. Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons. However, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service; 2. Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment, considering paving, grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered; '1'IGARD RI nAII,CENTER MODIFICATION(PDR2010-00X)1)PC ,ORDER NO.10-01 PC l'AGI?11 OF 13 • . 3. Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. Access to the storage areas will not require backing out of a driveway onto a public street. Adequate turning radii are provided to allow collection vehicles to safely exit the site in a forward motion. Although the franchised hauler, Pride Disposal Company, reviewed and signed off on the approved site plan, no such review and sign-off has been submitted for the proposed additional recycling area. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed development complies with the applicable Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage standards. Although the franchised hauler, Pride Disposal Company, reviewed and signed-off on the approved trash enclosure plan, no such review and sign-off has been submitted for the proposed additional recycling area. Therefore, a condition of approval shall require the applicant to submit a letter by the franchise hauler demonstrating the location, design and access of the proposed additional recycling area is serviceable. 18.780— SIGNS : *PD Guideline Chapter Chapter 18.780 regulates the placement, number and design criteria for signage. 18.780.130 Zoning District Regulations C. In the C-G and CBD zones. No sign shall be permitted in the C-G and CBD zones except for the following: 1. Freestanding signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties in commercial zones: The freestanding signs have been modified to remove the Target specific signage and provide signage for a non-specific use. The sign height (10 feet) and area for the proposed monument signs (66-sf per face, for a total of 264-sf for all four faces between the two signs) remains unchanged. 2. Wall Signs: No modifications are proposed to the wall signage for the retail shops buildings. As noted in the approved 2008 application, the total number and area of wall signs for the proposed retail shop buildings will be dependent on the tenant mix, but will comply with the requirements of this section. Without a user identified for Retail 3, the total number and area of wall signs for that building is also unknown at this time. FINDING: The proposed changes to the signs reviewed under the original decision relate to content only. The City does not regulate sign content. The applicant must still apply, and has stated their intention to apply for sign permits, when tenants and • etailed sign designs are determined. TIG ARD RF;1'ATL CI a MODIFICATION(PDR2010-0001)PC FINAL ORDER NO.10-01 PC PACT 12 OF 13 • • SECTION VIII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS Director's Interpretation on Expiration In addition to the requested elevation and site plan modifications, the applicant has also requested an extension of Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. Staff finds that the qualifying statement in the original approval "This detailed plan approval shall be valid for 18 months from the effective date of this decision" is not supported in the Tigard Development Code. Therefore, the applicant has requested a Director's Interpretation to clarify the expiration date of the approval. Being processed as Type II decision, the Director's Interpretation is due to be issued November 16, 2010 and become effective on December 1, 2010. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission continue the November 1S hearing until December 13, 2010 for final deliberation of the proposed modifications after the Director's Interpretation is issued. Development Review Engineer Comment The City's Development Review Engineer commented that because the proposed action does not alter or affect any of the public improvements approved under the prior Planning Commission order (Final Order No. 2009-02 PC), no additional pubic improvements are required with this land use application.. . SECTION IX. AGENCY COMMENTS No agencies were notified as none, other than the City, has purview over the proposed modifications to the approved detailed plan. SECTION X. CONCLUSION The City of Tigard Planning Commission has APPROVED, Planned Development Review (PDR2010-00001) —TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE APPLICANT AND ALL PARTIES TO THESE PROCEEDINGS BE NOTIFIED OF THE ENTRY OF THIS ORDER. PASSED: THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010 BY THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. 1 ` Dave Walsh,Planning ommission President Dated this 7c day of December, 2010. Attachments: 1 Vicinity Map 2 Preliminary Site Plan 3 Approved Elevation Drawings I:\CURPI,N\Gary\Site Development and PD\PDR2010-00001(Tigard Retail Center Modification)\PDR2010-0(XX)1 PC Final Order.docx TIGARD RETAIL,CENTER MODII IC;A"1TON(PDR2010-0(X101)PC FINAL,ORDIiR NO.10-01 PC PAGE 13 OF 13 liktminiallim,!;''''''.1. i'l:j:i ''. , IN ra I ,ji witemirme off ' I= Nip VICINITY MAP fiIii li �i PDR2010-00001 --f i I I "1 I \` /1i TIGARD RETAIL CENTER 'id �'} r r �`� MODIFICATIONS .../c13 .,-•'• ,.s} i1\ r A LANTA SI\ .. ..........., _ I..1•-e—.---.:-,4,-," . . fp 7 ) . I fix. r N! I 1 q�� L ; ��11 ei �-r f `;� 1 �� Subject Site d 11 .A71 N . ,, ,, , 1..;,. <„,...8 H, i »�y T�2�it222 1 : :: \IL x. r�' _ `217 ., --i‘i-ri' Tri35.,H'''' _'...- ''.'4,,--iy-T --- 4,- 1 ,'-.614-:-1- `� \ \ . / ;I •4I -I� • of��, . ` a ' " ,, r 1.1 I ;' W�krs Ern it I 71� � • / /ft ., . ' I 5 m in„i,,,,,..� '1. Information on this map is for general location �` __ a I only and should be verified with the Development 1-_______ 1 �`� �� . I I r .1 aims Services Division. �t T r Scale 1:6,000-1 in=667 ft I I -- �`��x Eli 4 T' (� I S "L Map pnnted at 01:55 PM on 20-Sep-10 1�•` �' ',!' } -. MUKESNOWARRANTV,REPRESENTATIONOROUARANTEASTOTHE CONTENT.ACCURACY.TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE r I r mink _ ;• DATA PROVIDED HEREIN.THE CITY OF TIOARO SHALL ASSUME NO '.� .�. L LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS,OMISSIONS,OR INACCURACIES IN THE/I ` 1 ` INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED. • ♦,k\ •i t h• 9 �III,III� �.. �r `\ — r.�� City of I Igard \ 11.`Feet S — ---- NA M lr7t7 77 � /ge)0 1000 _I �M www.tigard-or.gov• .._ "..., ! F-7 1 H —^i , I R- Ti•ARp • 'J/ / ' 1`It C 1 c`: 9 SITE DATA BUILDING DATA nu ACCESS / ° `l ^.•'- B ROM I ,t.aoD s: e re •`•', 9 DECD. l01, 1 RETAIL l IS).9�C0 YS PROPOSED 5W51 ,111111p.,' L,' OR B P[i t 14'01 1.51 KS 1EIM DUICNO AREA 16i 900 S/S . / \\. I[RNO$p!Mini 3 OCAtICW 10.05 KS .1\ 10115 1616 ACS PROPOSED,RAFTC SIGNAL �� / R...1 ... I e ZONE B (M�IXEZD� PARKING DATA , q ,, ,� O(GENERAL COMMERCIAL) REIAn t Imo v:DuXaxc urcA> / c `� ACCESS EASFYENi REWIRED II 1 © EMPLOYMENn 1' y \\�._-. •."':::::. `• NOTES nuouro nuLS a.Hors `�,":::.'I..•.I •`.\ L PRAWNS BASED EN 51RKY BY LICK ACI SIM15 I STALLS >:•:'1 • ':"'.`.:':. " ' ♦ II II SPD91q NC.DATED ORS O.1301 Iwwnl ACttSSBIE STALLS 3 5170'5 WolmENI 9001 :':;):•::::,q�L�q••. w:. `� PORNiW rUNP[ ro Sf PER r9tt AND IV HIGx WR. :>::pDg5�9, My(CµmCc. ACCESS IOGnE« ` ,µr N.1mR1 TOTAL R9 sous (TAO Y YAM CE AN SI :i.''1:< •1••• ,."1.p'':IL,'`4• %A. I /� PARKING RAM 561/1,[00 Si PL A{A/ . .....X17 � 9; :... l Q Q PARKING DATA RMS. S,INDIFD STALLS 42 AMONG SIMS �y.•�, _ _ 3 I.ALL CMCIM1Cx5 BASED ON TOTAL COLCACI STALLS B STALLS / Y ::N' . F ^, -_`-_\ \r,i■.,' 0 GROSS SOUARE FOOTAGE OF ACESSSBIE STALLS 3 STALLS / / ; :,;i," c* :17.4' .87,■I O BIRENG ImUNl INCLCES 10151 61 SlAlls ` .. '1::::: AttLSSBU STALLS MO STALLS 101�".EFA•',�i,:':.:.';.'.:C' : :::.':' :.::::::!..:.:.:.. PARKWG RAM 511/1,030 Sr n -� '..EY[lO$PP16:�.:: :.:'::: R{4R; :::l'7 :.'.6'•:', ::: ::.. :.:.:::::N O USfD BY CART[COALS) } ......... ...:Y'...:�•:::::::.; i.PARKING Sw'M MOANS 9'v1R5' AGAR] 131.930 Sri AIRING AREA 5 LOT 2 /► °" "^""nR;R as s 3'5 i ti i' 9��0.::. Q ST LLS PARKING RE 7615'5 ccuvnc, STAwARD STALLS 319 STALLS / ;2`�1::::::::::..........;;...I d ra',V O Z SHORN MM 1C A9E9KM 11P. ALCGESSIBLE1STALLS Ii siuLS.:::::::::1:::::::::.;i1. :•:'I -J�' M•r I '"' c C C 77I,c G C .. :: ::: c 3 CITY PARKING PARKING 31 PER OµNPM SEMIS S6I STALLS 5155 , t t _ O /1 I 1,000 SF NAYBRAI PARKNG RAM•/ / •.:•: :<:>I::::••:ir! a \\\\ I I © ®. IAICSCAPE 4J PNKNG5 0101/0004 ;•>rt<•:5' F�1. " `. �1� . �A UP 0 S S Of O )PA KIN[B)'1`,1 N :': 2 N,w 10 SOS a RCaRRm PARKNG 10151 5R,91 577015 AZ/030 Y RIL _ ��1Ha .IJ J] �1O]J J]]] O:::r NRMA'•:<:::�`:.? ¢ .MC ' Ef t-� �I�,1 Yf:.•/ R�'' ,�`E"LIe"AA a21:?: Y c c c 1�I ri c o c c 1/c c c LEGEND• / •:;: Or �P"' .."'i 1j � ;I{T7 0 .L]J] ::1]]\ ]]]]w :' _ ,;.;r':<Rf,_! i CC CRER CURB A CU11ER:C/ tl se 41� RRRRRt♦ 1 ." e�: ��P�6` ' \ ®®®ZMNG IM XYY,wn cif 1::Y,'��,_ c c C11:1� C C C��) R' �•.�••�PROP[Rn LINE:..!•�..; I I °•I s/'' . 9 i1P 0 F;;;?I40A'1+:!•. .1]]] J J J J J] ]J]] Oj '' c c B I1�R m{{1I11 1081030E �+;'�L;�,•{ ,'1,r+ _ __ I I©_f;l";i i _I III 9CE5 G ZW 1 1 PAM A ACCELE 51711 M I3:<:{C•:i. ~):•:::�...r>i• y.A:•,.:`B ' , III y_ III \rW��YW�rl�\^.�,'-I': _1G11 r;",TT:`1 !CW m1Y ASN1151C CWCREIE PKEN, a: f L N0Y P[ I 9 ro. ®f \. uAN tumr/ezH LOT 3 J 25:1.:.�;. y yAw$lri. Z RS �• y %-.•:.;y ]] a J a,.� \..:.I I ////1 :•: .1 © �= :�:: � 0pq,[ _ .: -.•__I- per{ . .ro Sr P[P(A10 AAO ANtt .?.. : IAwSCAP[ 1"::.:.:.:!'.:l'_� [1CIAL 3 ... ." �I= M9100 1EARANL0 AREA•O'Im1 YAr. �:•• y::y':: 11M MOO •A gO sr NAR.MAO Wit,u.In. - ;t441. ::A•'�� ® :.f M sows ire. a I 9S ' rARxRC X17,900 SF3 r: ':: U,UE ZONE RRfli`% SPACFS 5..::.., a FFE•180.0 is W:kOk1S:. r p(MIXED USE• 11....14/111,,,,.,,.„,..,,``. �i� M �� _ .. W®-i'II s�afX�°'f'� : O°MPLOYMENi) �� 9z ROW vAmos[D '.: ��` k�:.::::..:.::i::::.:.::':::::::::::::::::::::..::::::::: t:: .I' R'AD RECYQlO BTgM1E AIER „ 1ALAI:RDJTE:::::::::::::::::::::::::. 9'IM. ® ® 15¢x5 RPN Imnc1 Rd .'.0.: ::::::::::::..:..;:':... ,::[1 Q' - wlNOOU WARN WALL (TLS ry i 5'MANi[R 0 5'GR000 71 b..,\\�<�-�-' y;'':. ",Y.B14h1,f 9i0N111c56p4S:.W J]]. C 3 I jJ. :� .:;1,Ap��W•`„p,F .II C ' Ef61NG fYK1NL wM PAKVEN11 I' , I 30X I�Mr:.✓ �yQ7(gppt''t'' :::::1:' I ::::.:.. �I Ii r�rp B. �j PAKU[w PAKYExI MC5 / 6v I ::.;.; '�at l g III.S I OO y I:f...:.-1:1 O S" ]3': 1x.2": 'u.Y: S �/ ,� ,1515 ':`ii:;'.��.: .:>:::;:[y os � OO J /� ;: 1 `:1 ?2�;., LOT 1 -� wcsnAA,wcw / k i; eaMO RY 1 DARTMOUTH STREET I::A<•:<a.:;;.y,;, RETAIL 1•G3��,t g 54' £ OO �-':;:':, ® O I L :•Diii:�:iia:',\ 11,00D Sr: -••"a:ii;L':; y y..,;,., .. I '� ;,):,: - sj FEE•116 +' Ae ie p9 ;:;� IMPROVEMENT SECTION • �, A KNEW ;.,.; !:!:<�.v •.,,`rR A. .. � ]] ] _ 33 Ini/:;} ,'�Iv i ({t f<:i} ` f!%;i:iii': i:i o:i L{ PROPp5E0 5s'70 7i ROX E N I_- 1 ,:::.�...r :.:.:.:.:::::::':.::1•:A�;;:. .:...:9.':•w. : : - Aav�1YN 15 q ID,P, .:........... ........:.:::.. �: ::. . .A:. ;: 4iTl;WASH; ...:;:g s ?ob i?bV FpiA' >i:::ii::i:i T-03 0 } 1{ 3$CRASS O I �" I vA.[S PAKYD,i PAKYENI I �r sw Xs 1•A 1'A X-1ri B 1 •�. 1 .a v Ip r i� I (1/1 I �r 1�� 1 1 T' .�, : : ' •: : : :: s :<•> ::.: • Q (`ZZL1'_ A '.':.'. _ }: ;........i ........... ..;.; : - 33'PL�Av . - - PLYIR /D 1 1 l 1 l 1 j 'S)�� ) O HERMOSO WAY . OF ) �qE IMPROVEMENT SECTION GRAPHIC SCALE t��^y `QTY OF b IG R 1 1L.nKUrl7 I ��•c prO Ted 3o u r T '�.)ndi',ionally App ov#ad _.._.u� 9 '=,xr only the work as described in' j p,� ,�, 'IUD RETAIL CBITEFt 1'. REVISED DETAILED August 5,2010 Tigard. F _R�IIT PLO.. t'�R 2- d ° 0 (-DEV€LOPMENT PLAN PC-1.0 Sae Letter to: Follow • i 1 Attach % a Q� �..�-�,f'Y;— �__ Date:. /2yio,w .e. _ . . • "." •• • ' • ..•., : •• . ',,,,,,....1.i.4/...e,i' ,''''''',',•'X',...,...1... • ...IA..,,,,::...i.,,..t:4•.1.1,4, • ••• ••••.• ,'1,,,,ihg..,.".•#.4•1"tr•viltip•••si • !...,:■:.....111.1,...*:,,.?•••f.,., ... • .. ..•• • • •• . ... . .... • • ......:I.I''''" :::*:;'::. :...2!,5. 1.' —..:ir•fr:i.0.,■;:-.:,:-.. .ji.kE :..i.:. h'.. : WY(' . ***4 '.1 •;-:.1."...! .. .:,..", • . 4" ' : ' -.-• .'• - -." 1 uuuui i I.:'• ...-. i; ...la- .—: ... .i ..• =Mit Mili .4.4etemeutalissekOM •-,,,NrE.E:t-VAT:.4N . . . . .. .. • . . • •-...:. ...••• . • . • ,,.„...h!LA•.•,,.,!**•1•:;•.mr,...: `0....:fii.•:.•1,1,...1,H,,, AN.I.::I.41.1,•••1,,,,,`.:VC:....-4,......: . ,..• .• ,.. ..... .. , 5.16,:.•• Millili •A••••••••••••••••,•• A• "A ' • •• '••'-'''''''',-•"'•""""*--•*---•••""""""""""' """"""""'""""""""'"""""""'"''"''"' --- ..- i • .• il Ili ". ":•:••.....:„....,;..„.........:....::•::::r:•.h,..„:,::::„:„.„.„.„.....,:.,:.:.„.:::::::::....„....„.„..„,...... ..4..:.::„....::::.„....: .., .::::i...:::.......• ::..„.....„......„..„.:•:.:„„........„.....„:- •-.•••• .•:• • ••• •• ..... ...:._..._ ,:0::.::::.::::::;44,„,„...::: ::„::::: „:„..„,::::::.::::::,„:„„::„,::::„.. •„...„.:::::...:„.•:,::: ...„,•::::::::....4::.,„.„. .:•••.....„:„. ,::::::: ,,,,A . „- • ." . .:::::.::.::::::::::„•:•:...:••••:•::::.,„:„.,::::::::4,..i.: •:::::,5„:„:,::::„•,:::::.,i,..,„::::•:. :.:.:;:•:.::::::••••:...::::: ,........::•.:.:.:,":::••,...•••• „:„.::::.„::::::::::•:.",..„,„„:::::„....:„.: .. .. . .. • -:. . .P . . • . • • • • • • ., ••• • . .:,. •EirS•pairteqi — . . . . • • Ottgididliiiikiiiigiva.i,5)=4:4;...,..4.4.,..r....:4...vigaii.ue<4................4;ni.....E.4%,..41.•....•ii..61:y...m....',...4:11:151.E.:4. ., It............;..:....,-,--, .1,14...,.., u.,.41}.!..:, ,... ;.la ::-..h.e..........ile...i.....; iiii,KQ.41.,Ni*::::F.L.i;i14.4...•:.•••• • . . ......... ....• .. ••• ..•• • .. •••• • • , ......... ,,,„. ,, ..,.....,.,. ••• • ••.....••• tii. '...:?..11 ..*:-.'''''' '11'' ' -..::::. ............•.;.;;;::::::.•:•••••••. ,.........:....r....,...:.•:.:: I::,..T...--..••.......: ..-1 .* ••':::::::'.1.....14::,./.!.... '•},r...r.:.......1..:.•• P.:.•.1 .,,,,_,:,....: '" :;,-. *.f;:j:;.1:::::...104:.r.i.i:!::.-.1'):.::-..5:::::.::::44:::::'::::::::.::!:::::1Tgli2:::)91:::::::::::::" `'-••••.:'•'••••;•"..,,••••• •:,:::....I?''''''•••,••••••• ',,•'."..d.'•,"'-* . "" .:.hiiirith....!'"..... • ... '.. otaW04/111 . . , . • • ••• • • • . . .f.Ti,,i•t.,,,..s'. .. ..... , ........ .. ..- ••--,---- - 1111114...2..ii;Fl;::...',,'-!..1•?....."...c....:'.'"i•';'''....i.il'il•i:-... . -;.il•:-..••:::,:i!...i.....4.•:.:L.,•:::•,;••••••.,...••••,":';i:.;`..,.,;:......::.,...;•,:.....,,•••••:..':i...•:',.!..',....,,.....•. ...,.1..,:.,2••-.......::••••••••,, ••..,,.,••;........7.I •••.• , ............:::•••• .,:•••••,••••••. .;•:::;•••',.,•••.r.....-...:::::•,• il .... .. E .1 I 1 . A - • -.1:::::::::::::'..,',.......r...:1.........r.. •;.•.....1:-........4..i.:::::.................-.1 ••••::::::::.........••••••:1 . •• •.•• • • - ••ii......0.,•,••I.:.F../,'"•••I'f,',7,N .• . .. . • • • • . • . • ...... . . • *****•••• •••••• •• ......'........-..,:,--:•-•': : • •-• i..1 .:,: . I ......:•• •. .• • . . • . • • •••• . • . . . . . . • • - . • ' EXHIBITP Pacific Realty Associates PDR2010-00001 Attn:N Piven TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy. #300 Portland, OR 97224 Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. "NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE Attn: Matthew Oyen PLANNING COMMISSION" 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy.,Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 Mike Lilly,Attorney at Law 4800 SW Griffith Drive,Suite 325 Beaverton,OR 97005 Greg Close 1501 SW Taylor, # 100 Portland, OR 97239 Greg Close,Property Manager Pacific Crossroads Shopping Center 1501 SW Taylor, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97205 Chris Girard,President&CFO Plaid Pantries,Inc. 10025 SW Allen Blvd. Beaverton,OR 97005 Elise Shearer 9980 SW Johnson Street Tigard, OR 97223 Steven L. Pfeiffer,Attorney at Law Perkins Coie 1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor Portland, OR 97209-4128 Michael Ard,PE, Senior Transportation Engineer Lancaster Engineering 321 SW 4`h Avenue,Suite 400 Portland, OR 97204 • • PACTRUST 15350 S.W. Sequoia Pkwy., Suite 300 Portland,Oregon 97224 Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. 503/624-6300• Facsimile: 503/624-7755 December 16;2010 Mr. Gary Pagenstecher City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Pagenstecher: Re: Facility No. dar000 Tigard Retail Center Planned Development Review - PDR2010-00001 EXTENSION OF 120-DAY TIMELINE On behalf of Pacific Realty Associates, L.P., this letter will serve to confirm our consent to an extension of the statutory timeline for a final City of Tigard decision in the above matter from December 30, 2010 to February 15, 2011. Further, we appreciate the willingness of staff and the Planning Commission to afford us additional time to address the matters raised during the application review process. Thank you for your ongoing assistance with the review of our application and please feel free to contact me at (503) 624-6300 with any questions regarding this request for Extension of the 120-Day Timeline. Very truly yours, PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES, L.P. Matthew H. Oyen Construction Manager cc: Eric Sporre Andrew Jones , . Kelly Struhs Ken Grimes Steve Pfeiffer z•[:. ri ...�I'. )arm • • • • 114 ," City of Tigard T,I`GARD. Memorandum To: President Dave Walsh and Planning Commission Members From: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Re: Tigard Retail Center Minor Modification (December 13, 2010 Hearing, Continuation from November 1, 2010 Hearing) Date: December 13, 2010 The applicant has requested, and the Staff Recommendation to the Planning Commission anticipated, that the Commission's Minor Modification Final Order include a reference to the Director's Interpretation (DIR 2010-00006) that establishes the validity period for the original Tigard Retail Center approval for PDR2008- 00001 (Commission's Final Order NO. 2009-02 PC). The Commission's Final Order could state that: Pursuant to Director's Interpretation DIR2010-00006, the Tigard Retail Center approval PDR2008-00001 (Commission's Final Order NO. 2009-02 PC) shall be effective for a period of seven years from the date of approval. The Detailed Development Plan approval shall lapse if: 1. Substantial construction of the approved Detailed Development Plan has not begun within a seven year period; or 2. Construction on the site is a departure from the approved plan. Note: Validity of the Minor Modification is the same as for the original approval. I 0 ei City of Tigard s as ` - . . Planning Commission - Revised Agenda ya . ,x,:1.Cr;,A.R, E MEETING DATE: December 13, 2010; 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard —Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 Please note: The Commission will be meeting in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room at 6:00 pm for a brief social gathering, and to discuss Commission input regarding 2011 Council Goals. 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 p.m. 4. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:04 p.m. 5. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 7:08 p.m. CONTINUED -TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS (Deliberation only—No public testimony will be taken.) REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008 00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot "big box" Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 & 2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02 PC.• LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street, west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755, and 18.780. 6. WORK SESSION— ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ADVISORY COMMI'1"1'EE MEETING 7:38 p.m. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 9:08 p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT 9:10 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA— DECEMBER 13, 2010 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 oft Eil 40 II rq City of Tigard Memorandum . - 7,,,s..*.`._.:.':.s. =3. ma.:'....' " :x`.=.uc": -.:.i ": ..ice3':∎ ,.=,i.n1^c._.w' ^T,'°'.,....��.'°'..,..._'L`:inr:.':'i°...?'•—_..: ;_X:.''.w i.°t=7."=--,^.a:_s..=cam...-.:n26 To: Planning Commission From: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Re: Tigard Retail Center Minor Modification (December 13, 2010 Hearing, Continuation from November 1, 2010 Hearing) Date: December 6, 2010 At the November 1, 2010 Planning Commission hearing, the Commission heard from staff, the applicant, and public testimony on the proposed Tigard Retail elevation modifications, and addition of a 1,800 square foot recycling area. At the request of the applicant, the Commission agreed to leave the record open for additional testimony until November 8, 2010 and continue the hearing on December 13, 2010 for deliberation only. The City received testimony from Matt Oyen with PacTrust; Steven Pfeiffer, attorney for PacTrust; Michael Lilly, attorney for Plaid Pantry; Chris Tiesler, P.E. with Kittelson Associates, and Michael Ard, P.E. with Lancaster Engineering (see attachments). Significantly, the applicant has withdrawn the proposed recycling center from its modification request, leaving only the proposed building elevation modifications for consideration by the Commission. In addition, the Commission requested staff respond to the questions raised by the Commission as recorded in the minutes and outlined below. Since most of these issues relate to the withdrawn recycling center, staff's responses are brief. The applicant's written testimony also provides responses to these questions. 1. Commissioner Doherty asked for more specifics on the design of the recycle center. Since the proposed recycling area has been withdrawn, there is no specific information that is applicable. 2. Commissioner Walsh asked for clarification on the claims raised by Mr. Lilly with regard to the code regarding lot coverage by buildings, reduced landscaping, and change of use. Since the proposed recycling area has been withdrawn, theseissue are not applicable to the proposed modification of the building elevations. 3. Commissioner Vermilyea would like staffs' take on how the ITE Manual comes into play and what would trigger a major modification - particularly when it comes to traffic and the impact on the community. He would like an analysis of what triggers the need to revisit the Kittelson Report and the traffic impact requirements set forth in the last approvals, if anything. • Generally, the ITE Trip Generation manual is a standard reference used to estimate trip generation for a wide variety of land use types and characteristics. Trip generation is estimated using some kind of proxy variable for size, the most common being square footage. Trip estimates are provided for various timeframes (e.g., weekday daily, weekday p.m. peak hour, Saturday peak hour, etc). Most cities, including Tigard, require traffic impact studies when a specific estimated trip generation trigger is reached. Virtually all jurisdictions throughout the country rely on the Trip Generation manual as a starting point for estimating trip generation, though they frequently allow alternative estimates if applicants have an independent trip generation study. Chris Tiesler with Kittelson and Associates prepared a memo to help capture the trip generation rate that was utilized for the original analysis and the questions posed by tie Planning Commission as it relates to the change from Target as the potential end user of the Retail 3 building (see attachment 4). Michael Ard with Lancaster provides information suggesting that a different ITE code is applicable to the subject development (see attachment 5). 4. Commissioner Walsh asked what the issues are with regard to an alternative location to the west of Retail 3. Since the proposed recycling area has been withdrawn, there has been no consideration of alternative locations. 5. Commissioner Muldoon would like an itemization of sustainability features of the previously approved Target Store. The sustainability features are itemized in the applicant's submittal and the Staff Report for the Concept Plan (page 10). The proposed features were identified in the applicant's response to how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter. However, these items are not required by any condition of approval in the Final Order as there is no specific standard that requires them. Therefore, the building's end user will not be required to include the listed features, but will be encouraged to, as stated in the applicant's letter (Pg 2, #4). Attachments: 1. Michael J. Lilly Letter, dated November 8, 2010 2. PacTrust Letter, dated November 8, 2010 3. Steven Pfeiffer Letter, dated November 8, 2010 4. Kittelson & Associates Memorandum, dated November 8, 2010 5. Lancaster Engineering Letter, dated November 5, 2010 • I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2010 PC Packets\12-13-10-PH-Continued-Tigard Retail PDR2010-00001 r- ter' Y O = edHAL1 ATTACHMENT I Michael J. Lilly __ _ Attorney at Law NOV 0 8 2010 4800 SW Griffith Drive, Suite 325 Beaverton, OR 97005 Telephone: 503-746-5977 Facsimile: 503-746-5970 Email: mikelilly@michaeljlilly.com November 8, 2010 Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner City of Tigard Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 By Hand Delivery Re: File No.: Planned Development Review (PDR) 2010-00001 File Title: Tigard Retail Center Modifications Applicant/Owner: Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. Dear Planning Commissioners and Mr. Pagenstecher: This letter is a follow up to my earlier letter dated November 1, 2010. I am supplementing the material submitted at the hearing with the following: 1. The changes increase the lot coverage by buildings. I enclose a photograph of a similar recycle storage facilities constructed at a nearby free standing Super Discount Store. Not only do the recycle storage facilities match the Tigard code's technical definition of building, but the recycle storage facilities are also functionally a building for land use planning purposes. a) The facilities occupy open space. b) The facilities have a visual impact on adjacent property. c) The facilities increase the intensity of the use. A 12' x 90' enclosed storage area like this allows a retailer to shift storage from inside the main building to outside the main building in this ancillary structure. That in turn allows more square feet inside the building for use as retail floor space, and more customers. The fact that the recycle storage area has no roof and only three sides is mostly irrelevant to its planning impact. •This structure meets the code definition of a building, just as well as if it were fully enclosed. Therefore the Tigard Code does not allow this application for a change to be treated as a "minor" change. 2. The changes reduce the amount of open space and landscaping. No additional comments on the landscaping. 3. The new site plan involves a change of use. The point we made at the initial hearing is that the addition of the recycle storage facility indicates that the proposed use, for the first time, includes a feature for a free standing discount superstore. Your code does not refer to changes in the "categories" of use it refers to a change of use. Tigard Code definition for "Use" 18.120.030 (170): 170. "Use" - The purpose for which land or a structure is designed, arranged or intended, or for which it is occupied or maintained. I have attached a letter from Michael Ard, a professional traffic engineer, and I have attached pages from the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Different uses have different impacts, and as Mr. Ard points out, in his professional judgment he would analyze the traffic impact of part of this site plan using the ITE Land Use Code 813 for free standing discount superstores instead of using only ITE Land Use Code 820 for the shopping centers. The data pages for ITE Code 813 also confirm that this 137,900 sq. ft. store is large enough to be used as a free standing discount superstore. Furthermore, the specificity of the use approved in the prior application is emphasized by the language of the prior decision. The body of the decision refers specifically to a "Target" store 14 times, and "Target" store policies and characteristics are used as a basis for the decision. See items 4 and 5, pages 8 and 9. A marked copy of the prior decision is attached. Your prior decision is not a generic approval. Therefore this application changes the use and is not a "minor" modification. Michael J. Lilly Attorney for Plaid Pantries, Inc. cc: Steve Pfeiffer , •• ......•.at • ::fir:.. • • v iF e.::a ... i ..' '' ;tt ., j1", .'7:;... '•:.,, ,,,, ,,,, •1:::'4.is .t .: r, ......::.:...... ..=.1 -v."'1: 1Y• w.. • •PYtt7M *Rt► • • .'•:,,, :•,:....I.,1•••:.. !:.::::::34.Fir". . . : •0•::::::•.-::::- p :; . : .•i.i:::.:'.. 1.1..,:. ' i::.;:.:i ii ii:e:i:ii:•• !FiA;.*".....".•7 ...::..::.:.!....iii:::i:i:i::ixt ii::i:i:iiMV .......... ��x i '•.. SizexTii'ii.,:,....i• !t' ,p .x , • • • k+ • . d : .. .•ter, .� :. lyy 11jj • 1 tx• • r ! • • r ' ..:'ir^i:iuiF:[" : •}4'4•• •., i • Y • • •i S • • ' • • //I 06.0 PROpF $% NGINEFR` 7 54983PE 4 November 5, 2010 / � OREGO o LANCASTER ti 4I'10 p ENGINEERING Planning Commission 0'AEL City of Tigard 321 SW 4th Ave.,Suite 400 13125 SW Hall Boulevard EXPIRES: 12/31//11 Portland,Oregon 97204 503.248.0313 Tigard,OR 97223 phone:fax:503.248.9251 lancasterengineering.com RE: Tigard Retail Center Modification: ITE Land Use Codes for Trip Generation Dear Planning Commission Members: This letter is written to provide transportation engineering comments related to trip generation calculations for the proposed Tigard Retail Center Modifications. • The proposed development was previously analyzed based on ITE Land Use Code 820, Shopping Center. Typically,the shopping center land use is used to describe sites with numerous development pads and/or numerous tenants with retail uses. These sites include a variety of retail uses of different sizes,and patrons often visit more than one business during a single visit. The Tigard Retail Center as proposed does not appear to consist of a wide variety of retail uses of different sizes. Instead,the site is dominated by a single pad comprising over 85 percent of the available retail space. In instances such as this where the overwhelming majority of the site is developed with a single use,it is appropriate to analyze the site using the trip generation characteristics of the dominant site use. Based on the site plan, it is assumed that the dominant site use will be a Free-Standing Discount Superstore(ITE Land Use Code 813). Since this land use dominates the site,it would be appropriate to analyze the site using the trip generation characteristics of this specific land use,which differ from those of a Shopping Center land use. The two 12,000 square foot outlying pads may be treated as shopping center land uses if specific retail uses cannot be identified,however if restaurants may be included on the pads it may be more appropriate to analyze a potential worst-case scenario in order to verify that the transportation system can safely accommodate all permitted users of these outlying pads. Based on my review of the revised detailed development plan, it is appropriate to ask for analysis of the site based on the characteristics of the specific intended site use. Sincerely, Michael Ard, PE Senior Transportation Engineer • • Land Use: 813 Free-Standing Discount Superstore Description The discount superstores in this category are similar to the free-standing discount stores described in Land Use 815 with the exception that they also contain a full-service grocery department under the same roof that shares entrances and exits with the discount store area. The stores usually offer a variety of customer services, centralized cashiering and a wide range of products. They typically maintain long store hours 7 days a week.The stores included in this land use are often the only ones on the site, but they can also be found in mutual operation with a related or unrelated garden center and/or service station or as a part of a shopping center,with or without their own dedicated parking area. Free-standing discount store (Land Use 815) is a related use. Additional Data Peak hours of the generator— The weekday a.m. peak hour was generally between 10:00 a.m.and 11:00 a.m.The weekday p.m. peak hour varied between 12:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m.The Saturday and Sunday peak hours varied.between 12:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. The weighted average truck trip generation rates from approximately 30 sites surveyed for this land use are summarized in the table below.The average gross floor area of these facilities is 206,000 square feet. Weighted Average Truck Trip Generation Rate Day/Time Period (trip ends per 1,000 square feet) Weekday 0.87 Weekday a.m. Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic 0.05 Weekday p.m. Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic 0.03 Weekday a.m. Peak Hour of Generator 0.06 Weekday p.m. Peak Hour of Generator 0.04 Saturday 0.59 Saturday Peak Hour of Generator 0.04 Sunday 0.43 Sunday Peak Hour of Generator 0.02 One source provided information on trip generation rates for what the study defined as"typical" and "peak"seasons. These data indicated that weekday trip generation rates were similar in both seasons. However,trip generation rates on Saturdays during peak season were 13 to 20 percent higher than a typical season; Sunday rates were found to be 6 to 10 percent higher. For the purposes of this analysis, "peak"season was defined as the period between the week after Thanksgiving and the week prior to Christmas; "typical"season was defined as September through mid-November when transactions are close to average.The seasonal trip generation information provided was based on a sample of five sites. Garden centers contained within the principal outside faces of the exterior building walls were included in the gross square floor areas reported. Outdoor or fenced-in areas outside the principal faces of the exterior building walls were excluded. Please refer to Volume 1, User's Guide,for a more detailed definition of gross floor area. Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1375 Institute of Transportation Engineers r pw Several sites included in this land use indicated the presence of fenced/covered space. The sites were surveyed between the 1990s and the 2000s throughout the United States. To assist in the future analysis of this land use, it is important to collect and include information on the presence and size of garden centers, outdoor fenced-in space and service stations in trip generation data submissions. Source Numbers 354, 522,577, 595, 607, 609, 612, 618, 625,630, 636, 651,652,661 ;i. t1. Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1376 Institute of Transportation Engineers • 1 Free-Standing Discount Superstore (813) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area . On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 45 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 195 Directional Distribution: 50% entering; 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 53.13 29.65 - 85.01 13.31 Data Plot and Equation , 18,000 x 17,000 X 16,000-` X 15,000 - X 14,000 — X m X W 13,000 X r X o. m12,000 X X X - - . ' 13 X X , 0 X 11,000 x , X - X X 1 X -x• - 10,�� ,. X .. . . X . . . . X m a> X- X 9,000 , _ 0 _ X I— X _�C' X X 8,000 -� 7,000— . . X ,-- X 6,000— X x 5,000— X X ; X 4,000 1 , N 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 X= 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area x Actual Data Points Fitted Curve - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)=1.35 Ln(X)+2.11 R2=0.54 Trip Generation,8th Edition 1377 Institute of Transportation Engineers Free-Standing Discount Superst• ore (813) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, P.M. Peak Hour of Generator Number of Studies: 47 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA:. 195 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50%exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 4.68 2.66 - 7.40 2.39 Data Plot and Equation 1,600 x X 1,500- 1,400" X X 1,300 - X . 1,200 - x-i C . w .. 1100 - X X x x x X 15. 1,000 - X X X XX > X , 0 900 - 0 X X > 800 - X -r` X 5C I- 700 -, X X X 600 - - - - • - - • - - X X X X 500 X 400 - X 300 ■ I I 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 X=1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)=1.32 Ln(X)-0.16 R2=0.52 Trip Generation,8th Edition 1381 Institute of Transportation Engineers • Land Use: 820 Shopping Center Description A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned, developed,owned and managed as a unit.A shopping center's composition is related to its market area in terms of size, location and type of store. A shopping center also provides on-site parking facilities sufficient to serve its own parking demands. Specialty retail center(Land Use 814)and factory outlet center(Land Use 823) are related uses. Additional Data Shopping centers, including neighborhood centers, community centers, regional centers and super regional centers,were surveyed for this land use. Some of these centers contained non- merchandising facilities,such as office buildings, movie theaters, restaurants, post offices, banks, health clubs and recreational facilities(for example, ice skating rinks or indoor miniature golf courses).The centers ranged in size from 1,700 to 2.2 million square feet gross leasable area (GLA). The centers studied were located in suburban areas throughout the United States and therefore represent typical U.S. suburban conditions. Many shopping centers, in addition to the integrated unit of shops In one building or enclosed around a mall, include outparceis(peripheral buildings or pads located on the perimeter of the center adjacent to the streets and major access points).These buildings are typically drive-in banks, retail stores, restaurants,or small offices.Although the data herein do not indicate which of the centers studied included peripheral buildings, it can be assumed that some of the data show their effect. 1 The vehicle trips generated at a shopping center are based upon the total GLA of the center. In cases of smaller centers without an enclosed mall or peripheral buildings,the GLA could be the same as the gross floor area of the building. Separate equations have been developed for shopping centers during the Christmas shopping season. Plots were included for the weekday peak hour of adjacent street traffic and the Saturday peak hour of the generator. Information on approximate hourly, monthly and daily variation In shopping center traffic is shown in Tables 1-4. It should be noted, however,that the information contained in these tables is based on a limited sample size.Therefore,caution should be exercised when applying the data.Also, some information provided in the tables may conflict with the results obtained by applying the average rate or regression equations.When this occurs, it is suggested that the results from the average rate or regression equations be i`. used, as they are based on a larger number of studies. Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1497 Institute of Transportation Engineers , , • Shopping in Center • (820) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area k.: On a: Weekday is Li. Number of Studies: 302 i i Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 328 4 k. Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting I Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation ., 42.94 12.50 - 270.89 21.38 7 • Data Plot and Equation 70,000 - ': 1 f, x I i. 60,000 Y- , x 50,000 h c x , x w - ' i ' 0. X X X,� - x ,} m 40,000- - ---. - - X- -y,, �1 :E X x x x X : x a) X x X X X ,s >vs 30,000- X )Sir X x x X- ; 3( x.-'x x x x x X ?F : p x ,XX . Xx I— 34 x x x 20,000- x .z- k X • .X x * X X X X�c ,, ,, x 1. ,t "X: < z x x x 10,000- >S<• =;.. x x. x ` x ": Xx x : : x : 0 . 1 , -1 , , , , , , , , 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 X=1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area X Actual Data Pointe Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)=0.65 Ln(X)+5.83 R2=0.78 Trip Generation,8th Edition 1500 Institute of Transportation Engineers • -----T . i Shopping Center (820) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area a, On a: Weekday, '' Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, : One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. 5: f Number of Studies: 412 q. Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 379 I: Directional Distribution: 49% entering, 51%exiting 1 '. Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 3.73 0.68 - 29.27 2.74 Data Plot and Equation 9,000 - 8,000— y, '�� 7,000 / c 6,000 _ X ,�' X a _ X -c I— X • 5,000 — ,' X • X X m - ' X > $4 c 4,000 — x X -X > x- X x ''A> x x Q X >x„' X x x H 3,000 x xx,,/j<it 'Ax X . xxx • x ; x # i xX' . X x x x 2,000— x ": <: x X �x 4t,,4 �c 1,000— .<'M `:X'?Z•. x.x X 'X" XX X • p , 0 1000 2000 3000 X=1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)=0.67 Ln(X)+3.37 R2=0.81 Trip Generation,8th Edition 1502 Institute of Transportation Engineers • • 120 DAYS= 8/31/2009 (Includes a 212-day extension) DATE OF FILING: 5/29/2009 v DATE MAILED: 6/2/2009 = < CITY OF TIGARD TICA r� . Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-02 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Case Numbers: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR)2008-00001 Case Name: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER Applicant's Name/Address: Pacific Realty Assoc.,L.P. 15350 SW Sequoia Parkway,Suite 300 Portland,OR 97224 Owner's Name/Address: Same as Applicant Address of Property: South of SW Dartmouth Road,west of SW 72nd Avenue Tigard,OR 97223 Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washington Co. Tax Assessor's Map No. 1S136CD,Tax Lot 04200, 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101;and 2S101AB,Tax Lot 01400. A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISIONS STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER 1, 2008, FEBRUARY 2, 2009 AND MAY 18, 2009 TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER. Request: > The applicant requested Planned Development Review approval for concurrent review of a Planned Development concept plan and detailed development lan for development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a proposed 137,900 square foot Target retail building and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings. In addition, there will be surface parking, landscaping, lighting, access and utility infrastructure improvements. The Concept and Detailed Plans were reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at successive hearings. On December 1, 2008, the Commission continued the public hearing to February 2, 2009, where they reviewed and approved the Concept Plan and provided the applicant with direction in developing the detailed plans. On May 18, 2009, the Commission approved the Detailed Plan, subject to conditions of approval within this final order. Zone: C-G: General Commercial District with PD: Planned Development Overlay Zone. Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Action: > ❑ Approval as Requested © Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to: E2 Owners of Record within the Required Distance © Affected Government Agencies © Interested Parties © The Applicants and Owners The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard Permit Center at City Hall. Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JUNE 2,2009 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 17,2009 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Review Authority is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal tcether with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, Oregon 97223. L THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON JUNE 16,2009. Questions: If you have any questions,please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at(503) 639-4171. S • NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-02 PC BY PLANNING COMMISSION • • FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD A FINAL ORDER APPROVING A LAND USE APPLICATION FOR CONCURRENT REVIEW OF THE CONCEPT AND DETAILED PLANS FOR THE TIGARD RETAIL CENTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. THE COMMISSION APPROVED THE CONCEPT PLAN ON DECEMBER 1, 2008 AND APPROVED THE DETAILED PLAN WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON MAY 18, 2009. THE PLANNING COMMISSION BASED ITS DECISION ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE AND PLAN SET (TIGARD RETAIL CENTER, LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, AUGUST 29, 2008), THE APPLICANT'S MEMORANDUM DATED APRIL 10, 2009, THE APPLICANT'S MATERIALS SUBMITTED AT THE MAY 18, 2009 HEARING (SHEET L-lb, REVISED 5-18-09, (Attachment 2) AND EXHIBITS A-D "OFF-SITE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS" (Attachment 3)AND THIS FINAL ORDER. (Includes a 212-Day Extension) 120 DAYS = 8/31/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER CASE NO.: Planned Development Review(PDR) PDR2008-00001 "Detailed Plan Review" APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S OWNER: Eric Sporre REP: Brian Dickerson Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. PacLand 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy,Suite 300 6400 SE Lake Road,Suite 300 Portland,OR 97224 Portland, OR 97222 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval for concurrent review of a Planned Development concept plan and detailed development plan (PDR2008-00001) for development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a proposed 137,900 square foot Target retail building and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings. In addition, there will be surface parking, landscaping, lighting, access and utility infrastructure improvements. The Concept and Detailed Plans will be reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at successive hearings. The Concept and Detailed Plans are being reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at successive hearings. On December 1, 2008, the Commission reviewed and approved the Concept Plan and provided the applicant with direction in developing the detailed plans. This staff report includes the findings for the Detailed Plan. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Road west of SW 72nd Avenue;Washington County Tax Map 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200, 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101; 2S101AB, Tax Lot 01400. ZONE/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATIONS: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses,including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 1 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • • (PD)The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources,aesthetic appeal,and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space,innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, white respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site,within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780,18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION The:P :<Commtssron findsrthat_the ro .osed:detailed< lan meets the'`:a"-`-licable>a proval-criteria>of-the Ti 0^ x lanntng .fi <<p:,:;1?. -..p.. .pPa, ,:PP _..�-:<;,�:.. .. t�omrimunr �-a to 'm nt C e�urd<<that-�tl�e-.ro'`osalk- `.not»adversei�:affect:<.the�Health=safe `=a.nd":welfafe�'o they >C D ve e od p ./. ,.3 A ":':C;• 2`^ t;<�,.'< ..l}t,... ,.£�:i?",•::::%;N<.^:i:: <•l:Vt ��Ct' ::�>The'.'PIaP �Comiiitssio .ailerefb`re�._ `PP�tOVES;�the''rr` "ested`T;arid-�:UseA" 'licattoi'<aubect<ao''the. q'..' .:... a .a4.. <S'�A oll .con n f a r F .'; 4:..... o dttro s o oval Pp .M, Y ,... ..tee. ...... ,. .� Y r.... n ,. ..:,--., CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S AMENDMENTS ARE IDENTIFIED IN ITALICS IN CONDITIONS 1,2,11,14,17,18&19)F c ZPIN t NIA s NS S BESATI�SNI,�D f 9 A•The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 1. Prior to issuance of any site/building permit, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan and a statement demonstrating that • the project incorporates safe measures such as video surveillance, enhanced lighting,prominent signage and monitoring by store personnel to address the �nsible space issues raised in the City of Tigard Police Department's comment letter dated May 15, 2009. 2. Prior to issuance of any site/building permit, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan demonstrating that the arking lot trees (as proposed at the May 18, 2009 PC Hearing, Sheet L-lb, Revised 5-18- 09) will be provided sufficient soil volume to support their growth to maturity or otherwise provide for parking lot canopy coverage of 30%. 3. Prior to issuance of any site/building permit, the applicant shall either provide a revised site plan showing one loading space for each of the proposed 12,000 square foot buildings or, alternatively, provide documentation limiting tenants of these buildings to 10,000 square feet,or less. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 2 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 L • • • 4. Prior to issuance of any site/building permit, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing trees in the setback between SW Dartmouth and tae proposed parking lot are consistent with the L-1 standards of 3 1/2 inch caliper. 5. Prior to issuance of any site/building permit, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing all required parking lot and street trees at 2 1/2 inch caliper. 6. Prior to issuance of any site/building permit, the applicant shall submit a revised arborist report that includes detailed mitigation calculations and a detailed mitigation plan. The applicant shall submit a cash assurance for the value of the required tree mitigation. Trees planted for mitigation on the site or off site in accordance with 18.790.060.D will be credited against the cash assurance, for two years following Certificate of Occupancy based on a mitigation plan submitted for review and approval to the staff Planner. After such time,the remaining value of the cash assurance will be retained by the City as a fee in-lieu of planting. 7. Prior to issuance of any site/building permit, the applicant shall submit construction drawings that include the approved Tree Removal, Protection and Landscape Plan. The protection guidelines shall be based on the project arborist report dated August 20, 2008. The tree protection plan shall show the tree protection fencing dimensions to scale, include the tree protection requirements in the August 20, 2008 arborist report, and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. The plans shall also include a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading,and paving. A note shall be placed on the final set of plans indicating that equipment, vehicles, machinery, grading, dumping, storage, burial of debris, or any other construction-related activities shall not be located inside of any tree protection zone or outside of the limits of disturbance where other trees are being protected. 8. Only those trees identified on the approved Tree Removal plan are authorized for removal by this report. The following note shall be placed on the final construction documents: Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, any party found to be in violation of this chapter pursuant to Chapter 1.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $500 and shall be required to remedy any damage caused by the violation. Such remediation shall include, but not be limited • to, the following: replacement of unlawfully removed or damaged trees in accordance with Section 18.790.060 (D) of the Tigard Development Code; and payment of an additional civil penalty representing the estimated value of any unlawfully removed or damaged tree, as determined using the most current International Society of Arboriculture's Guide for Plant Appraisal. 9. Prior to issuance of any site/building permit, the applicant shall establish fencing as directed by the roject arborist to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Forester for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. 10. If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely impacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arborist may require changes prior to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is occurring within the tree protection zone and submit a summary report certifying that the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and/or stability of the trees. This note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: BIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 11. The applicant shall revise their plan set to incorporate landscaping (appropriate soil and street trees spaced at the equivalent separation of one tree every 28 feet) and irrigation along the entirety of the raised medians on OR 99W, except where sight distance may be compromised. 12. The applicant shall revise their plan set to show full pavement, curb and storm sewer improvements on SW 72nd Avenue through the OR 217 Interchange Area to provide the two northbound lanes to Beveland Road. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 3 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • • 13. The applicant shall obtain all ODOT permits prior to issuance of any City of Tigard Permits. All work • within the ODOT ROW requires an ODOT Miscellaneous Permit. €� *. THE FOI LOWING•CONDITIONS�SNA, 4 g14$ATISFLED- - -y;,•. .: �. .?, �:�+5�'.':k°`�''r�� 1..yK.•`x' •:-mat ?u.,.+:��.y.:a,. _ .�m:..�.,c��•. .,ra•��- irs,�+,_.,,�.c - .yi _ +,,� c x',LL F .-' _ x : ,,. ::PRIOR TO"A,-FINAL:BI7I :D_ING INSPECT'IUN ` . -. .� ..: .:�. ,:: _ -A�-�-i2-mss. :�._r-..^•1'€:� �; .-�°'k�; ."..:.-!r:✓:,.. ..__ ,. :'x,.�a.4: -ti.,�: .-s.;e:, _- r'�fr, -. .. .S:Y•-'�.,.5:raz:.\r.:'ec s:...-..,.,,��i:�:_ f The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it along an with a supporting documents and/or plans that address the followin re uirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary • Pagenstecher 503-639-4171, EXT 2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 14. Prior to issuance of building permits and any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant shall ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the City Forester at least, once every two weeks (or by agreement between the project arborist and the City Arborisi), from initial tree protection zone (1.PZ) fencing installation, through building construction, as he monitors the construction activities and progress. These reports must be provided to the City Forester until the time of the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy. The reports shall include any changes that occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and location of the tree protection fencing. If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arborist shall justify why the fencing was moved, and shall certify that the construction activities to the trees did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted or received by the City Forester at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan is not being followed by the contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the City Forester and the Project Arborist. This inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection fencing, determine if the fencing was moved at any point during construction, and determine if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. 15. Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant/owner shall record deed restrictions to the effect that any existing tree greater than 6" diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. 16. The applicant shall call for final inspection by the Current Planning Department to ensure that the project is built according to the applicable standards and approved plan set. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 17. OR 99W: (Refer to 5/18/09 PC Hearing exhibits A-D "Off-Site Transportation Improvements')The applicant shall develop a third westbound through lane on OR 99W in advance of the OR 99W/72nd Avenue intersection and extending southwest through the Tigard Theater and SW Dartmouth Street intersections to OR 217. To address safety concerns with left turning vehicles crossing three lanes of traffic, a raised concrete median island or traffic separator shall be installed for all unsignaliized accesses between SW 72nd Avenue and OR 217. The applicant will be required by ODOT to apply for a design exception subject to the approval of the State Traffic Engineer to allow the substandard lift lanes on OR 99W. With these improvements, U-turns will not be allowed on OR 99W westbound at the OR 217 northbound ramp terminals or on OR 99W eastbound at SW 74th Avenue (see December 1st, 2008 letter for explanation). ODOT will consider allowing U-turns at OR 99W eastbound at Dartmouth and OR 99W eastbound at SW 72nd Avenue. The applicant shall lengthen the eastbound right turn lane at the OR 99W/Dartmouth from 300 ft to 400 ft to accommodate the increase traffic at this movement. 18. OR 217/SW 72nd Avenue Northbound Off Ramp: (Refer to 5/18/09 PC Hearing exhibits A-D "Off-Site Transportation Improvements') The applicant shall extend the two lane storage on the northbound off ram from 100 ft to 650 ft of two lane storage (550 additional feet of two lane storage including 160 ft taper This improvement can be provided within the existing right of way. (Contingent on successful adoption of a local improvement district) 19. SW 72nd Avenue through the OR 217 Interchange Area: (Refer to 5/18/09 PC Hearing exhibits A-D "Off-Site Tram ortation Improvements')The applicant shall restripe the northbound lanes along SW 72nd Avenue from • . the OR 217 southbound ramp terminal to SW Beveland Road to provide two continuous northbound through lanes. The applicant shall remove the traffic signal at SW Hampton Street and install a raised concrete island to restrict the side street movements to right in/right out. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 4 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • 20. ODOT Permits: The applicant shall obtain an ODOT Miscellaneous Permit for all work in the highway right of way. 21. The applicant shall complete all public improvements prior to occupancy. THIS DETAILED PLAN APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History PDR94-00019 approved a general retail center providing between 300,000 and 320,000 square feet of retail and commercial space, but expired. In 1998, the Tigard City Council approved the Tri-County Shopping Center proposal (Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 98-0002/Site Development Review (SDR) 98-0002/Planned Development Review (PDR) 98-0001/Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) 98-0002/Lot Line Adjustment(1VIIS) 98-0004). Grading, filling, and wetland mitigation occurred on the subject site, even though the retail development was not built. Subsequently, PD2000-00001 approved a phased commercial shopping center development with 297,179 square feet of building area including an anchor building at 223,461 square feet,which has also expired. On October 6,2008, at the Community Development Director's request, the Commission recommended the Council approve a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to correct the City's Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map and Significant Habitat Areas Map associated with CPA98-00002 regarding the subject property. On November 25, 2008, the Council approved the amendment. On December 1, 2009 the Commission approved the applicant's Concept Plan with direction for the applicant to proceed to the Detailed Plan. (See applicant's response below under the Planned Development section of this staff report,page 6). Vicinity Information: The subject 18.16-acre property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street, west of SW 72nd Avenue, and east of Hwy 217 in the Tigard Triangle. The subject site,zoned primarily C-G (PD) with a 0.45 acre parcel in the southeast corner zoned MUE, is surrounded on the north, west and east by C-G(PD) zoned land, and on the southeast by land zoned MUE.A 10.42-acre significant wetland associated with Red Rock Creek is located adjacent to the site on the west which'buffers Hwy 217. Vacant developable land exists to the east fronting on SW 72"d,which was once a part of the previous approvals on the subject site. The area to the southeast, zoned MUE, is a neighborhood in transition where a number of residences have converted to commercial uses. Proposal Description The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval for concurrent review of a Planned Development concept plan and detailed development plan(PDR2008-00001) for development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a proposed 137,900 square foot Target retail building and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings. In addition,surface parking,landscaping,lighting,access and utility infrastructure improvements are proposed. SECTION IV. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity for written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. The City provided notice to neighbors within 500 feet and the site was posted with a notice. Staff received several written comments from neighbors regarding this application. Kevin Lubby, a property owner to the southeast on SW Hermosa, attended the December 1s`Commission meeting and testified that he was concerned about visual screening between the proposed loading dock and his business. The Commission requested the applicant to address his concerns in the detailed plan. RESPONSE: The applicant's response memorandum states that the landscape plan has been revised to incorporate additional large scale evergreen plantings along SW Hermoso Way and along the existing residence at the southeast corner of the site. These plantings include 28 Western Red Cedars, 10 Hogan Cedars and 15 Deodar Cedar in addition to the deciduous trees proposed at the southeast corner of the property to.provide a dense evergreen screen. Refer to revised landscape plan L-1 a for additional information. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 5 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • Specht Development commented that their land use approval for a 70,000 square foot office building (SDR2007- 00003) required them to build the signal at SW 68`' and Dartmouth. Specht Development suggests that the City instead require the first project to actually develop (Target,most likely) be responsible for building the signal. RESPONSE: There is an approved LID that will be responsible for the infrastructure that will support the signal installation. The signal is required to be installed as a condition of approval of SDR2007-00003. However, if the Tigard Retail development is requesting occupancy prior to an occupancy request for SDR2007-00003, then Tigard Retail shall coordinate with the LID and install the signal. The LID is scheduled for completion in fiscal year 2010- 2011. Carol Getgen commented that the traffic at 72nd and Dartmouth is bad now and worries that increased traffic with the proposed Target will make it worse. RESPONSE: The applicant has prepared a Transportation Impact Analysis (June 2007) and supplemental analyses (October 2008, November 2008, and January 2009), and worked closely with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to identify off-site traffic impacts. The ODOT recommendations for off-site improvements are included at the end of this report and include substantial mitigation to SW 72nd and Hwy 99W. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA The applicable review criteria are addressed in this report in the following order: 18.350 lanned Developments) 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.620 Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 18.705* (Access,Egress and Circulation) 18.725 (Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745* andscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage) 18.765* Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780* (Signs) 18.790 (Tree Removal) 18.795* (Vision Clearance) 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvements) 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures, Impact Study) *According to Section 18.350.100 of the Planned Development Chapter, these chapters are utilized as guidelines,and strict compliance is not necessary where a development provides alternative designs and methods that promote the purpose of the PD Chapter. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of these Specific Development Standard Code Chapters.These chapters are,therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.710 (Accessory Residential Units) 18.720 (Design Compatibility Standards) 18.730 (Exceptions to Development Standards) 18.740 (Historic Overlay) 18.742 (Home Occupations) 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations) 18.785 (Temporary Uses) 18.798 (Wireless Communication Facilities) TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 6 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO:2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The applicant submitted for concurrent review of both the Concept and Detailed plan. On December 1, 2008, the Planning Commission approved the Concept Plan for PDR2008-00001 with direction to the applicant for approval of the Detailed Plan. The findings for the Concept plan approval are not included below but are included by reference (Concept Plan Approval, PDR2008-00001, dated November 20, 2008). The applicant's narrative and plan set (Tigard Retail Center, Land Use Permit Application for Planned Development, August 29, 2008) demonstrates substantial compliance with the applicable provisions of the Tigard Development Code without appealing to the discretion of the Commission or requesting any variances or adjustments. As such, the findings in the applicant's narrative are also adopted by reference with the exception of those chapters and standards below, for which staff has recommended conditions of approval. 18.350— 'LANNED DEVELOPMENTS In a Memorandum dated April 10, 2009, the applicant submitted a response to the Commission's nine issues on approval of the Concept Plan for PDR2008-00001. A summary of the applicant's responses, followed by staff comment, is included below after each listed issue. The Applicant's full responses can be found in the Memorandum,on which PacTrust intends to elaborate at the May 18th Commission meeting. 1. Adequate screening for the Sly Hermoso neighborhood. Applicant Response: Fifty-three additional cedars have been proposed to the southeast corner of the site to further screen the loading dock area of the development from the Hermoso neighborhood (revised landscape plan,L-1a). Staff Response: The additional proposed evergreen landscaping distributed across the slope between SW Hermoso and the proposed Target store's loading area appears to adequately address the concern expressed by Mr. Luby. The City Arborist has reviewed the revised screening plan for SW Hermoso and found it to be satisfactory. 2. Further conversation with City Arborist. Applicant's Response: PacTrust and the project Landscape Architect have met on multiple occasions to discuss the project with the City Arborist since the December 1, 2008 Planning Commission meeting including our presentation to the Tree Board on January 28, 2009. The proposed landscape plans were revised to address several of the City Arborist's comments with regard to the tree canopy and the number of trees provided within the interior parking lot area. Included with this revised submittal package are copies of a Preliminary Tree Preservation Plan to help clarify the trees on site that are proposed for removal with this development application. The project Landscape Architect, Beighley and Associates,will also be at the May 18, 2009 Planning Commission meeting to present the revised landscape plans and to discuss the project with the Planning Commission. Staff Response: The City Arborist has met with the applicant on several occasions and resolved a majority of the tree and landscaping items. Those items left to be resolved include ensuring consistency between the tree inventory and protection specifications in the arborist's report with the site plan drawings. Also, there is a difference of opinion on the feasibility of the proposed interior parking lot trees to provide substantial canopy in the long term(see below). 3. Further discussion regarding the parking lot and the plantings within the parking lot, both with the respect to the number and overall canopy, width to the soil vault, and the viability of the trees to produce the canopy. Applicant Response:The Landscape plan has been revised to add an additional 30 trees to the interior parking lot areas.As shown on the revised landscape plan,L-1b,this will provide 1 tree for every 4 parking stalls within the interior of the parking lot versus the code requirement of 1 tree for every 7 parking stalls. The Project Landscape Architect will be present at the May 18,2009 hearing to discuss long term viability of the trees within the parking lot areas and their ability to produce canopy. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 7 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAII.FD PLAN 5/18/2009 • • • Staff Response: The applicant has investigated the feasibility of incorporating larger soil volumes to support growth to maturity of the proposed parking lot trees in order to provide greater canopy. They note that larger soil volumes would mean fewer parking spaces, which would be unacceptable to Target. They are concerned with durability and maintenance associated with alternative construction techniques that would allow for sufficient soil while retaining adequate parking spaces. PacTrust points to their experience in providing and maintaining successful parking lot landscaping in their other Tigard and Metro area properties. The Architectural Graphic Standards outline the projected tree canopy growth based on soil volume. According to these standards, the projected canopy growth in the interior landscape islands will be approximately 15 feet in diameter. The applicant projects the canopy spread of the interior parking lot trees to be 40 feet in diameter. While the applicant and City Arborist differ on their expectations of future parking lot tree canopy,the applicant responded to the City's concerns by increasing the number and spacing of parking lot trees in their revised submittal. The City Arborist has continued to request that the applicant provide more soil volume for the proposed parking lot trees in order to improve their long term viability and growth based on the above standards. However,the applicant has determined that increasing the soil volume available to the interior trees is infeasible for two reasons. First, increasing the size of the landscape islands will reduce parking below what has been deemed marketable by the applicant. Second, treating the soil beneath the paved surface in a manner that will allow for healthy root growth underneath the parking lot has been deemed cost prohibitive by the applicant. A third option was suggested which involves installing permeable pavers within the limits of the parking stalls surrounding the trees. The City Arborist indicated this option can improve the tree rooting environment, support long term tree growth, and help minimize costs. The applicant contends that the site soils are not conducive to permeable pavers. An International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) ordinance provision for 25 cites recommends 50% canopy shading as a standard for parking lots. American Forests recommends a 40%citywide canopy goal for Pacific Northwest cities. Preliminary land use analysis in the Urban Forestry Master Plan has determined that 40% citywide canopy coverage is achievable in the City of Tigard (current canopy is 24%). If averaged over the whole site, including the revised landscaping proposed by the developer in their Memorandum and the non-buildable open space areas,40%canopy coverage would be expected. This is an area for Planning Commission deliberation. New tree code standards will likely emphasize canopy cover rather than individual trees. If the Commission determines that adequate canopy cover will result from the applicant's proposal, the Commission should accept the applicant's findings. If not, the Commission can approve the use of permeable surface,additional soil volume,or other acceptable means. 4. Further discussion on LID[low impact development]green building practices, I RED practices for both the site and the building. Applicant Response: The applicant submitted revised elevations and information on a potential system to incorporate solar arrays into the building architecture as part of the awnings along the south side of the building. They have engaged the Energy Trust of Oregon to help analyze energy conservation systems as well as other available technologies. Categories within the 1.FED rating system that the site would potentially be eligible for include restoring habitat, reducing heat island effect associated with roofs, construction activity pollution prevention, public transportation access and alternative transportation. Target has also continued with their efforts to develop the design and proposed sustainable features that they would incorporate into their building. A Design Intent Memorandum from Target's Senior Project Architect dated April 9,2009 is included. Staff Response: As shown in the Planning Commission minutes, the Commission is interested in a cost/benefit analysis addressing the issue of pervious paving materials, use of a green roof, and use of solar energy for both the site plan and building and the rationale for including them, or not. The applicant has included Solar Concept Sketches incorporating solar panels in the awnings of the two retail shop buildings. However, the applicant believes there is more energy cost savings in conservation methods through energy efficient lighting low-E glazing and reflective roofing than would otherwise be off-set by the use of solar power. The applicant included additional materials that showed which aspects of the project would be creditable under LEED and what sustainable initiatives were already being incorporated by Target. The applicant intends to share the results of the Energy Trust analysis with the Commission and may provide additional responses to this item at the upcoming Commission meeting. 5. Address further discussion on police department concerns. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 8 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 4 S Applicant Response: The applicant met with Jim Wolf of the Tigard Police Department (1'PD) who commented that the Department's chief concern was the lack of defensible space on the store's south and west perimeters.TPD supports using the proposed plaza space on the north side as an alternative route between SW Hermosa and SW Dartmouth. Staff Response: Staff supports the indusion of the proposed path along the wetlands as provided for in the Tigard Development standards for connectivity and the planned development standards for open space recreation. Additional pedestrian scale lighting may improve the safety of the trail. Monitoring trail use can provide information on whether the level of use of the trail will itself improve safety in the area, which is currently frequented by transients (as reported by the police). Monitoring trail use by both Target (remote cameras) and the City Police Department (potentially, quad patrol) would help determine if other techniques would need to be incorporated to enhance defensible space on the south and west sides of the proposed Target store. The Tigard Police, Planning Division, and the applicant will discuss the issue further to substantively address the potential conflict between public safety and access and enjoyment of the natural area. 6. Take a look at the front facade of the Target store to see if there's a way to bring the right side of it down to more pedestrian scale. Applicant Response: As shown on the revised landscape plan, L-1 a, a planter island has been added to the northwest corner of the building along with a trellis to effectively wrap the building with landscaping materials that tie into the pedestrian plaza and landscape elements that occur along the entire north elevation. Staff Response: Staff finds the revised landscape plan, L-1 a, is consistent with the original plan set (PC-1.0) with no apparent changes to the plan. No revised elevations drawings were submitted with which to gauge the effectiveness of the proposed trellis and additional landscape island with respect to the pedestrian scale. 7. Address willingness to put in bus shelter should one be deemed appropriate at some future date. Applicant Response: PacTrust contacted Ben Baldwin with TriMet to discuss the project, bus service along Dartmouth and the potential desire to provide a bus shelter for the site.As noted in the email correspondence from Mr. Baldwin that is included with this memorandum,TriMet does not currently plan to change line in this area, or add a line to service to this area along Dartmouth. However, PacTrust will continue to stay in contact with TriMet as the project develops and would remain open to the concept of providing a bus shelter for the property. Staff Response: Staff supports the efforts and willingness of Pactrust to incorporate transit facilities into the project. 8. Meet with the Tree Board. Applicant Response: PacTrust met with the Tree Board on January 28, 2009. Tree canopy and long term viability with respect to soil volumes for parking lot trees were discussed.The Project Landscape Architect will be present at the May 18, 2009 hearing to discuss the minimum standards that have been developed by PacTrust for parking lot landscaping installation and maintenance based on their experience. Staff Response: The applicant met with the Tree Board on January 28, 2009. The Tree Board was generally positive about the overall site plan, but inquired about the possibility of improving soil conditions for the interior parking lot trees with permeable pavers, under pavement treatments,and bioswales. The applicant has investigated these options and determined that they are infeasible. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 9 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • • 9. Check to see if there are any incentives for energy aspects for the building. Applicant Response: PacTrust has a meeting scheduled with the Energy Trust in April to review some of the energy conservation measures that they have already proposed for the building such as Low-E glazing with our expansive glass line, TPO roofing materials and lighting systems. We will also be discussing other energy conservation measures that they would suggest for the building as well as some of the incentive programs that may be available and how they might apply to our project. Staff Response:The applicant may provide further information at the May 18th Planning Commission meeting. 18.520— (COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS) FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable commercial zoning district standards. 18.620— IGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening A. Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. . Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. 1. L-1 Low Screen - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots and along local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial,trees shall be planted at 3 1/2 inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. Where the parking lot is not located behind the retail pad buildings (approximately 280 lineal feet), the setback between the parking lot and SW Dartmouth St. exceeds five feet due to the width of the wetland and associated buffer area. The wetland buffer area is being enhanced per Clean Water Services requirements. The applicant's Landscape Concept Plan (Sheet L-1 a) shows Red Sunset Maples spaced approximately 28 feet apart, consistent with this standard. However,the size specified in the Plant Materials Listing is 2 1/2 inch caliper rather than the required 3 1/2 inches. Therefore, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing trees in the setback between SW Dartmouth and the proposed parking lot consistent with the L-1 standards. 2. L-2 General Landscaping - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 2-1/2 inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years.Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. • According to the Landscape Rendering Plan (Sheet L-1d) and the Plant Materials Listing (Sheet L-2), the applicant has specified Crimson Sentry Maple (2 inch caliper) and Red Sunset Maple (2 1/2 inch caliper) for the parking lot field; Greenspire Linden (2 inch caliper), Kwanzan Cherry (no caliper specified), and Autumn Purple Ash (2 inch caliper) are specified street trees for SW Dartmouth, SW Hermoso, and the access drive, respectively. The sizes of these trees are not all consistent with the L-2 standard. Therefore, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing all required parking lot and street trees at 2 1/2 inch caliper and spaced no greater than Z8' apart. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 10 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • • FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Tigard Triangle Design standards, with the exception of Section 18.620.070 as reviewed above. -Provided the applicant meets the following conditions of approval, the proposed development will be consistent with the applicable Tigard Triangle Design Standards. CONDITIONS: ♦ The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing trees in the setback between SW Dartmouth and the proposed parking lot are consistent with the L-1 standards of 3 1/2 inch caliper. ♦ The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing all required parking lot and street trees at 2 1/2 inch caliper and spaced no greater than 28'apart. 18.705—(ACCESS AND EGRESS): *PD Guideline Chapter FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Access and Egress standards. 18.725— NVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Environmental Performance standards. 18.745— DSCAPING AND SCREENING : *PD Guideline Cha.ter Section 18.745.030.C: Installation Requirements. The installation of all landscaping shall be as follows: 1.All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures. The accepted planting rocedures are the guidelines described in the Tigard Tree Manual. These guidelines follow those set forth by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) tree planting guidelines as well as the standards set forth in the most recent edition of the American Institute of Architects'Architectural Graphic Standards. In the Architectural Graphic Standards there are guidelines for selecting and planting trees based on the soil volume and size at maturity. Additionally,there are directions for soil amendments and modifications. The City Arborist is concerned that the parking lot trees on the interior of the parking lot have not been rovided sufficient soil volume to support their growth to maturity. According to the Architectural Graphic Standards, the required soil volume per tree should be 1200 cubic feet. The applicant has determined that it is not feasible to provide the required soil volume. Instead,the applicant has proposed additional parking lot trees at a ratio of one tree for every four parking spaces. An ISA ordinance provision for 25 cites recommends 50%canopy shading as a standard for parking lots. American Forests recommends a 40%citywide canopy goal for Pacific Northwest cities. Preliminary land use analysis in the Urban Forestry Master Plan has determined that 40%citywide canopy coverage is achievable in the City of Tigard (current canopy is 24%). FINDING: As shown in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Landscaping and Screening standards, with the exception of the Section 18.745.030.C.1 as reviewed above. CONDITION: ♦ The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan demonstrating that the parking lot trees will be provided sufficient soil volume to support their growth to matunty or otherwise provide for parking lot canopy coverage of 50%. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 11 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAII FT)PLAN 5/18/2009 y . • • 18.755—(MIXED SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING STORAGE): FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage standards. 18.765—(OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS): *PD Guideline Cha.ter Off-street loading spaces. Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: 1.A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; 2.A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. The applicant states that "the proposed Target provides 4 truck loading spaces in the loading dock. The smaller retail buildings are multi-tenant retail shop buildings with up to 9 tenants in each building. The tenants will lease blocks of the building with areas ranging from 1,200-sf to 1,800-sf. Some tenants may choose to lease multiple blocks of the building, but the maximum tenant space for these types of buildings typically does not exceed 5,000- sf. These smaller retail format merchant stores do not typically receive large quantities through large delivery trucks and do not require dedicated loading space. Based on this information, no dedicated loading space is needed or proposed for the smaller retail buildings. ' The two proposed 12,000 square foot retail buildings have not been provided with any loading spaces, as required. The apphcant states that the expected size of the leased space would not create the need for such loading spaces. However, it would be possible for a single business to lease the entire space, where the size would warrant the required loading space.Therefore this standard is not met. FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements with the exception of Section 18.765.080 .A.1. To comply with this section, the applicant would either need to limit tenants to less than 10,000 square feet or provide a loading space for each of the 12,000 square foot pad buildings. CONDITION: ♦ The applicant shall either provide a revised site plan showing one loading space for each of the proposed 12,000 square foot buildings or, alternatively,provide documentation limiting tenants of these buildings to 10,000 square feet or less. 18.775— SENSITIVE LANDS : FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Sensitive Lands standards. 18.780— SIGNS : *PD Guideline Chaster FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Sign standards. 18.790—(TREE REMOVAL): 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed.Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. The applicant submitted an arborist report and tree plan prepared by a certified arborist at Arbor Pro, Inc., dated August 20,2008.The report includes a site plan,Tree Inventory Table, and provides guidelines for the removal and protection of existing trees on the site. The applicant states that the majority of trees proposed to be removed with this development are dead or in poor health and pose a potential safety hazard. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 12 OF 19 PLANNING COMMIISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • Plan requirements.The tree plan shall include the following: 1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; The Arborist Report's Tree Inventory Table and site plan identify the size, species and location of all existing trees on the site. The site does not contain any trees designated as significant by the City. 2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. • Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: a. Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees; b. Retention of from 25% to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; c. Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; d. Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation. The applicant states that as shown in the Arborist Report, there are 19 trees on site that are alive and greater than 12" caliper. Of these, 13 will be retained (65%). In accordance with the mitigation requirements outlined above, 50% of the trees to be removed will be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D. Trees that are dead or a hazardous condition are not included in these calculations. The narrative refers to the Preliminary Landscape Plan for the proposed tree mitigation. However, the applicant's plan set includes a Landscape Concept Plan Sheet L-1). The applicant's Memorandum includes Landscape Concept Plans (Sheets L-la through L-1d) and a Preliminary Tree Preservation Plan (Sheet PC-5.0). None of these plans include the referenced mitigation plan. Therefore, the applicant shall submit a revised arborist report that includes detailed mitigation calculations and a derailed mitigation plan. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; All trees to be removed have been identified in the Tree Inventory Table and on the Preliminary Tree Preservation Plan (Sheet PC-5.0). A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The arborist report defines standards and methods to protect trees during and after construction. However, the proposed tree protection measures have not been shown in the plan set. To ensure tree protection in the field during construction, the applicant will be required to incorporate the tree protection measures in the plan set. Therefore, the applicant shall submit a revised grading plan that shows which trees are to be removed/retained, and how retained trees will be protected. The protection guidelines shall be based on the project arborist report dated 8/20/08. The grading/tree protection plan shall show the tree protection fencing dimensions to scale, include the tree protection requirements in the 8/20/08 arborist report, and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. Subsequent removal of a tree. Any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by this section to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree.The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director. A condition of approval will ensure that this standard is met. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 13 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • • • 18.790.050 Permit Applicability A. Removal permit required. Tree removal permits shall be required only for the removal of any tree which is located on or in a sensitive land area as defined by Chapter 18.775. The permit for removal of a tree shall be processed as a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, using the following approval criteria: No trees within sensitive lands are proposed to be removed. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed development does not comply with all of the applicable Tree Removal standards. Provided the applicant meets the following conditions of approval, the proposed development will be consistent with the applicable Tree Removal standards. CONDITIONS: ♦ Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall submit a revised arborist report that includes detailed mitigation calculations and a detailed mitigation plan. The applicant shall submit a cash assurance for the value of the required tree mitigation. Trees planted for mitigation on the site or off site in accordance with 18.790.060.D will be credited against the cash assurance, for two years following Certificate of Occupancy based on a mitigation plan submitted for review and approval to the staff Planner. After such time, the remaining value of the cash assurance will be retained by the City as a fee in-lieu of planting. ♦ Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall submit construction drawings that include the approved Tree Removal, Protection and Landscape Plan. The protection guidelines shall be based on the project arborist report dated August 20, 2008. The tree protection plan shall show the tree protection fencing dimensions to scale, include the tree protection requirements in the August 20, 2008 arborist report, and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. The plans shall also include a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices,clearing,grading,and paving.A note shall be placed on the final set of plans indicating that equipment, vehicles, machinery, grading, dumping, storage, burial of debris, or any other construction-related activities shall not be located inside of any tree protection zone or outside of the limits of disturbance where other trees are being protected. ♦ Only those trees identified on the approved Tree Removal plan are authorized for removal by this report. The following note shall be placed on the final construction documents: Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, any party found to be in violation of this chapter pursuant to Chapter 1.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $500 and shall be required to remedy any damage caused by the violation. Such remediation shall include,but not be limited to, the following: Replacement of unlawfully removed or damaged trees in accordance with Section 18.790.060 (D) of the Tigard Development Code;and Payment of an additional civil penalty representing the estimated value of any unlawfully removed or damaged tree, as determined using the most current International Society of Arboriculture's Guide for Plant Appraisal. ♦ Prior to commencing any site work, the applicant shall establish fencing as directed by the project arborist to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Forester for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 14 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • ♦ If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely impacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arborist may require changes prior to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is occurring within the tree protection zone and submit a summary report certifying that the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and/or stability of the trees. This note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan. ♦ Prior to issuance of building permits and any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant shall ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the City Forester, at least, once every two weeks, from initial tree protection zone fPZ) fencing installation, through building construction, as he monitors the construction activities and progress. These reports must be provided to the City Forester until the time of the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy. The reports shall include any changes that occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and location of the tree protection fencing. If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arborist shall justify why the fencing was moved, and shall certify that the construction activities to the trees did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted or received by the City Forester at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan is not being followed by the contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the City Forester and the Project Arborist. This inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection fencing, determine if the fencing was moved at any point during construction, and determine if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. ♦ Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant/owner shall record deed restrictions to the effect that any existing tree greater than 6 diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. 18.795— SUAL CLEARANCE AREAS : *PD Guideline Cha•ter FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Visual Clearance Areas standards. 18.810—(STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets,sewers, and drainage. The applicant's narrative and plan set address the applicable standards of Section 18.810. In addition to the proposed site improvements and adjacent right-of-way improvements for SW Dartmouth and SW Hermoso Way, the applicant has identified and proposed off-site improvements to SW 72nd Avenue and OR 99W. The applicant has prepared a Transportation Impact Analysis (June 2007) and supplemental analyses (October 2008, November 2008, and January 2009), and worked dosely with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to identify off-site traffic impacts. The ODOT recommendations for off-site improvements are included at the end of this report and include substantial mitigation to SW 72nd and Hwy 99W. The applicant has worked with the City and ODOT to satisfactorily address the impacts to streets and arterials in the vicinity of the proposed development. The City's Development Review Engineer has reviewed this information and provided the following comments and recommended conditions for the applicant's proposal: 1. OR 99W: The raised medians shall incorporate landscaping and irrigation along its entirety, except where sight distance may be compromised. 2. OR 217/SW 72nd Avenue Northbound Off Ramp: City Engineering staff concurs with the ODOT recommendation. 3. SW 72nd Avenue through the OR 217 Interchange Area: City Engineering staff concurs with ODOT recommendations with the additional requirement that the applicant construct the full pavement, curb and storm sewer improvements to provide the two north bound lanes to Beveland Road. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 15 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • FINDING: As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and plan set, the proposed development complies with the applicable Street and Utility Improvement standards for the subject site. With respect to offsite improvements the applicant shall be subject to following ODOT recommended conditions of approval and additional City conditions of approval. CONDITIONS: ♦ OR 99W: The applicant shall develop a third westbound through lane on OR 99W in advance of the OR 99W/72nd Avenue intersection and extending southwest through the Tigard Theater and SW Dartmouth Street intersections to OR 217. To address safety concerns with left g vehicles crossing three lanes of traffic, a raised concrete median island or traffic separates shall be installed for all unsignali.ed accesses between SW 72nd Avenue and OR 217. The applicant will be required by ODOT to apply for a design exception subject to the approval of the State Traffic Engineer to allow the substandard 11 ft lanes on OR 99W. With these improvements, U-turns will not be allowed on OR 99W westbound at the OR 217 northbound ramp terminals or on OR 99W eastbound at SW 74th Avenue (see December 1st, 2008 letter for explanation). ODOT will consider allowing U-turns at OR 99W eastbound at Dartmouth and OR 99W eastbound at SW 72nd Avenue. The applicant shall lengthen the eastbound right turn lane at the OR 99W/Dartmouth from 300 ft to 400 ft to accommodate the increase traffic at this movement. ♦ OR 217/SW 72nd Avenue Northbound Off Ramp: The applicant shall extend the two lane storage on the northbound off ramp from 100 ft to 650 ft of two lane storage (550 additional feet of two lane storage including 160 ft taper). This improvement can be provided within the existing right of way. ♦ SW 72nd Avenue through the OR 217 Interchange Area: The applicant shall restripe the northbound lanes along SW 72nd Avenue from the OR 217 southbound ramp terminal to SW Beveland Road to provide two continuous northbound through lanes (see attached conceptual layout). The applicant shall remove the traffic signal at SW Hampton Street and install a raised concrete island to restrict the side street movements to right in/right out. ♦ ODOT Permits:The applicant shall obtain an ODOT Miscellaneous Permit for all work in the highway right of way. ♦ The applicant shall incorporate landscaping and irrigation along the entirety of the raised medians on OR 99W,except where sight distance may be compromised. ♦ The applicant shall construct the full pavement, curb and storm sewer improvements on SW 72nd Avenue through the OR 217 Interchange Area to provide the two north bound lanes to Beveland Road. ♦ All ODOT permits must be obtained prior to issuance of any City of Tigard Permits. ♦ All public improvements must be completed prior to occupancy. 18.390— I ECISION MAKING PROCEDURES/IMPACT STUD : Type III procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain predominantly discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission with appeals to the City Council. SECTION 18.390.040.B.e requires that the applicant shall include an impact study. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests,the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication of real property interest, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 16 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009.02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • " r • • The applicant has submitted an impact study addressing the required elements above. As shown in the applicant's Preliminary Site Plan and narrative,the applicant specifically concurs with the required SW Hermoso Way dedication. ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS The Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure required for new development and will be paid at the time of building permits. Based on Washington County figures,TIF's are expected to recapture 20 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Based on the use and the size of the use proposed,the applicant is required to pay TIF's of approximately$916,810. Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 20 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $4,584,050 ($916,810 divided by .20). The difference between the TIF paid and the full impact,is considered as unmitigated impact. Mitigation Value Assessment: Full Impact ($916,810=0.20) $4,584,050 Less TIF Assessment -916,810 Less SW Hermoso Way Dedication ($15 x 2,178 sq. ft.) -32,670 Less mitigated values for off-site transportation improvements (SW 72nd/Hwy 99W) - -4,000,000 Estimate of unmitigated impacts -$365,430 TIF Credit $916,810 Total Net Estimate of unmitigated impacts $551,380 FINDING: The applicant concurs with the dedication of right-of-way and improvement of SW Hermoso Way, a local street, as shown in the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet PC-1.0) and stated in the narrative. The applicant has proposed transportation improvements on SW Dartmouth, SW 72nd Avenue, and OR 99W to address the roject's impact. For this project, the TIF is creditable to the off-site impact mitigation required of the applicant for SW 72nd,an arterial. Based on the analysis above, the net value of these dedications, assessments, and improvements is roughly proportional to the value of the full impact. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Tigard Police Department commented that the side and rear of the proposed Target store should include design elements to increase natural surveillance to provide added safety to trail users. It was further suggested that utilization of the pedestrian plaza area on the north side of the building would better address the safety issues as an alternative to the pedestrian/bicycle connection between SW Dartmouth and SW Hermoso Way. The Tigard Public Works Department commented that they would support the proposed public sewer main segment entering the property via the westernmost driveway if the property is planned to be partitioned. The applicant plans to adjust the lot lines of the three existing lots to match the three separate buildings. The City Arborist commented on the proposed development finding that not all of the landscaping and screening, street tree, and tree plan requirements have been met. These standards are addressed above in the Landscaping and Screening and Tree Removal Chapters of this staff report. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Water District commented that the plans needed clarification and that fire lines cannot be tapped directly for domestic water for the buildings. These issues must be addressed with construction plan set review of by Portland General Electric commented on the subject proposal requesting a public utility easement on the south side of Dartmouth along the frontage of the subject property and the adjacent property to the east to provide underground power from the east side of SW 72nd Avenue at Dartmouth. Oregon Department of Transportation provided additional comment on the subject proposal in a letter dated April 23, 2009 in which it made its final recommended conditions of approval to address off-site impacts to state highways: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 17 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • • • Recommended Local Conditions of Approval: 1. OR 99Wt,dThe applicant shall develop a third westbound through lane on OR 99W in advance of the OR 99W/72 Avenue intersection and extending southwest through the Tigard Theater and SW Dartmouth Street intersections to OR 217. To address safety concerns with left turning vehicles crossing three lanes of traffic, a raised ppncrete median island or traffic separator shall be installed for all unsignalized accesses between SW 72 Avenue and OR 217. The applicant will be required by ODOT to apply for a design exception subject to the approval of the State Traffic Engineer to allow the substandard 11ft lanes on OR 99W. With these improvements, U-turns will not be allowed on OR 99W westbound at the OR 217 northbound ramp terminals or on OR 99W eastbound at SW 74 Avenue (see December 1 , 2008 letter for explanation). OIIOT will consider allowing U-turns at OR 99W eastbound at Dartmouth and OR 99W eastbound at SW 72 Avenue. The applicant shall lengthen the eastbound right turn lane at the OR 99W/Dartmouth from 300 ft to 400 ft to accommodate the increase traffic at this movement. nd • 2. OR 217/SW 72 Avenue Northbound Off Ramp: The applicant shall extend the two lane storage on the northbound off ramp from 100 ft to 650 ft of two lane storage (550 additional feet of two lane storage including 160 ft taper).This improvement can be provided within the existing right of way. 3. SW 72nd Aven&le through the OR 217 Interchange Area:The applicant shall restripe the northbound lanes along SW 72 Avenue from the OR 217 southbound ramp terminal to SW Beveland Road to provide two continuous northbound through lanes (see attached conceptual layout). The applicant shall remove the traffic signal at SW Hampton Street and install a raised concrete island to restrict the side street movements to right in/right out. 4. ODOT Permits: The applicant shall obtain an ODOT Miscellaneous Permit for all work in the highway right of way. Oregon Department of State Lands was notified of wetlands located on the subject site but did not comment on the proposed development. Because the proposal does not further impact wetlands on the site, it is unlikely DSL would prioritize this application for review and comment. Clean Water Services issued a service provider letter dated August 1, 2008 (CWS File No. 08-00228) requiring enhancement of existing sensitive areas. Washington County commented that they have no objection to the proposed development. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue commented that they can endorse the proposed development with conditions of approval relating to required fire flow, reflective hydrant markers, hydrant fire department connections, access and water supply during construction, and provision of a Knox box. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER(PDR2008-00001) PAGE 18 OF 19 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-02 PC,DETAILED PLAN 5/18/2009 • . _ pkunii% _AppRovED. _ FR ;AID RETAIL CFNIFK. IT I (*Dr.RI D TH.AT THE ..•\I'PLI CANT .\N I) ,ALL PARTI S TO 'In ESE E N(7', BF N(.)-1-1 II Fl.) ()I T •I E NIA OF TEI I S ORDER. PASSE I): 11 111 Y TI IF CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING (TONI jv hunan., PlInning • NITACIINIE NTS Alzachomit I: Vicinity Map Attachment . : May IS, Revised Applicant Nlaterials (Sheet L-1 h and 3 Additional Riges Attaament 3: Off-Siti: Tans portaiun linpr...r.-cnient.s (Applicant's Exhibits A-Di • • • NTER. ii W.TAH.ii N AN • • RECEIVED PACTRUST 15350 S.W.Sequoia Pkwy., Suite 300 NUV !� 8 ` Portland,Oregon 97224 Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. 503/624-6300• Facsimile: 503/624-7755 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT 2 November 8, 2010 Planning Commission c/o Mr. Gary Pagenstecher City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Planning Commission and Mr. Pagenstecher: Re: Tigard Retail Center Planned Development Review Approval—PDR—2010-00001 PLANNING COMMISSION REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION On behalf of Pacific Realty Associates, this letter provides an itemized list of responses to the request for additional information that the Planning Commission outlined at the conclusion of the November 1, 2010 Planning Commission Hearing. 1. Provide additional details of the exterior recycling storage area including the intended use, architectural details and configuration of the facility. Response: Based upon the discussion at the recent planning commission hearing, the applicant withdraws the request for the screened recycling storage area and request that the current application be limited to the minor building elevation modifications to accommodate a non-specific user. It is assumed that this activity will be accommodated within the Retail 3 building at this time. If a screened exterior recycling storage area is determined to be necessary by the end building user once determined; the configuration, location and size of the facility will be submitted for approval as necessary at that time. 2. Respond to Tigard Development Code issues raised in the November 1, 2010 letter from Michael Lilly. Response: As noted in the response outlined in item 1 above, PacTrust has withdrawn the request for the screened recycling storage area and therefore the points of concern raised by the opponent, with regard to the screened recycling storage area, are no longer relevant. With regard to Mr. Lilly's assertion that the change from Target as the end user of the retail 3 building constitutes a change in us,please see the attached letter prepared by Steve Pfieffer with Perkins Coie, dated November 8, 201, addressing this assertion. • • Planning Commission Mr. Gary Pagenstecher Page 2 November 8, 2010 3. Provide additional information regarding the ability to locate the screened exterior recycling storage area to the west of the Retail 3 building. Response: As noted in the response outlined in item 1 above, PacTrust has withdrawn the request for the screened recycling storage area. Therefore we have not provided additional information with regard to any site constraints associated with locating a recycling storage facility along the west side of the Retail 3 building. 4. Provide additional information regarding the sustainability features that the applicant would look to implement in the Retail 3 building. Response: Consistent with the spirit of sustainable development and the discussions with the Planning Commission during the original Planned Development Review approval, PacTrust will work with potential Retail 3 users to promote and encourage sustainable features in the construction and operation of the proposed building. This will include providing the research and contact information gathered during this project to assure that the tenant is aware of local organizations and incentive programs offered through various groups such as the Energy Trust of Oregon to help encourage sustainable development at the site. 5. Provide a sign off letter from Pride Disposal regarding their ability to service the proposed recycling storage area. Response: As noted in the response outlined in item number 1 above, PacTrust has withdrawn the request for the screened recycling storage area. Therefore we have not coordinated with Pride Disposal regarding their ability to service the recycling storage area. 6. Provide additional information on how the proposed building heights relate to the originally approved elevations. Response: The proposed building heights are consistent with the heights noted on the original approved building elevations. Attached to this letter is a copy of the revised building elevations that were submitted as part of the application with the building height information added to demonstrate consistency with the approved elevations. • • Planning Commission Mr. Gary Pagenstecher Page 3 November 8, 2010 Thank you for your ongoing assistance with this project and please feel free to contact me at (503) 624-6300 with any questions regarding the Planning Commission information request responses. Sincerely, PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES, L.P. Matthew Oyen Construction Manager cc: Eric Sporre Andrew Jones Ken Grimes Steve Pfieffer • w:\construction management\dartmouth lots\_site&infrastructure\tigard retail center-pc response 11-08-10.doc • • ..•.•.•...•.••••••••.......•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• : :::•-vg-L::::..T.LT:•Int,::::TT LL3•• •.... .........:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.: --.--....,•• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • .Laws.on BR.e;= •e. =:-1 5•111ted r Canopy element 4. •:•LI.%MMUS:....i.i.:!iii.:i.::•:•:::•:•iii:::: ::: :iii: ::::qii ii.:i•: Pliaster-Imfing cream.5 • .• : I 1 inlemal-Cnior Spht Mac 55.0,411 r ouit,8 ............. • • _ • M1V4nCleanee158.. e • -•.- ,• _ : .• ICI -Split••Face Chili .••• .••• .••• : .---- : , .••• .• .• ..... .. .. ... . .... . .. . r. El .t,. ....., - ' - --7.::::::::::NiT1::::::::::17:::::::::::::::::::::::: ::-.. . ' I.T.„:„. :-::::::- !!... • .,. . 1 " -7.-!!!!.-":;:,-- -7.-r - :!"--r.- • • • . ... . „ . Ili - . i 1 I 1 1111 . i .„.•.,• .:,:.: ....: : 1:..1 •• - - • • d. I IF IMISMOMMINME • I '1111111111111111111N18. • E::-..- TV -.•. .1".:. •• • ...,:,..p.:: Id,•,:•:`..;:..i..'.•'•••,..:...• : .• - •18=== •=5-•°85-. Ise e st M.8.Pee . -.5855.The 555=seel..1,55; 1 55•1558.-• te: -1=-8.8e81 --t 85 5.8881 .•8 5581.8.5•8 Sp::: 5:85-Mme 'sem I.5 e 5 mi: 5.81.1= 8.81 1-58 1.:=511.i .:-).:1.C.1'....,,■• • .......c;••/..'...•'.-', ' . • e C. 8 meozeil Split face CMLIpaMted ,SMit face:CIMU painted :,;p1,t f,,,,CM:LI f.1...1:111.C,d •if ving(ream'.it•II,•••,......-Ii.......:::::•, E".;,.... Rouse Tare SW 282.S 1 .Pmekwond(WM SW 282S l'eow tiouse Tart''SW .7t..-9 11155nomeend ChM SW 2825 [Split.PriCi-.555...M.Li ----••••••••-•- •, . : .• •• .... -- --..p.• .• ,, ...... = • ° ; i i • 11111:111:111111111:1:11 1:151515152:551:15=M11:15:515=5:555151:115:5151:1515151155:151515:151515:5151511W24::11:11:::5:1:1:51:1:5:1:1:1:1:1:1:155:::::::1111M1551:5:1 11:11:1:5:1:1:5:11:1:5:1:1:5:11:1:1:1:15.1 MUWW•11451:1121:112151 ;51•151111ggg11111141dni=5;•:„- -,---- mmemmemmeme emm,m,-,---8e8epemmemmemmemmw888: 5pmepeppmemee ,.....m. ,.:TITITITTI . E....iii: i.i.i.i...,,,,N,..,..,-.,,,r.,r.,,rrrrrrrrrr.,...,:• ...............,..n....................................................................,,,,,........ 1.......!.....N.i.i.i...!....., votititi:m flflihrn.:::!. !!!!!!!!! .!!!!:31..111.111121111:111M115112PgFggiN: 0:41:M$M111:11$1:MMUNI:MMUNUMM 111L[1:::a1M10:1 tflflPial T4TiL:,:, „.... ,:•::.3..:.,:;•...:;:333I;3L1.1: ----• -3333333333333-333-3- : .........m.m.....m...m .nr.K,....m...m . ,..!1:::T,,:r.1:17.144;!::::4::•.1:14:::.,:. ..._. um......Amumadig.......04..910NE • .• .••• : .• : LEFT ELEA/AT-E7 N : - •••••• : •,:),..„.:0;..:-. 1.:-.,..: ::••:t...-:::::::,:.. :-.1.-:• •••I.,...:s)0,1.,:-:-I C.,,,,i:k:".f:i,", I '.■...•::. 1.','r•...MI i;:ii'•''•••■ 1-.1.3-1,•.- '1011,...1•'..•.: f'.,,1 i j 1.-..-...n1(..-1 S...:•:. ',,,:. (:....,11.I •:::;-.1:::-.:•::.:•,,,,, ',....."..•6,2:::.2 ,-',...-,••,••'1,-....-:c 1.---H•-• ',....'.... /I.E.'. • • • • SI.,1 t.(301.f:„r••,•ti....;,:::::,•..0..,...,.i . '....1....:• '.-::.,:.•:::.r.:11,1 co.,1,.:=•!-....i .5pin lam C.Mu pe-Roteed •'5.=: =.:.'''s.5' -mow Home 1.85.SW PPM; i r:, •:lace(MU palmed I ., ,Awood Clay'5' 2823 • . i'Flow HQ UV.'1.::M"SW 7.52-M.3 1..555-5518.518-as T.:11.1'.S.V.i....q.;:':3'; .••• 1 .Reepeppmel Clap.SW 2821 : .••• 1 .• • .• .8 . 1. 1'.= 1 . , 1 .••• cm : 51:15110 ti..,..;!....Wt....kithk,'Z.th: J.J .kkkff...:::J:i.. ..kh;:iti::::::: ::: :.gi..:::**A: *!#!:! !....:.: 41.:i;nii;i1E.. iiiii,K* *ff::::::::ft., x J,Ithiii#1•11111# 1•1#:.-- 111§1.111.11SiEii , ........................... .....................................„.„..... --------•••••-•• ................................. *111 Ir.*: .......................... ....................................... ........ ........................... ........._......._.......... ..,.. • ,.....,.....,.....,.......... . • i 3 Milifiliiii impemetp-,ple-m•(558.55 lk M=lit-cm(MU palmed Spiit face EMU painted 1,155.,°tem=5:555.5 55511m-5,1 1 11"Rew House Tam 5W185.M9 MT% ' . iSpht-485edINR5 . .• : .• : .• . . • _M...••::= : :::::•:•:•:•::,::::•:::::::•::::5:..8,,..:::s:.::::::::::=..... •5•••• e• • •881 3.7....373::::::::::::::::::::•11•; 13 33 .: .. -11 ::. . . .I 1......„:„:„„„:„:„..:.:„:.:„:...............:„:„:.:„.„:„................................ • 1 • • ••• • ••••.• • .....•••••. •""•••1...........•::::::::••••: •i1:. i... • . . .. .I.i :: . '111. .• .1 E.::::::::::::::::::1:!:.:1:::1:::!:!:::ii::!:::1:::;:::::::::::!::::::::::::::.:::::::::::.:::::1::.•..::::..„1::::::.:...::. •• • ....1.111: 1,1+ •1-. 1 1111.1::i...1.1..1..i...1:1:1.1...1 L..: . :.....T 1 3!LI • • ,,...,„....„..:L......„,1 ...................„.„„... ,.. i E LET.. . .... ',.•:.I.:.• •.::- in:• ..1: ,i :.i.-• ...... '.',E...,.E. ......,•E..,,j • . --3 T:- -L 3 . - .... : •• i : .••• .• : 13 L.i I 1 I.) I'•••'.•G 1.11.11.VA I 1 0 Ni:s 2 : .••••• August 05, 2010 , .• ! : • : : .•• : i.... ,..... .• • • ' •• - •• • •• • • • . • . . . . . . . . . . • REC8VED • ATTACHMENT 3 NOV 0 8 ?um Perkins CITY OF TIGARD Coie PLANNING/ENGINEERING 112o N.W.Couch Street,Tenth Floor Portland,OR 97209-4128 Steven L.Pfeiffer PHONE:(503)727-2261 PHONE:503.]2].2000 FAX: (503)346-2261 FAX.503.727.2222 www.perkinscole.com EMAIL: SPfeiffer @perkinscoie.com November 8, 2010 VIA HAND DELIVERY David Walsh,President Planning Commission City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Tigard Retail Center Modification,PDR 2010-00001 Response to Comments Dear President Walsh and Members of the Planning Commission: This office represents Pacific Realty Associates,L.P.,the applicant for approval of the above- referenced modifications to the Tigard Retail Center. The purpose of this letter is to address certain issues raised by Mr. Michael Lilly in his letter dated November 1, 2010 and by Mr. Chris Girard in his letter dated November 1,2010. For the reasons discussed in more detail below,we request that the Planning Commission approve the subject modifications. First and foremost, it is important to note that all of the issues raised by Mr. Lilly in his November 1, 2010 letter are premised upon the proposed addition of a recycling storage area. However, Mr. Lilly is incorrect in his assertion that only certain retailers support sustainable practices and incorporate recycling facilities in their projects. Regardless, as noted in the letter to the Commission from Pacific Realty Associates dated November 8, 2010,the recycling storage area component of the modification submittal has been withdrawn, which effectively removes any basis for Mr. Lilly's comments. Additionally,Mr. Lilly relies upon the faulty assumption that the only use allowed by the original Detailed Development Plan(DDP)approval for the Tigard Retail Center was a Target store. To the contrary,the decision on the DDP approved the wide range of uses allowed within the General Commercial District(C-G). The DDP provides, "The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area." DDP Approval,p. 1. Furthermore, although the DDP approval imposes 37881-0008/LEGAL 19556020.1 ANCHORAGE BEIJING • BELLEVUE • BOISE • CHICAGO • DENVER • LOS ANGELES • MADISON MENLO PARK • PHOENIX • PORTLAND • SAN FRANCISCO • SEATTLE • SHANGHAI • WASHINGTON, D.C. Perkins Coie LLP and Affiliates • • • David Walsh,President Planning Commission City of Tigard November 8,2010 Page 2 conditions of approval regarding site planning building size and architectural elements,nothing in the DDP approval serves to restrict the range of uses allowed in the C-G base zone. Stated another way,there is no change of use issue associated with this project provided the ultimate use falls within the broad range of retail,office and civic uses authorized under the base C-G designation and the current DDP approval. Lastly,Mr. Girard's comments fail to raise any valid concerns with the proposed modifications. As explained above,the modifications do not result in a change of use and the recycling storage area aspect of the modifications has been withdrawn. The remainder of the proposed modifications are minor exterior improvements which do not increase the usable square footage of the building or otherwise modify the approved DDP site plan. Therefore,neither the Comprehensive Plan policies nor the Code provision referenced by Mr. Girard are applicable to this very limited review. Moreover, such policies and Code provisions were appropriately addressed at the time of the original Conceptual and Detailed Development Plan approvals. For the reasons above, and as set forth in our previous testimony and evidence,we respectfully request that the Planning Commission approve the requested modifications. Please include this letter in the official Planning Department file for this matter. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Very truly yours, Steven , ` eiffer SLP:crl cc: Client(via email) 37881-0008/LEGAL 19556020.1 • • • ASSOCATES , NC REC'D NOV 0 8 2010 _� T R I A N S P O L R T A T I O N E N G I N E E R I I N G / P L A Ni N I N G.. 610 SW Alder Street, Suite 700, Portland, OR 97205 F 503.228.5230 F 503.273.8169 MEMORANDUM ATTACHMENT 4 Date: November 8,2010 Project#: 7692.0 To: Matt Oyen PacTrust 15350 SW Sequoia Parkway, Suite 300 Tigard,Oregon 97224 Cc: Gary Pagenstecher—City of Tigard From: Chris Tiesler, P.E. &Marc Butorac P.E., P.T.O.E. Project: Tigard Retail Center—Tigard,Oregon Subject: Development Trip Generation Clarification The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to and answer the following question raised at the November 1,2010 Planning Commission hearing for the Tigard Retail Center development: Question: Does the transportation impact analysis (TIA) prepared for and submitted with PacTrust's application for PD approval of the Tigard Retail Center project address and accommodate reasonably anticipated trip generation associated with the range of retail uses allowed under the General Commercial C-G designation, based upon the approved site plan, in addition to trip generation associated with a Target anchor use?" Answer: Yes. The use of the Shopping Center land use category is both reasonable and conservative. The remainder of this memorandum provides additional details with regard to the above question. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS Trip generation estimates for the potential retail uses on the site were based on empirical observations made at similar developments representative of the broad retail uses allowed under Tigard Development Code, as summarized in the standard reference Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). It should also be noted that the original transportation impact analysis (TIA) and conditioned improvements from the original approval assumed approximately 32,000 additional square-feet of retail space for trip generation estimate purposes. The original selection of the Shopping Center land use (ITE Land Use Code 820) as the most appropriate was made after carefully considering several factors: • Consistency with the land use description contained in Trip Generation H:\PROJFILE\7692- TIGARD RETAIL CENTER\REPORT\FINAL\7692_TRIP GEN MEMO2_FINAL.DOC • • Tigard Retail Center Project#: 7692.0 November 8, 2010 Page 2 • A specific anchor tenant had not been identified • Compatibility with surrounding land uses in the area • Potential for future commercial development immediately to the east of the site The ITE manual defines the Shopping Center land use as "an integrated group of commercial establishments," and goes on to indicate that many shopping centers "include outparcels (peripheral buildings or pads located on the perimeter of the center adjacent to the streets and major access points)." The Shopping Center land use category relies on discreet studies of over 300 sites across the United States, comprising a wide range of users, sizes, intensities, and configurations. Its application in the case of the Tigard Retail Center is appropriate, and furthermore, conservative compared to other land use categories that may have been selected to estimate the trip generation of the development(such as Free-Standing Discount Superstore). CONCLUSION The ITE Shopping Center land use is representative of the broad range of retail uses allowed under Tigard Development Code, and conservatively estimates the development's impact to the surrounding transportation system. The results and recommendations in the TIA remain valid and unchanged. Further, the approved trip generation is conservative as compared to the application of the Free-Standing Discount Superstore land use category. We trust this memorandum adequately addresses trip generation assumptions and questions regarding the Tigard Retail Center. Please contact us if you have any questions or comments regarding the contents of this memorandum or the analysis performed. Kittelson&Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon 1. . ✓ • • ATTACHMENT 5 //.4.0 PROpp p e 4y 4k cNGINEF,p �O 54983PE e November 5, 2010 !'"' v�REGO Doti LANCASTER Planning Commission �-ele Y10 0°- ENGINEERING g AELt• City of Tigard 321 SW 4th Ave.,Suite 400 13125 SW Hall Boulevard ( EXPIRES: 12/311/1 Portland,Oregon 97204 Tigard, OR 97223 Ph fax:503.248.9251 lancasterengineering.com RE: Tigard Retail Center Modification: ITE Land Use Codes for Trip Generation Dear Planning Commission Members: This letter is written to provide transportation engineering comments related to trip generation calculations for the proposed Tigard Retail Center Modifications. The proposed development was previously analyzed based on ITE Land Use Code 820, Shopping Center. Typically,the shopping center land use is used to describe sites with numerous development pads and/or numerous tenants with retail uses. These sites include a variety of retail uses of different sizes, and patrons often visit more than one business during a single visit. The Tigard Retail Center as proposed does not appear to consist of a wide variety of retail uses of different sizes. Instead,the site is dominated by a single pad comprising over 85 percent of the available retail space. In instances such as this where the overwhelming majority of the site is developed with a single use, it is appropriate to analyze the site using the trip generation characteristics of the dominant site use. Based on the site plan, it is assumed that the dominant site use will be a Free-Standing Discount Superstore(ITE Land Use Code 813). Since this land use dominates the site,it would be appropriate to analyze the site using the trip generation characteristics of this specific land use,which differ from those of a Shopping Center land use. The two 12,000 square foot outlying pads may be treated as shopping center land uses if specific retail uses cannot be identified,however if restaurants may be included on the pads it may be more appropriate to analyze a potential worst-case scenario in order to verify that the transportation system can safely accommodate all permitted users of these outlying pads. Based on my review of the revised detailed development plan, it is appropriate to ask for analysis of the site based on the characteristics of the specific intended site use. Sincerely, Michael Ard,PE Senior Transportation Engineer • • Land Use: 813 Free-Standing Discount Superstore Description The discount superstores in this category are similar to the free-standing discount stores described in Land Use 815 with the exception that they also contain a full-service grocery department under the same roof that shares entrances and exits with the discount store area. The stores usually offer a variety of customer services, centralized cashiering and a wide range of products.They typically maintain long store hours 7 days a week.The stores included in this land use are often the only ones on the site, but they can also be found in mutual operation with a related or unrelated garden center and/or service station or as a part of a shopping center, with or without their own dedicated parking area. Free-standing discount store (Land Use 815) is a related use. Additional Data Peak hours of the generator— The weekday a.m. peak hour was generally between 10:00 a.m.and 11:00 a.m.The weekday p.m. peak hour varied between 12:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m.The Saturday and Sunday peak hours varied between 12:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. The weighted average truck trip generation rates from approximately 30 sites surveyed for this land use are summarized in the table below.The average gross floor area of these facilities is 206,000 square feet. Weighted Average Truck Trip Generation Rate Day/Time Period (trip ends per 1,000 square feet) Weekday 0.87 Weekday a.m. Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic 0.05 Weekday p.m. Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic 0.03 Weekday a.m. Peak Hour of Generator 0.06 Weekday p.m. Peak Hour of Generator 0.04 Saturday 0.59 Saturday Peak Hour of Generator 0.04 Sunday 0.43 Sunday Peak Hour of Generator 0.02 One source provided information on trip generation rates for what the study defined as"typical" and "peak"seasons.These data indicated that weekday trip generation rates were similar in both seasons. However,trip generation rates on Saturdays during peak season were 13 to 20 percent higher than a typical season; Sunday rates were found to be 6 to 10 percent higher. For the purposes of this analysis, "peak"season was defined as the period between the week after Thanksgiving and the week prior to Christmas;"typical"season was defined as September through mid-November when transactions are close to average.The seasonal trip generation information provided was based on a sample of five sites. Garden centers contained within the principal outside faces of the exterior building walls were included in the gross square floor areas reported. Outdoor or fenced-in areas outside the principal faces of the exterior building walls were excluded. Please refer to Volume 1, User's Guide,for a more detailed definition of gross floor area. Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1375 Institute of Transportation Engineers ` • •� .f: Several sites included in this land use indicated the presence of fenced/covered space. The sites were surveyed between the 1990s and the 2000s throughout the United States. To assist in the future analysis of this land use, it is important to collect and include information on the presence and size of garden centers, outdoor fenced-in space and service stations in trip generation data submissions. w,: Source Numbers : 354, 522, 577, 595, 607, 609, 612, 618, 625,630,636, 651,652, 661 L .1 ,i. Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1376 Institute of Transportation Engineers iii Free-Stain 9 Discount Su ersre (813) ) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 45 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 195 Directional Distribution: 50% entering; 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 53.13 29.65 - 85.01 13.31 Data Plot and Equation 18,000 x 17000- x 18,000 - x 15,000 —. X co 14,000 X X C X W 13,000 X 12,000 X x x • 11,000 X I - X X 10,000 " x. x X x x Q 9,000 '' X- X r- x x 8,000 _ -�" x x x 6000 " < X 5,000 x• x: • X. • . 4,000 • I • t r , 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 X=1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)=1.35 Ln(X)+2.11 R2=0.54 Trip Generation,8th Edition 1377 Institute of Transportation Engineers Free-Stadin 9 P Discount Su ergtore (813) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, P.M. Peak Hour of Generator Number of Studies: 47 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA:. 195 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 4.68 2.66 - 7.40 2.39 Data Plot and Equation 1,600 x X 1,500 - 1,400 X X 1,300 X U) 1,200 - X- c W X X . 1,100 - X X x 1C X- 0 3 11,000 - L X ,- • X X - X ' X C -1) X 900 - X � X > 600 -' X X X X II f- 700 X X X X X X X 500 -- - - - X 400 - X 300 1 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 X=1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)=1.32 Ln(X)-0.16 R2=0.52 Trip Generation,8th Edition 1381 Institute of Transportation Engineers • • Land Use: 820 Shopping Center Description A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned, developed, owned and managed as a unit.A shopping center's composition is related to its market area in terms of size, location and type of store. A shopping center also provides on-site parking facilities sufficient to serve its own parking demands. Specialty retail center(Land Use 814) and factory outlet center(Land Use 823) are related uses. Additional Data Shopping centers, including neighborhood centers, community centers, regional centers and super regional centers, were surveyed for this land use. Some of these centers contained non- merchandising facilities, such as office buildings, movie theaters, restaurants, post offices, banks, health clubs and recreational facilities (for example, ice skating rinks or indoor miniature golf courses). The centers ranged in size from 1,700 to 2.2 million square feet gross leasable area (GLA). The centers studied were located in suburban areas throughout the United States and therefore represent typical U.S. suburban conditions. Man y shopping g centers,din addition to the integrated unit of shops in one building or enclosed around a mall,, include outparcels(peripheral buildings or pads located on the P-erimeter of the center adjacent to the streets and major access points). These buildings are typically drive-in banks, retail stores, restaurants, or small offices.Although the data herein do not indicate which of the centers studied included peripheral buildings, it can be assumed that some of the data show their effect. The vehicle trips generated at a shopping center are based upon the total GLA of the center. In cases of smaller centers without an enclosed mall or peripheral buildings,the GLA could be the same as the gross floor area of the building. Separate equations have been developed for shopping centers during the Christmas shopping season. Plots were included for the weekday peak hour of adjacent street traffic and the Saturday peak hour of the generator. Information on approximate hourly, monthly and daily variation in shopping center traffic is shown in Tables 1-4. It should be noted, however,that the information contained in these tables is based on a limited sample size. Therefore, caution should be exercised when applying the data.Also, some information provided in the tables may conflict with the results obtained by applying the average rate or regression equations.When this occurs, it is suggested that the results from the average rate or regression equations be used, as they are based on a larger number of studies. Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1497 Institute of Transportation Engineers • Shopping Center • (820) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area On a: Weekday ' Number of Studies: 302 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 328 • Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 42.94 12.50 - 270.89 21.38 Data Plot and Equation 70,000 x 60,000 X 50,000 - co c x, x W o.= X x X,•-' X I- 40,000 x X- -s . . . - X X X X L X > x X a) Xx .' •X X X i g 30,000 X Y X X- . .X x > X',X �X x X II X I— X Vie X X xX 20,000 - 5( -)4()). • - X . . .: x X Xx X CSC ' X x X• X ,• ASC• XX X X x X X 10.000 - 'S(; ;,;: X X. XX X ai /.';.;4.* X X • X ; ;. xX X 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 X= 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)=0.65 Ln(X)+5.83 R2=0.78 Trip Generation,8th Edition 1500 Institute of Transportation Engineers • Shopping Center (820) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 412 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 379 Directional Distribution: 49% entering, 51%exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 3.73 0.68 - 29.27 2.74 Data Plot and Equation 9,000 8,000 7,000 - co c 6,000 W X / - ''X a X l- x N 5,000 - X L X X N - • X )LC 4,000 X X ,' XX > x X X w 3,000 ,'Xit '•AX X X X>,4CX x X XX' :, X X X X X 2,000 - X X 1.i X X •i%..tip M;.;. X y`.. X 1,000 <: . X X X X • X • 0 0 1000 2000 3000 X= 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)=0.67 Ln(X)+3.37 R2=0.81 Trip Generation,8th Edition 1502 Institute of Transportation Engineers • • CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes November 1,2010 CALL TO ORDER President Walsh called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall,at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Anderson; Commissioner Doherty; Commissioner Hasman; Commissioner Muldoon; Commissioner Ryan; Commissioner Schmidt; Commissioner Shavey; Vice President Vermilyea; and President Walsh. Absent: The entire commission was in attendance. Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Community Development Director Doreen Laughlin, Sr. Administrative Specialist; Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner COMMUNICATIONS President Walsh welcomed the newest Commissioner.—previously alternate Commissioner Richard Shavey was appointed to replace former Commissioner Tim Gaschke.This was Commissioner Shavey's first meeting as a voting member. [Shavey's term will last until 12/31/13, at which time he will be eligible for 2 more full terms.] Commissioners Doherty and Walsh noted that they'd attended"Rail-volution." President Walsh and Commissioner Doherty gave a quick run-down of what it was about. Commissioner Vermilyea,who is also chair of the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee ('ITAC), said the TTAC will be meeting the upcoming Wednesday evening. He said the committee will select priorities for transportation related projects to put on the Capital Improvement Plan and suggested people attend that meeting if they're interested. CONSIDER MEETING MINUTES 1:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2010 PC Pukets\I I-I-10 PI I.7 iga d Retml PDR2010-00001\6-tpe minutes 11-1-10.doc Page 1 of 8 October 18th Meeting )"nutes: President Walsh asked if there we• re any additions, deletions Y deletions, or corrections to the October 18th minutes; there being none, Walsh declared the minutes approved as submitted. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED—PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR2010-00001 TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008-00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 & 2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. An 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street,west of SW 72"d Avenue within the Tigard Triangle President Walsh read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Exparte contacts: None. Site visitations: Matthew Muldoon and President Walsh. No challenges of the jurisdiction of the commission. No conflicts of interest. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner, Gary Pagenstecher,gave the staff report on behalf of the City. [Staff reports are available on week before each meeting.] STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the proposed modifications to the approved Planned Development Detailed Plan meet the applicable Approval Standards as outlined in this report. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed modifications. Staff further recommends the Commission delay final action on the application until their December 13th hearing to allow for the Director's Interpretation to be issued regarding the expiration date for Final Order #2009-02 PC. Pagenstecher amended the previous staff recommendation to add a condition of approval: that the garbage hauler, [Pride Disposal], provide a sign off letter for the revised plan for access — so there's no question that it's accessible and feasible for them to service the recycling area. QUESTIONS OF STAFF Following are some of the questions directed to staff by the commissioners: I;\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2010 PC Packets\11.1-IO PH-Tigard Retail PDR2010-00001\6-Ipc minutes i 1-1-10.doc Page 2 of 8 • • Regarding the prior facility design -we'd asked for an evaluation of several efficiency measures and the "white roof" was found to be economical to deploy. Is that still part of the design? Those things that weren't modified will be the same, so, if that's the case, then that's not changed. The path lighting—is that something that still would satisfy the Tigard Police Department? It's not proposed to be changed and under the original approval, it was acceptable. Would the facility still use the same trip calculation as though it was the Target or does it do a different trip calculation? The use is the same —retail use. That would remain the same. So if it's not exclusively stated here, all conditions of the original detailed plan remain the same? That's what the applicant represented. Yes. When does the original approval expire? The code is silent on that question. So that would mean this is open-ended? There's an argument to be made, the applicant has submitted for a Director's Interpretation which would find the validity of the permit perpetual. I would suggest that we look at amending the code to address that particular issue. Staff has that intention— to address what we see as an omission when the code was revised in 2006. Depending on the retailer that would eventually move in,if that affects the traffic study, could we request another trip count—as opposed to the traffic study and trip count that you have? Yes-if they change the use -it would be a major modification requiring another review. It's not necessarily changing the use. It's just that some retailers may have more traffic than others. Would they have another study? Yes. That would make a substantial change and require further review. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Steve Pfeiffer, Perkins Coie LLP land use attorney for the applicant, 1120 NW Couch, Portland, OR 97209 informed the Commission that Ken Grimes and Matt Oyer would make a substantive presentation next. His role at this time was to introduce the subject and procedure. President Walsh informed Mr. Pfeiffer that there were some members of the commission who were not present at the first hearing in 2009 and that it would be good if he would give a brief background to the commissioners (which he did.) Attorney Pfeiffer told the commission that the earlier approval remains in place whether they approve these modifications in whole or in part. He said they hadn't asked to modify any of those conditions. They have no problem with the additional condition regarding the garbage hauler. He said the Commission's review is limited even if they hear testimony tonight that goes back to the merits of the earlier review. He noted that under the ITE manual (the transportation manual by which uses are categorized and then trips are assigned by any number of measurements— usually a square footage, depending on what it is.) The earlier review was based on the "shopping center" classification in the ITE manual so the range of uses that could go would be those that are retail in nature—subject to the ITE classification "shopping center." He noted to the commission that there was a possibility that they (the applicant)may ask to leave the record open. They would listen to the testimony and then decide whether they will ask to leave the record open or not. Phoning Commission\2010 PC Packets\11-1.10 PH-Tigard Retail P1)112010-00001\6-tpc minutes I I-1-I0.doc Page 3 of 8 • • Kenneth Grimes, representing Pac Trust, 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy, Tigard, 97224, and Matthew Oyen with Pac Trust (same address) introduced themselves. Grimes explained the change to the plan - which is the addition of an 1800 sq ft recycling center to the lower section of the drive-by in the rear of the building. He noted that everything else remained the same other than removing all the identifier elements or Target"branding." He showed an elevation of the minor changes. [He used an enlarged version of drawings the commissioners had previously received in their packets.] He went over the small changes including the color palette which was changed to brown and tan rather than Target's typical red color. QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSIONERS Are there emergency exits on this plan? Yes—he pointed out the egress areas on the display. Are you proposing EIFS on that facade? It can be EIFS or it could be plaster as well. That's subject to the detail of whoever the respondent may be at that time. Are you planning to actually build the building or are you seeking approval and then waiting to have a tenant and then build the shell? Our intention is to go to market with this. The tenant is undetermined at this point. We will not construct the building without the tenant. No. I'm concerned about whether this will turn into a Wal-Mart. That could be a problem. I can't answer that because we don't have aprospect at this time. That's why we're here. We want to put together this ' marketing program so we can go out to market. Point of order from Commissioner Vermilyea: "Mr. President, I don't think we have the authority to make a decision based on the ultimate user. We cannot make a decision with that issue in mind." There was a question about EIFS... my understanding is that the base material is a concrete block and any EIFS, plaster, or stucco that would go over it would be going over a concrete block—is that correct? That's correct. It's not going to go over a wood frame or anything like that? No. Okay—I'm going to ask... What is EIFS? Commissioner Vermilyea answered: EIFS is `Exterior Insulation Finishing Systems"— a synthetic stucco product that at one time was the leading cause of construction defect litigation in Oregon, California, Florida, and Texas, among others. It's particularly problematic when talking about wood frame construction. It was designed to go on concrete block construction and, when used in that fashion, does not cause problems. Why the addition of the recycling center? To respond to a broader market— we thought we'd be responsible and have it there whether they use it or not. What are the heights on the buildings? The same heights as the prior one;it's nowhere near the 4S foot height limit that's allowed in that tone. 1:\IJ PIN\1%nning Commission\2010 PC Packets\t1-1-10 Pl1-'l3gtn1 Retsil PDR2010.00001\6-tpc nines 11-1.1Ddoc Page 4 of 8 • • PUBLIC TESTIMONY—IN FAVOR: None. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— OPPOSED: Michael J. Lilly, Attorney representing Plaid Pantries, Inc. 4800 SW Griffith Dr, Suite 325, Beaverton, Oregon 97005 — said there's a [Plaid Pantry] store across Hwy 99 from the area where this development will occur. He testified that this should not be a minor modification for three main reasons. 1. The change increases the lot coverage by buildings; 2. The changes reduce the amount of open space and landscaping; and 3. The new site plan involves a change of use. He submitted written testimony (Exhibit A). Chris Girard, President& CEO of Plaid Pantries, Inc. 10025 SW Allen Blvd., Beaverton, OR 97005 read his written testimony (Exhibit B). Greg Close, Property Manager of Pacific Crossroads Shopping Center— 1501 SW Taylor Street, Suite 100,Portland, OR 97205, said that he echoes the testimony of Mr. Lilly and Mr. Girard and left some statistics for the commission to look at (Exhibit C). His main concern is the issue of the raised median. He contended that they did not get noticed regarding the original application hearings and did not get their testimony in. He said they would have objected strenuously to the raised median. Elise Shearer, 9980 SW Johnson Street.,Tigard, OR 97223, testified she would welcome a regular retailer but not a grocery supercenter store. She recommends a non-grocery retailer. REBUTTAL Steve Pfeiffer spoke to the topic of"change of use". He said there is no change of use. Change of use is not measured by who a hoped for first tenant or purchaser might have been. It's based on whether it's going to be retail or not. There is no reason for anyone to believe that this is going to be anything other than a retail use. It's a non-issue. Not germane to this hearing in any case. With regard to the testimony of Mr. Girard and Mr. Close has nothing to do with the application. It does not even speak to the criteria by which this decision will be made. They wanted to talk about the median which was offered up in the earlier proceedings and at the behest of ODOT and your own engineering staff, for a variety of reasons, including safety. That issue is resolved, done, and that's simply where it sits. They offered nothing to the issue before you tonight. Regarding Mr. Lilly's issue—his supposition is grounded entirely of the notion that any retail use, other than Target,is a "change of use." That's simply false and does not support any notion 1:\LRPIN\Planning Commission\2010 PC Packets 11-1-10 PH-raged Retail PDR2OIO-000DI\6-tpc minuet 11-1.104« Page 5 of 8 • of denial on your part. Secondly, regarding landscaping, I'll need to look at the code - but we have far more than that in excess of the minimum code requirement. REQUEST FOR RECORD TO BE LEFT OPEN Mr. Lilly's third point- the notion of a very broad definition of a building— again, I'll need to look at the code to see if an open air walled facility for purposes for this use, recycling, or anything else, constitutes a structure and at the end, I think what we need to do is ask that the record be left open for a week to afford us an opportunity to respond to what we've seen tonight— or what we've received but have yet to see... and then secondly would allow anybody else to submit comments during the course of that week. I would then ask that you close the record, if it's your inclination at that point and then continue to a decision which I believe has been projected to the 13th of December as a date for decision making. So that would be our request. PUBLIC TESTIMONY CLOSED DELIBERATIONS Doherty: Wanted to be on the record as being concerned about this being a "big box." She has an"uneasy feeling" about an unspecified user- especially with regard to traffic. She doesn't agree with the idea of having a recycling center—it's a big change—especially for the people that live behind there and have businesses on Hermosa. She is uneasy about what might be coming. - Vermilyea: Disagrees with Doherty—he believes it is a minor change. He said there are two important issues. First- we are not authorized to make a decision based on the end user. Our code doesn't allow it. It may be shortsighted that our code doesn't allow it. We have to make decisions based on what's in the code. Secondly,in the midst of that discussion three years ago that retailer (Target) decided not to come to this location because they couldn't build a big enough footprint to get enough trips based on the trip cap that we have on the Tigard Triangle. I feel fairly confident this is not a big enough building for that kind of a supercenter. I think this is not a change in use. I agree that this is the broadest type of use under the ITE Manual. I don't want to deal in speculation. What we've been asked to do is approve the removal of some identifying marks from a concrete box that we approved a year and a half or two years ago. I don't see that there's any significant change in what this is going to be versus what it was going to be before. Cabela's is looking for locations, maybe we'll end up with a Cabela's in Tigard— I think that would be a good thing. There are other large retailers out there that may end up coming to Tigard. I would much rather have an employer of this size,in this community, than for us to dicker about what"might happen."Whoever ends up in that space is going to have to meet the trip generation requirements, and they're going to have to meet code requirements, permitting requirements, etc. This is not the last story on this space or this project. Additionally, he believes this should not be continued and a decision should be made tonight. Doherty believes the recycling center is not a minor change and she would vote "no" because of it. I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\7010 PC Packets\11-1-10 PH-Tigard Retail PDR2010-0000I\G-tpc minutes t 1.1-10.doc Page 6 of 8 • • HEARING REOPENED Walsh reopened the hearing so the commissioners could ask staff some questions: I would like your input on the issues raised about a minor modification. Our use category does not distinguish between a superstore and a Target type store. There's no change of use. What about the issue of what constitutes a building? Is the recycle center a building?I identify that as an accessory use. I didn't take issue with that definition. Buildings usually have roofs—a structure?I don't have the exact language here so I'm not prepared to parse out... Would an accessory structure be allowed? Yes, it would be allowed. That doesn't necessarily mean it's a major modification. Is the use of the recycle facility for the store's material only? Yes, that's correct. RECLOSED PUBLIC HEARING President Walsh said they would take it to a vote when Gary Pagenstecher interjected that the applicant had asked that the record be left open for 7 days for additional comment—and in that case,it has to remain open. REOPENED PUBLIC HEARING At this point, the hearing was reopened and the question was asked whether the applicant was willing to waive the right to have the record left open for 7 days,in other words, to withdraw the request. They were not'willing to do that because, among other things,it was important to have the requested Director's Interpretation in hand. They would like to have the final order reflect that decision and if it occurs in advance of,it won't have that opportunity. After much discussion,it was decided this would not go to a vote at this time because the purpose of the record remaining open is to get all the information before the commission prior to the decision. The applicant's lawyer explained that the scenario, as they've proposed,would be that 1. they leave the record open for written material from anybody for seven days; 2. the record then closes, self executing, automatically; 3. the matter is shifted to the agenda for December 13th ; and 4. the Planning Commission would convene on the 13th and the agenda would reflect deliberation only- no additional testimony - as the record would have been closed back on the 8th of November. Commissioner Vermilyea asked Community Development Director,Ron Bunch, if he agreed with what counsel had just said. Bunch said he agreed. The applicant has the right to review and respond to the written material. Vermilyea said he doesn't like it but will go along with it. He would prefer to take this to a vote. RECLOSED PUBLIC HEARING L-\LRP[.N\PlanningCommhsion\2010 PC Packes\11-1-10 PH-Tigard Retail PD1i2010.00001\6-tpc minute 11-I.10.doc Page 7 of 8 • REQUESTS OF STAFF President Walsh asked the commissioners if they had any requests for information from staff within the next 7 days. He noted that at the next hearing there will be deliberation only. No further testimony. Following is what the commissioners would like from staff: 1. Commissioner Doherty would like the design of the recycle center,why the recycle center is 1800 sq ft, whether there's going to be machinery in the recycle center, whether it's going to be broken down to strictly cardboard or whether it's going to be others. The concern is why is such a large recycling center needed if it's not going to be a super store -and why it has to be outside next to other businesses as opposed to inside the store. 2. Commissioner Walsh would like clarification on the claims raised by Mr. Lilly with regard to the code (the change increases lot coverage by buildings -reduced landscaping- change of use). 3. Commissioner Vermilyea would like staffs' take on how the ITE Manual comes into play and what would trigger a major modification- particularly when it comes to traffic and the impact on the community. He would like an analysis of what triggers the need to revisit the Kittelson Report and the traffic impact requirements set forth in the last approvals, if anything. 4. Commissioner Walsh wants to know what the issues are with regard to an alternative location to the west of Retail 3. 5. Commissioner Muldoon would like an itemization of sustainability features of the previously approved Target Store. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 13th (RECORD REMAINS OPEN 7 days until the 8th of November) OTHER BUSINESS -None ADJOURNMENT President Walsh adjourned the meeting at 8:45pm. • .� Doreen Laughlin,Planning Co 'ssion Secretary / r A'1'FEST: P,;.' - - David Walsh 1:\I.RP1.N\Planning Commission\2010 PC Packco\11-1-10 P13-7tg3rd Rctml PDR2010-00001\6-tpc minutcs 11-1-10.doc Page 8 of 8 • • EXHIBIT A Michael J. Lilly Attorney at Law 4800 SW Griffith Drive, Suite 325 Beaverton, OR 97005 Telephone: 503-746-5977 Facsimile: 503-746-5970 Email: mikelilly@michaeljlilly.com November 1, 2010 Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner City of Tigard Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 By Hand Delivery Re: File No.: Planned Development Review (PDR) 2010-00001 File Title: Tigard Retail Center Modifications Applicant/Owner: Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. Dear Planning Commission and Mr. Pagenstecher: I represent Plaid Pantries, Inc. a locally owned company which operates the Plaid.Pantry Stores, including Plaid Pantry #149 at 11705 SW Pacific Highway, Tigard, Oregon in the Pacific Crossroads Shopping Center. We oppose the application because the approval requested by the applicant does not qualify as a minor site plan modification. The Tigard Code specifies when changes to a detailed plan can be treated as minor modification: "18.350.070 Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria A. Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria. A detailed development plan may be approved only if all the following criteria are met: 1. The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan. Minor changes from the concept plan do not make the detailed plan inconsistent with the concept plan unless: a. The change increases the residential densities,increases the lot coverage by buildings or reduces the amount of parking; b. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping; • • c. The change involves a change in use;" d. *** e. *** The changes proposed in this application are greater than the changes allowed in "minor" changes. In particular: a) The changes increase the lot coverage by buildings. The applicant proposes to add a 12' x 90' recycling storage area- 1,080 square feet with 10 ft. high walls. Section 18.20.030(35) of the Tigard Code defines`Building." "35. "Building" —That which is built or constructed,an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner." A structure that is 12' x 90'with a 10 ft. high wall is a building by that definition. b) The changes reduce the amount of open space and landscaping. Comparing the new site plan with the old, it is apparent that the 12' x 90' recycling storage area will be located in an area previously designated for landscaping, thereby reducing the landscaping, thereby reducing the landscaping and open use in the site plan. c) The new site plan involves a change of use. The change of use is not merely the addition of the recycling storage area. The applicant added the recycling storage area to accommodate a different use, namely a Wal-Mart like super center including a supermarket. The original application was for a Target store. The addition of a recycling storage area indicates that the new proposed use includes a supermarket as a part of the retail facility, because no other retail facility needs a 12' x 90' recycling storage area. Supermarkets need a recycling storage area for recycling cans,bottles, and cardboard. The applicant is seeking approval for a site plan that would allow a Wal-Mart super center or Wal-Mart like super center that includes both a supermarket and general retail. This is a significant difference, because it results in a change in land use category in the ITE Trip Generation Manual for traffic impact analysis. In their original analysis the applicants used category 820 "Shopping Center." With the addition of a supermarket, the applicant falls into category 813 "Free Standing Discount Superstore." The traffic impacts are greater in the new category. The change in use requires a new traffic analysis and a new application, not merely a minor modification. Thank you for your attention. 4/1,4,"A Michael J.Lilly Attorney for Plaid Pantries, Inc. . . I . 1. . 1 1 t. . I. . . : . ... . t . • 6 0..,..;?•:.-.W (;".,.....-.;-•:.::::.'.:V • Name ...,... ....; 1 • aratIP ".....2:14 ,.91.-- . :...,-..,.., „... ,..., •,. . ,-; - . .1 : ...87..m„....2.,..,,......,..... P .., :::,..'',4' ;%:.•,:.:-.7,!.. .--it:f....':-.-:- ..v..,.._ - ....E,t1 : -------,..,'..•-,::. .v.::-Ailli -.:-..,: r.,....-3,,r,..... ....... :'•.;11-,c,".,--..;-.,0'.0*.;r1V0.„::', 611 "I''..".' "-i:',.'7'::..k.."-A'!. 7o.,-•,•,..r"*.,..... -- . .'- '...'''''‘!"-'. ---'''. ..1111%.,,,„_--- a...: ,;V: -# ( ;il r 1 t -;,:::-4,-,teln'o■-w---- w2-M i ..%\ -I . :. gm' ,,, 'it ',-,;::■-.:-•-..-..-----;,-;-;;I:,:k axe 6 dee,'401,7tk• ,;,,■■'' -IP 1 %- 13-- 1! ''!-"1- 91 I '''. 11!11'7'—---- ifir-.0 • , 1. ..^t i _ ,_.. .. • ....:. (. 1..t,..„,..„--;-4 ,.;„,,„a,.. • • -',.::■■•-iii,w,o,,,,,,-, ,,i,......,,,,:::: i •,--. . ...., AlliNn MB_ Mi•II :L.'''ii g.'1.Y.5 . IllPoi,,,, ril i _ MIIC ... . . 1 • q,g;;,;-5......_..,-1.„,,a:.: -z C-t CZ =4 ill •q-Jl.—,I r.4. : V.: — ..le•4L-•J :,::,; ..■ .11 1 tiit fi: I ha_— • I:11 r':':-'7 ” __ I::1 1-.,..•.,„, :..!......Cr-107P.....-''.';' la • ;4'; MI- ::;: /ilk Alibi Ali& ;41 4:: MIIC "allIM 3111C Ili II MUM VII/ MIMI' Ell . cike 41 Mit."..Q011,:4 /1 :: VC PC ; 7 1 9 .-... ... it z•!:; - MIN/ M./ MIS• CFAS.. Illy- :: AIM /lift in. ••.!-.., i(;) ,..,....1!",,..• F"I+ mile mile mile .mad: ■:-:.-:• ';' El, Ilm•IV V_IN■ ■ s4 6N- t:',:-'.::•C 5'• )1 ..14.•.:".1. 133 . ...ft. Ali. limi ill IP -.;" ,... ., . „II ., :: 1 Vain 0 '■Ill] g. i 4'.•J.'.:'...,... M !:-,-,-, =I IF■14;:S.c.' 1 ".4 ;■...• t t. :',.•. .. ..:,* ,,,---• .:.--....,, .. . , =\-6°*1;1.!''''''''' ° *. I- i- ociNsp,,,e, 4' •:::...,...., J ::::::::::: rep ,.,141t 1-4 __ .1 ........... — -,• ,-.kvthi . ... . ;,-::.,•-if.."._ ,.:.; i, k,,..::,...:-..7-1.k.:4i;t:%.'•-.3.'-',:::• 40,a 0*I. 1..;.4.;0'*6■4 4:±•?..-:..,,t2...- '.',. -.:-.10-::::-.1.:::,a•r.:■_,..:. ,,I,.-,-....,.1.-.4„,...4s-ti, 1:2: ff -__. -,-, tif t3ip'4' ,:ii',:-L'"'"-!'l ■■ --*1.-2AN:All',.,...:,*81:04■4Pile.g9.4';•14..,';'6.':;. .---) le'Ai...L lr,,Al. ® -."' - - ‘411.110H--1-7-,T., ..'.--0 4 %,• 4IF'!".,:e41 if' SW HE , C. -'2-l'a?.1'..■ •:SWE.VS5-• Ai: il- '4 ‘.4 ? • ,'-:P'...=%..- , ... 71 A 6 f it a (..,.11• l'113,*(4-:t.tj .'1--'''.-::f---,.340 ..;•....:114 yir111 1 .• c'',3 a- ,A:447.i,• 03, .,w,li ... e ....- r4MOscs WAY z. 0. . lig ;13 s -0 g z 4 1 1111 TARGET & ASSOCIATES INC. I 2 I I i STORE 'T-2733 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING -_■ i 12840 N.W. Camel/Rood, Portland,Oregon 97229 SW DARTMOUTH TIMM IMAM OREGON ZN1/4. (503) 643-4796 FAX (503) 643-4798 6 ....i 141 • • ......< . • f :1 - 3IaId EXHIBIT B tpan r`y convenience stores Plaid Pantries, inc. • 10025 SW Allen Blvd. • Beaverton, Oregon 97005 • Telephone: 503.646.4246 • Facsimile: 503.646.3071 November 1, 2010 City of Tigard Planning Commission 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Oral Testimony re:Tigard Retail Center PDR2008-001 Good evening Commissioners. My name is Chris Girard, and I am President and CEO of Plaid Pantries, Inc. Plaid operates over 100 stores, primarily in Oregon, and we have two stores here in Tigard. As explained by Mr. Lilly, the requested application for a minor change is really an application for a change of use. That change is likely to have a negative impact on the Highway 99 traffic congestion problem that was already critical as a result of the original application. That traffic congestion and the proposed "fixes" will have a significant negative impact on our store directly across Highway 99.. The prior application resulted in a condition requiring a median on Highway 99W. We collected over 1,000 signatures on petitions from citizens and customers who were opposed to the median. Tigard's own public opinion survey showed that only 7% of citizens favored a median as part of a plan to address congestion on Highway 99. The addition of the new grocery store use as a part of this project will make those problems worse. The median was a result of ODOT requirements, but we ask the City to considered the unfavorable impacts on small businesses and consider that ODOT, according to statute, must ". . carry out its responsibilities . . . in a manner compatible with" Tigard's Comprehensive Plan and land use regulations. (ORS 197.180(1)(b)). • Tigard's Comprehensive Plan includes the following Goals and Policies: Tigard shall have a strong and resilient local economy with a diverse portfolio of economic activity: retail, professional service, and industrial jobs. (Tigard Comp Plan Goal 9 Economic Development, page 9-1). The City shall establish strategies to retain and encourage the growth of existing businesses. (Tigard Comp Plan Goal 9 Policy 1, page 9-5). In addition, Tigard's land-use regulations in City Code Section 18.390.040B.e require traffic studies to address both the transportation system and impacts on the public at large and the affected private property owners. Also, Tigard's Transportation Plan (Table 8-2), like ODOT's standards, requires lanes that are twelve feet wide. The volume of traffic generated by the approved development created the need for a third lane in each direction, and PacTrust had to use lanes that are eleven feet wide. This current proposed change of use has the potential to make that problem worse. Since the Applicant is now proposing a change in use and modifications to the prior plan, we are requesting that a complete new application for detailed plan approval be required so that these factors and the potential for increased traffic can be considered. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. i Chris Girard President& CEO Plaid Pantries, Inc. • ■ 1501 SW Taylor Street.Suite I0111 • ��IIbm Portland.Oregon 97205 503-294-0400 EXHIBIT C Fax 227-2507 www.wyseinvestment.com WYSE INVESTMENT SERVICES COMPANY November 1, 2010 City of Tigard Planning Commission 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Tigard Retail Center PDR 2008-001 Dear Planning Commission: We are the property manager for Pacific Crossroads Shopping Center located at the corner of SW 78th Ave and Pacific Hwy. This is the Center that contains Arby's,Big 5 Sporting Goods and Plaid Pantry, among other tenants. A map of the Center is attached hereto for your reference. The owner of the Center and we support the position taken by Plaid Pantry and its council —that the matter before you does not qualify as a `minor' site plan modification and we further echo the request for a new development application with a new and more up to date traffic analysis requirement. The offsite conditions imposed by ODOT under the existing application have far- reaching negative consequences to local, established businesses along Pacific Hwy. The raised median will eliminate the left-turn movements exiting Pacific Crossroads and numerous other properties situated like it along the highway. In the case of Pacific Crossroads, this will make it nearly impossible(highly inconvenient at best) for customers of our tenant businesses to exit the property and access Pacific Hwy northbound, since the only alternative will be via SW 78th Street—an intersection that is already severely congested. Pacific Crossroads tenants number 15 local and regional small businesses—from electronics to athletic equipment, to pizzas, ice cream and pet supplies—most of these businesses have been located at the property since 1990 or earlier. Their employees number between 75 to 100, depending on the season, not an insignificant number of jobs for a City the size of Tigard. Further these businesses serve some 1,500 to 2,000 customers per day,mostly local neighbors and Tigard residents. A survey of our tenants indicates that some 30%to 40%of their customers choose to exit the property and access Pacific Hwy, northbound, as a matter of convenience. Given the local traffic pattern, and the `convenience' service offered by most of our tenants, the expectation is that following the installation of the raised median,most of the customer base wishing to access Pacific Hwy to the north, will look elsewhere for their goods and services. In fact,over 80 percent of the tenants at Pacific Crossroads have indicated that • they will not renew their leases if the left-turn exiting is curtailed as designed. Most of these tenants are owned by local business people, some as independent operators and others as franchisees of a larger organization. In some cases the principal's life savings, or close to it,have been invested to open and maintain the business and it is where substantially all of their family earnings come from. We have heard from many of these people first hand that considering a move to a new location could be all but impossible— with the likely result that the businesses would likely simply close. We understand that there are legal and technical issues to be worked out.Aside from those,we ask you to consider the issue of fundamental fairness—why should long established local and regional businesses, and their customers,be displaced, and a viable commercial property that has supported the local economy by attracting excellent tenants for over 26 years,be placed under a severe economic hardship to make way for another `big box' retailer and a handful of smaller retailers? Please support the small, long-established businesses along Pacific Hwy and require a new application with a new round of fair and complete public input and updated traffic study. Sincerely, Greg Close Property Manager--Pacific Crossroads Shopping Center ( PACIFIC CROSSROADS -SHOPPING CENTER • ilikk VA . r ' 01-ARBY'S 0 A-PLAID PANTRIES I B-RADIO SHACK il C-THONG THAI RESTAURANT ♦ +1 ; D-EDWARD JONES III ( ,a'4;,a.* 4..=-'+ : E-BASKIN ROBBINS t „T �,� ” F-PETCO ANIMAL SUPPLIES a __. - , I. _ J-SUSHI HANA A �� • K- V0.cANT L-BlG 5 SPORTING GOODS �,---ae —��Y M -QUIZNO'S R N-DREAM NAILS • B ' • , X- LITTLE CAESAR'S PIMA - • --- ■ •Y-CASH CONNECTION C C . j Z- HAM RADIO OUTLET g --__a a a D . P ' - a iii -,..„ i fn . .� 4� 104 -J ` •zi;-,11:: • • Ll2 47,A,.. � - -N L r. l''TO 4 tl if . > Ali & ilArl 4. t fl i * , 4, • * 4 • i ,sr . i 44 N.: ..-:7':. • 47 11 q Att , ft` L.LI " } ,. 41\ ! skip,'` S.W. 78th AVENUE *4Iiee' • • PLEASE SIGN IN HERE Tigard Planning Commission T I G A RD Agenda Item # Page of_L Date of Hearing I l - (•( O Case Number(s) eQ f�2 (O - OC,b& j Case Name " _ r - - o ' �. "mil Location 5_c r r-tVY\154L►St./ C6,CYC SUd n�� A ■ If you would like to speak on this item, please CLEARLY PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (FOR the proposal): Opponent (AGAINST the proposal): Name: Name: , Al i C , / L G y ,p Address: dres /.0 s: f G/ C �, b filagro /V , oe °I '7 00,C City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: 6,63 c .'c Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: ,-7'�''/ O� Z 0e Name: Na 'e: c_4/„A., Address: ddress: City, State, Zip: City, Sta , Zip: Re 2/a�/�41 7' Name: N e: j Address: Address: 9q r/ ;/ , i ' „elk City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: , Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: • • . City of Tigard r- :=:-. Planning Commission — Agenda MEETING DATE: November 1, 2010; 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard—Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS —7:02 p.m. 4. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:04 p.m. 5. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008 00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot "big box" Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 &2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street, west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map (WCTM) 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200, WCTM 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101, and WCTM 2S101AB Tax Lot 01400. ZONE: C-G (PD) General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755, and 18.780. 6. OTHER BUSINESS — 8:25 p.m. 7. ADJOURNMENT— 8:30 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA-NOVEMBER 1, 2010 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 1 • • Agenda Item: 5 Hearing Date:November 1.2010 Time: 7:00 PM _ _ y" F- - RAP - - O� T :. � ...Pt-"� ':.Yi§' _ �'t2. 2=-'lcia as•'�i2i�:�n>a�o.;'.. :y'•' f"_: ,c vy.,. -i� q .ti.,k ".<i'..i• w„F- i{>§at,^N'-'.;'t:':r!"k%_y: i.:.rf. .nS. } _ - - ,.-i'1, .�� _ LANNIN=G� �=1VIt_� „� =Y.r., .��.•�._, -"�u•'`_r1:=�'�';<?�„ �'e:< • �T.,-.� ,::x i- ,.a!°r•-�._:• z// . r'. F 4L 3, T�t"a,3,+?,,.'..,Iy.^kG..,.. _ •r��. IO.. -:RE'$_.�'L:,yi:lfr`G::`:..'... Or. N,.'...;`,•�. 4 T I G A R D- -,�,>>._<,;c'` a - j?r:-�.T::n•;:-'wtF.. .'C,• fi.<n 'i.,.r;-:2� a;::.7. - `::',s.?::'.�r-s �:: - - >,u;<;�-:' :.h::c, a'�,•','i? --'r..,.w4,< >z�z_. .s,�-. .�Sf=9-..,k:...�•.-,^::.�:<":�cY"m,rs;, - ..i' •;`r,�' - 120 DAYS = 12/30/2010 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY • FILE NAME: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS CASE NO.: Planned Development Review(PDR) PDR2010-00001 Minor Modification) APPLICANT/ OWNER: Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. Attention: Matt Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicant requests Planned Development Review approval for minor modifications to an approved planned development (PDR2008-00001). Through Final Order No. 2009-02 PC, the Commission approved development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a 137,900 square foot Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings and associated surface parking, landscaping, lighting, access and utility infrastructure improvements. The proposed modifications would: 1) change the approved Target-specific color, materials, and logos of the Retail 3 building to accommodate a non- specific user to facilitate marketing of the entitlement to interested parties, since Target has decided not to locate at the subject site, and 2) add a 1,800 square foot recycling area at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with the Tigard Retail Center Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street west of SW 72nd Avenue;IVashington County Tax Map 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200; 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101; and 2S101AB,Tax Lot 01400. ZONES/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATIONS: C-G (PD): General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. (PD): The property has a planned development overlay designation. The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for TIGARD RETAIL CENTER STAFF REPORT'(PDR2010-00001) PAGE 1 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION I-IEARING 11/1/2010 * * . . . . . • • • • • • • . • • • . • . • • •- • . . •- • -- . . . . fit: :• -• •• :'• Os l• , • • • hat,: r.• •: •• n •• t : I:••••• •I •• 11 • • ••. V•1 • :•:••*. • • : •• ••• • ' C• .•• ••• • i• ficris .. a f • • • fit• • •••• fittoth•. •••• fin : f t. I • : : e• eeee eeeee- eee •• e-e - • I •• •V Sr I ',. • • "fi I •: • • • n .•• • •• •: • : • . ••*.• •-.• .fit . •fit arch :••• • •••• n.• rt. i ..-• . ts.•• tt On • -:•• f:•• . • a . thota , . • csicct • : v••••,••• :• • t ••• h • h.. C finch • 1 •• ::: 'V :it• • V. •••- ts• h • - • I.:VI !•:',V 1'• R •- . . . . . • •:4*.R.• !••• R *R.:I.:RN.' : :Staff roncontinands that the Planning Commission fI nd that- the nropecval minor rriodifications tt.-) the : afiptanted Illanned Development Detailed Plan ninet the atnnicable .Afitan.tval Standa.rds: as outlinet.l. r.his •reffinv liherefore Staff reetannnerlds AP.PRONAls t•tf tiroposen ata rf frtrth t reparnmerids the filothmissifin. delay final action on. t.he apt-Pica-Phi until t.hett December 13th hvarina ; alfivas for the Inireciancs Ithernretatichl tel• be je ate re....er,a refine file expiraticp date for Final (finks : *as,. platn..s2 fine Other. Staff int annients cal ryzip....e 12 cf Tcporil•:. • . . . . . . • • • • • the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a re ona_ mixed- use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and- ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate infra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the City through the legislative process. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755, and 18.780. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ;y., r«k ',•� .di.' - _ ::rK --.M==-" :r." y•:,t^': .S.v��,vtiti�:.c_e;.:� e'r.!•--:� .3•S } t _ ©�7F7 �.j.�� $,�>• k. .ke.i �$ati'.5...- ;ii"YW'�'.�,. i '%, T .�N.+ :. k`,'t -A el Fa �.,..r.:" "' '� 4•a t+.y �!. <fv :• 0•a ii •A- S f .je tile&t e,: _ six ic ati+4*. o� e,a e. , a a:� o ae.. t` " r. a 3',; Ci " .l a a ? ace is u'�`t. c Cable- . r �a�s�a�.>� e�°.� yt �Yf't= : �4.�»�z,�a: ,T., -�'m• $� .��r:�;-?1€t+z§.=:� :�.;.w`�= ^� s %ear. 3€y.#�:=a��?:m:`-�" 9�b��' +uv x •�,,;r,�•�; ,;'this• �r. i-- _ -% taz., r 'PR tlie� r+sr ' • o }� sedr o+�fi+caiij�s:,�tafa a a err:; :.'r'+.'k•:a' .'w°'ws� «:Cis :.':>c'd:.��.7"��'' �2'. Tv. c'k9 ��:aY74':1.��=��1+s1?.'�„'`l��''3,.;;.:n'.'=-:u-i;-"��„t.�.t�.-. y''+?-�` � 'xt ir`:�"r'n w:r:>,. t"'.`v,E�7rE',r;ter°»�: recd°` :: he oi,runission eta �:achai2;;:on•.,diera cation t �:thetr_)ec+em. t t,'4 -�.v. �:::. .s•. ,.�,_,, _ w ,�. <s ,.�:�� ..�., < M::�;<�a..�,��,,,. . ,.�.L� 1�_13c ;.�..eang... 4:,=;; p"� £°'��5..a:�;sa "�:., c �:�: '�.�l,.r...5^�i">x.,�.ic,;-.y.�f,` -:i17.. _ - ,-.. _,.�,. d,,.,.Fw_,,.._::_,''a:,x x-se'rc4 1�;;=:�" - ;:to:;alidw fo,07-3)ni is n retatiM to s;u_iss� - r- di.1.4.1 he-py� ` _ .- ..— fe..-�-7 ;..t"�=-l:-•_::E..: w.-.-r:.-:,.-..,7._Y,`a; ,:.-. -" :T"g„-e _�'h;, -,'Zr∎Y �.Ari ciate'.for:`Final Order w>v� or= "-.;.,.!h?e`�'mat, ? ,,3_' �:-, ?'' v -N`o::20(09-02=PG=:s+ec Other staff-Coi mmerits"oi >,12:of tl=iist,i.. ort ..:' =',-..�.:>;-}:.: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER STAFF REPORT(P1R2010-(X)001) PAGE 2 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION I-TEARING 11/1/2010 r • CONDITION OF APPROVAL T FOLLO- N - WI G.COivDITI - _ - n;� _�•�ter, - - yr' T:b o _ ssuAlV�` eAINY=' SIT IN- The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting; documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION,ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher 503-718-2434. 1. Prior to site development, the applicant shall submit a letter by the franchise hauler demonstrating the location, design and access of the proposed additional recycling area is serviceable. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The Planning Commission approved the proposed Tigard Retail Center Detailed Plan with Final Order No. 2009-02 PC, effective June 17, 2009. Due to the off-site transportation impacts associated with the proposed development, the decision was appealed to Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) for alleged lack of adequate notice to property owners beyond the 500-foot notice area. LUBA dismissed the late- filed local appeals and affirmed the Planning Commission's Final Order. Vicinity Information The subject 18.16-acre property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street,west of SW 72nd Avenue, and east of Hwy 217 in the Tigard Triangle. The subject site, zoned primarily C-G (PD) with a 0.45 acre parcel in the southeast corner zoned MUE, is surrounded on the north, west and east by C-G (PD) zoned land, and on the southeast by land zoned MUE. A 10.42-acre significant wetland associated with Red Rock Creek is located adjacent to the site on the west which buffers Hwy 217. Vacant developable land exists to the east fronting on SW 72nd, which was once a part of the previous approvals on the subject site. The area to the southeast, zoned MUE, is a neighborhood in transition where a number of residences have converted to commercial uses. Proposal Description The applicant requests approval for minor modifications to an approved planned development detail plan (PDR2008-00001). The proposed modifications would 1) change the approved Target-specific color, materials, and logos of the Retail 3 building to accommodate a non-specific user to facilitate marketing of the entitlement to interested parties, since Target has decided not to locate at the subject site, and 2) add a 1,800 square foot recycling area at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with the Tigard Retail Center Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES Type III procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain predominantly discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission with appeals to the City Council. As the proposal is a modification of Planning Commission Order No. 2009-02, the appropriate review is through the Type III-PC hearing process. SECTION V. NOTICE AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENT The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity to provide written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. On October 8, 2010, staff posted the subject site with a notice. On October 12, 2010 the City mailed notice to neighbors within 500 feet and other interested parties. In addition, the October 14th edition of The Times included a notice of the Planning Commission hearing. Staff did not receive any written comment from neighbors or interested parties regarding this application. TIGARD RETAIL.CENTER STAFF REPORT(PDR2010-00(x)1) PAGE 3 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION I-IEARING 11/1/2010 • SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The applicable review criteria for the proposed modifications to the detailed plan, including elevation changes to Retail Building 3 and the proposed addition of a recycling storage area, are contained in Community Development Code Chapters: 18.350, Planned Developments; 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts; 18.620, Tigard Triangle Standards; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage; and 18.780, Signs. This staff report is limited to the review of these sections and contains a staff recommendation for the Commission's review and decision on the proposed modifications. Proposed Modifications to Retail Building 3 Elevations The applicant's submittal includes proposed non-specific user Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010) and the previously approved building elevations Tigard Store Design (May 18, 2009). A side by side comparison of these two sheets may be helpful to understand the proposed modifications. When comparing,please note that the order of the four views is inconsistent between the two sheets. Proposed Modification to the Site Plan for the Addition of Recycling Storage The applicant's submittal includes a Revised Detailed Development Plan (Sheet PC-1.0) that shows the location of the proposed 12' x 90' Recycling Storage Area with a 10'high CMU screen wall. 18.350- (PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS_______ 18.350.010 Purpose: The applicable purposes of the planned development overlay zone are addressed in Section 18.350.040.A.1.c, below. 18.350.020 Process: A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. At the time of the original zoning designation (1983), City Council applied the planned development overlay (PD) to a portion of the General Commercial zone in the Tigard Triangle that includes the subject site. Therefore, the applicant was required to apply for planned development review. However, the approved Detailed Plan met all of the applicable standards without variance or adjustment or the application of the Commission's discretion for those chapters that could otherwise be applied as guidelines (TDC 18.350.070.A.3). B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development concept plan; 2. The approval of the detailed development plan; and 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. The applicant's proposed Concept and Detailed plans were approved under Planning Commission Order No. 2009-02. The planned development overlay zone (PD) already existed over the subject site. 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER STAFF REPORT(PDR2010-(XX)01) PAGE 4 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION I-IEARING 11/1/2010 • • • A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following: 1. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include: b) An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning principles are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed; The applicant explains the architectural style, or design concept "is still to provide buildings that establish a modern presence within a natural landscape, enhanced to provide an expression of quality enduring architecture in a sustainably responsible environment that transcends period trends to create a special shopping experience." [Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010), Tigard Store Design (May 18, 2009)]. The proposed modifications pertain to removing elements of the buildings associated specifically with the Target store in order to accommodate a non-specific user: "The Retail 3 building concept proposes an architectural design of exceptional quality and construction, compatible with the Tigard Triangle Design Standards that will blend with the character of the surrounding area. The contemporary style of the architecture will create a continuous and unified composition throughout the development. Architectural design of the building entrance area allows pedestrian visibility from various points across the site. The main entry features storefront, windows, decorative lighting, and a canopy for weather protection. Pilasters add vertical elements which, along with the use of color, modulate the horizontal aspects of the building. The color palette will be comprised of warm earth- tone colors. Planters placed along the front facade provide further interest, articulation, and scale. The entry canopy, storefront, windows, lighting and planters further articulate the north (front) facade, adding pedestrian scaled interest along the front sidewalk. The front facade includes three planters strategically placed and will include native ornamental shrubs and trees. The front sidewalk will also include lit and standard bollards, benches and bicycle racks as well as lighting to illuminate the building and sidewalk. As a condition of approval, a free-standing canopy element, similar to the one proposed over the building's entrance, has been located near the right front corner of the building and a planter has also been located near the front corner of the right (west) facade. All of these design elements work together to produce a variation in texture, color, and scale to provide visual interest and a pedestrian-friendly experience." In addition, the Target building program included sustainability features addressing Site and Water, Energy Optimization, Materials and Resources, Indoor Air Quality, and other measures. The applicant states that "consistent with the spirit of sustainable development, potential Retail 3 users will be worked with to promote and encourage sustainable features in the construction and operation of the Retail 3 building at this location." c) An explanation of how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010: To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed modifications to elevations of Retail 3 are consistent with the original approval in that they provide a similar appearance through the use of building articulation, changes in materials and TIGARD RETAIL CENTER STAFF REPORT(PDR2010-0{)001) PAGE 5 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 11/1/2010 • • • colors, parapets, and awnings [Retail 3 Building Elevations (August 5, 2010), Tigard Store Design (May 18, 2009)]. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the Concept Plan Submission Requirements address the planning objectives of the proposed modifications and the purposes of the planned development chapter. The proposed Retail 3 elevation modifications relate to the aesthetics and innovative building techniques elements of these sections. The Commission may concur that the applicant has adequately addressed these elements and that the proposed modifications are consistent with the approved Detailed Plan. Alternatively, without the prejudice of Target as the tenant for Retail 3, the Commission may wish to consider whether to require additional building articulation, materials, colors, etc., or sustainability features that were a part of the Target proposal. 18.350.070 Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria A detailed development plan may be approved only if all the following applicable criteria are met: The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan. Minor changes from the concept plan do not make the detailed plan inconsistent with the concept plan unless: a. The change increases the residential densities, increases the lot coverage by buildings or reduces the amount of parking; b. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping; c. The change involves a change in use; d. The change commits land to development which is environmentally sensitive or subject to a potential hazard; and e. The change involves a major shift in the location of buildings, proposed streets, parking lots, landscaping or other site improvements. b. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, e.g., between single-family and multi-family residential, and residential and commercial uses; The only adjacent property with a different type of land use is located to the southeast corner of the development. Although the adjacent property is zoned MUE which allows similar commercial use, the existing use of the noted property is residential. The proposed development allows for a 20' buffer between any hard surface improvements or structures and the existing residential use property. According to the Buffer Matrix, Table 18.745.1&2, only a 10 foot buffer is required. The buffer will consist of shrub groundcover, trees, and hedges per the Buffer Matrix requirements. • On-site screening from view from adjoining properties of such activities as service areas, storage areas, parking lots.and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: a) What needs to be screened; b) The direction from which it is needed; and c) Whether the screening needs to be year-round. The applicant states that the proposed recycling areas will be screened by a 10-foot high CMU wall. The screening would screen the area from adjoining properties to the south. In addition to the wall, landscaping is proposed between the wall and the property line, which should further screen the proposed recycling area. Response: The proposed site plan modification is for the inclusion of a screened recycling area behind Retail 3 and is consistent with the approved concept and detailed plan. No significant changes are proposed to the site plan. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER STAFF REPORT(PDR2010-00001) PAGE 6 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 11/1/2010 • S FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, any modification of the approved Detailed Plan must be generally consistent with the approved Concept Plan. Minor changes from the Concept Plan do not make the Detailed Plan inconsistent with the Concept Plan unless (b) the change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping. The proposed recycling facility would reduce the amount of landscaping approved under Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02. by 0.2%. The modification of the site plan to accommodate the proposed recycling areas is minimal and therefore generally consistent with the approved Concept Plan and may be approved. 18.520— COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS) C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini- warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for The subject site is zoned C-G and MUE. The proposed general retail use is permitted outright in both the C-G and MUE zones. The proposed recycling area is accessory to the approved retail use and is subject to the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district. The elevation modifications are aesthetic in nature and are subject to the applicable Planned Development standards. The applicant states that the proposed modifications are still consistent with the requirements of this section. 18.520.040 Development Standards All development must comply with: 1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapter 18.370; Development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.502.2. 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. The applicant has not requested any development adjustments or variances. With respect to the proposed recycling area, the applicable standards in Table 18.502.2 include: STANDARDS C-G MUE (PD) Approved Proposed Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 0 ft 0 ft. - 100ft. 80 ft. Maximum Site Coverage (PD): 85% 85% 80% 67.0% 67.2% Minimum Landscaping (PD): 15% 15% 20% 33% 32.8% TIGARD RFs IAII,CENTER STAFF REPORT(PDR2010-00001) PAG l 7 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION IIEARING 11/1/2010 • • The location of the proposed recycling area is in the rear yard approximately 80 feet from the southern property line, consistent with the 0 ft setback requirement. In addition, the proposed location is outside of the 50-foot wetland buffer. The proposed 1,800 square foot recycling area would minimally increase the site coverage by 0.2%. Therefore, the proposed development complies with all of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district. All other applicable standards and requirements, as reviewed in this staff report, are met or otherwise conditioned to be met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed modification of the approved Detailed Plan with the addition of the 1,800 square foot recycling area is consistent with the applicable Commercial Zoning District standards. 18.620— cTIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS) L_ 18.620.010 Purpose and Applicability A. Design principles. Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principles adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. 18.620.040 Building Design Standards All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Ground floor windows - All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. The retail shops buildings (1 and 2) are within the required Building Setback. Approximately 58% of these building elevations facing the Dartmouth Street frontage are comprised of windows and/or doorway openings on the ground floor wall area. No changes are proposed to the approved ground floor windows within the Building Setback with this application. 2. Building facades - Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: a) a variation in building materials; b) a building off-set of at least 1 foot; c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. TIGARD RIn'AIL CENTER STAFF REPORT(P1)R2010-00001) PAGE 8 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION III ARING 11/1/2010 • • • No building facade facing a public street extends more than 50 feet without providing building offsets and architectural design features, as well as variations in building materials. No changes are proposed for Retail 1 and 2 with this application. For Retail 3, the north (front) facade is the only facade that faces a public street. This facade has been designed to meet the design guidelines of providing architectural features at least every 50 feet with the following: The north (front) elevations provide a variety of pattern, texture, and material. Pilasters and offset corners occur in less than 50' intervals along this facade. The entry utilizes a storefront system comprised of anodized aluminum and glass, additional glazing occurs to the right and left of the entry vestibule. An EIFS (Exterior Insulated Finish System) panel wall extends to the right to emphasize entry and display user identity signage. As in the original submission, the architectural treatment continues to the sides and rear with a similar vocabulary of materials, texture, and color. No building facades extend more than 300' without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. 3. Weather protection - Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. No changes are proposed to the approved weather protection measures with this application. 4. Building Materials - Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. No change is proposed to the material pallet. 5. Roofs and roof lines - Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. False fronts and roofs are not proposed. 6. Roof-mounted equipment - All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. All roof-mounted equipment is proposed to be screened from view of adjacent public streets by using parapets. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: 1. Zoning district regulations - Residential only developments within the C-G and MUE zones shall meet the sign requirements for the R-25 zone 18.780.130B; nonresidential developments within the C-G zone shall meet the sign requirements for the commercial zones, 18.780.130C; and non residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the 'IIGAIu)RETAIL CENTER R STAFF REPORT(PIR2010-00001) PAGE 9 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 11/1/201(1 • • • sign requirements of the C-P zone,18.780.130D. In addition, sign area, height, and location standards further restrict signs in the Tigard Triangle. The proposed development site is covered by two land use districts, General Commercial (C-G) and Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The sign requirements of Commercial Zones have been met for signs in the C-G zoned portion of the site per code chapter 18.780.1300. See a more detailed code response in that section, below. No signs are proposed in the MUE portion of the site. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards continue to be met with the proposed modifications to Retail 3 elevations. 18.755— (MIXED SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING STORAGE): A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that certain new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source-separated recyclable materials prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. B. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and non- residential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for such uses. 18.755.030 Materials Accepted A. Materials accepted. Except as provided for in 18.755.040 G and I, the storage area must be able to accept at least all "principle recyclable materials" designated by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other source-separated recyclable the local government identifies by regulation. The approved development included storage areas able to accept all "principal recyclable materials" that were specific to the Target operations program. The proposed additional recycling area provides this function exterior to the Retail 3 rather than interior. 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance A. Alternative methods of compliance.An applicant shall choose one of the following four methods to demonstrate compliance: 1. Minimum standards; 2. Waste assessment; 3. Comprehensive recycling plan; or 4. Franchised hauler review and sign-off. The minimum standards method was used to adequately size the trash enclosures for the proposed retail pads for this site. The trash enclosure for the Target building was based on building specific requirements as provided by the retailer. The proposed additional recycling area is based on coordination with other retailers as a typical requirement and is proposed to maximize marketability of the Retail 3 store. 18.755.050 Location, Design and Access Standards for Storage Areas A. Applicable standards. The following location, design and access standards for storage areas are applicable to all four methods of compliance, described in 18.755.040 above. B. Location standards. 1. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be collocated with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; 2. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; TIGARD RETAIL CENTER STAFF REPORT(PDR2010-00001) PAGE 10 01?13 PLANNING COMMISSION HI ARING 11/1/2010 • • 3. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; 4. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; 5. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; 6. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; 7. The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. As shown on the applicant's site plan (Sheet PC-1.0) the only change proposed to the approved mixed solid waste and recycling plan is the addition of exterior recycling storage to the rear of Retail 3 off of the access road.The proposed area is consistent with the applicable location standards. C. Design standards. 1. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; 2. Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; 3. Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; 4. Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. According to the applicant's narrative, the proposed recycling area will meet Uniform Fire Code standards, will be enclosed by a 10' high split CMA screening wall, and containers (provided by tenants) will be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted, consistent with the design standards. D. Access standards. 1. Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons. However, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service; 2. Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment, considering paving, grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered; 3. Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. Access to the storage areas will not require backing out of a driveway onto a public street. Adequate turning radii are provided to allow collection vehicles to safely exit the site in a forward motion. Although the franchised hauler, Pride Disposal Company, reviewed and signed off on the approved site plan, no such review and sign-off has been submitted for the proposed additional recycling area. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed development complies with the applicable Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage standards. Although the franchised TIGARD RETAIL CENTER STAFF REPORT(P1R2010-00001) PAGE 11 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 11/1/2010 • • hauler, Pride Disposal Company, reviewed and signed-off on the approved trash enclosure plan, no such review and sign-off has been submitted for the proposed additional recycling area. Therefore, a condition of approval shall require the applicant to submit a letter by the franchise hauler demonstrating the location, design and access of the proposed additional recycling area is serviceable. 18.780— (SIGNS): *PD Guideline Chapter Chapter 18.780 regulates the placement, number and design criteria for signage. 18.780.130 Zoning District Regulations C. In the C-G and CBD zones. No sign shall be permitted in the C-G and CBD zones except for the following: 1. Freestanding signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties in commercial zones: The freestanding signs have been modified to remove the Target specific signage and provide signage for a non-specific use. The sign height (10 feet) and area for the proposed monument signs (66-sf per face, for a total of 264-sf for all four faces between the two signs) remains unchanged. 2. Wall Signs: No modifications are proposed to the wall signage for the retail shops buildings. As noted in the approved 2008 application, the total number and area of wall signs for the proposed retail shop buildings will be dependent on the tenant mix,but will comply with the requirements of this section. Without a user identified for Retail 3, the total number and area of wall signs for that building is also unknown at this time. • FINDING: The proposed changes to the signs reviewed under the original decision relate to content only. The City does not regulate sign content. The applicant must still apply, and has stated their intention to apply for sign permits, when tenants and detailed sign designs are determined. SECTION VIII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS Director's Interpretation on Expiration In addition to the requested elevation and site plan modifications, the applicant has also requested an extension of Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. Staff finds that the qualifying statement in the original approval "This detailed plan approval shall be valid for 18 months from the effective date of this decision" is not supported in the Tigard Development Code. Therefore, the applicant has requested a Director's Interpretation to clarify the expiration date of the approval. Being processed as Type II decision, the Director's Interpretation is due to be issued November 16, 2010 and become effective on December 1, 2010. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission continue the November 1St hearing until December 13, 2010 for final deliberation of the proposed modifications after the Director's Interpretation is issued. Development Review Engineer Comment The City's Development Review Engineer commented that because the proposed action does not alter or affect any of the public improvements approved under the prior Planning Commission order (Final Order No. 2009-00002 PC), no additional pubic improvements are required with this land use application. TIGARD RETAIL CENTER STAFF REPORT(PDR2010-000{)1) PAGE 12 OF 13 PLANNING COMMISSION I IEARING 11/1/2010 • • SECTION IX. AGENCY COMMENTS No agencies were notified as none, other than the City, has purview over the proposed modifications to the approved et ed plan. t 67 `A ''`J October 25, 2010 PREPARED Y: ary Pagenstecher DATE Associate Planner 11L J- s� .� v"` October 25 ,2010 APPROVED BY: Ron Bunch DATE Community Development Director Attachments: 1 Vicinity Map 2 Preliminary Site Plan '1'IGARDRIil'AII,CI?N'fl R STAFF RFs1'ORT(SUB2O(18-00001) PAC 1313Olr13 PLANNING COMMISSION 1 WARING 12/1/2(08 ..._[___.1��;� _ �� 1, :• VICINITY MAP '� d g" ! 4' PDR2010-00001.. ;� I , , ,, ,k...„... . •.... `'' TIGARD RETAIL CENTER__, •--�_Per F1.F is J =� — ,,,.--` � t ' �`'y ODIFICTIONS\rm__II`-',.1 'A - 1 t \ II ? I -, /,/ lir y r_ 1 I f r1{i.A11l371 tiI I J 1 I �, hJj ' i ''‘nifil EIJI T:': ' ', . • `_ I Subject 7 -ic ; f Site 4 N )—J I j \\\44:1\1\T IN ..-.. --r .,,I________ ...till [.. 1 I ._.D, n— 1 .‘.-.-)".,1-.,..,..,-1,--' s„A..‹,4,...„7.,,,x):;.>:....„7..,..x.,x,„ t.., , 1 • Fr'i'. —I li IL: • J I __ *� 1 A' ; y1' I cs j�. ,'\ 1 �; Information on this map is for general location__, - �, — — l— r--.., ;,---1-- "a r T ..) i T- only and should be verified with the Development 1 , — I I 7' I �,. I — I r Services Division.t.I J ----III ‘ '\ J ._JJ V J'S11 @It ti, "—J t-/ I �, Scale'1:8,000-tin=667/t i III 1. `i \ — I — —^ —I I H7: Map printed at 01:55 PM on 20-Sep-10 1J lI 1'• '\ `'� ��— I I I - '�I .. DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES.THE CITY OF TIGARD IJ 1 .1 •I MAKES NO WARRANTY.REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE �; I� CONTENT,ACCURACY,TIMELINESS O0.COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF TXE �~� I �` 4 1 ` ti. 1 --� L— I_ DATA PROVIDED HEREIN.THE CnY OFTIGARD SHALL ASSUME NO �`y` f II I \ ,,` \ . HMI 4, r- T LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS.OMISSIONS.OR INACCURACIES IN THE I 1117 INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED."Mil 1 LI III —.: ' ` J} )r , I I _—� 1__1—� I � - D City SW Hal rd iit({` ".•!t� 13125 SW Hall Blvd �- TIGAR MIiPS Ti ard,OR 97223 e: °•Feet \` — -- g ; ,..,. •0 1000 11,AM11TnN ST _—_ 503639-0171 \�_�_, ,-� �I L l J — J I I ll, .T �� www.tigardor.gov • _/ / I ' [� \ U SITE DATA BUILDING DATA 1 S\I` nu ACaiS ,/ Cl M - •`• `�l\`\ LAM O�SISEd KiM 1 17,000 }.Oro Ye - . Wd09D Srom ' \,,\ KIM;Vol Il ]m Kf M1M] I)).fW Sit , "FM 1 IDI 1 1.51 Kf TOM Moot AKA 161.900 YS 1-1 .1\‘'. ©' ® K1M)t01) 12.6 Ke `\ , e ra%st AY O�9G1R01 OOS Kf PRdoYO KArra s91xL 1. \\1I O O Z coMMEACwu 9"`�'�"�' ss(AS1u1N1 Rtawto t 1 ® EAWLOi) NOTES 1::::.:::..\. ```� L DAAG/SCO al 4tKY I'0: ::A'> \ AttESaIE srNIS 1 SiLIS ql'..:. --?(, vosno,me.DAM Ann 14 KW twAnD r-. IWWU[NI 9a 1 ‘::,> 111 f aM uSAKA) .<:;;.)';.:: ronxNA rvNK JAI u,xooe) MOAK RAM 1n/1.OW Sr x}Sf KR 4a AND 10.11a1 YM. '.: {tl:}i?:("$/I' a:::�,'.:AMy�A.[ptl�m�at� l Atau tOaMN (110 Y YAL 101L) SI :•. ��...�.'. _ _ .._._ _ -. ___ ...__.. . ._ '' 'ETA 1 Mt.000 YS MC.AMA) It�IA A/ -0B. ;�� Vi3: ......:.:: --m�++®'K'. 1. PARING DATA VDU SUM.SILLS 51 S1AaS .i""IC•.41.;y.• ., '' I.Lt tAlGaAlaNS asm al IoiL C01wKi nLLts 1 nuts 'rhi:}>:.': Ir @:ii `i; k`�,�:�\ r ^, 1 �1��.�CDi� ' O 3!!;Ww/ / ):•::':6 ' LS Aw)STALLS•::•i:j':;:• :gg' ... ..:K IaAAlS)/ A:':..;A ;::::.-i H.y .. O MOM VOSl::: ,:;1 !iiii:i:i 7 AIM COW.CO / / / LOT 2 � e a ��. O,� ;O a'•rarM AR[bM M. =fig.MAUS n Mu N ,� I /: i /}�� ]an.REMO,IMYNG w)CdtL SrALLT 74 sILCS :.� , C C C 'C t C �;:;:;:;: LLL, WYW PARMC lAt4])Pa J N$ MIL Y1 StAat / - : .• 2 yKS� a _ ®• O (U tODD Sr w9vw PAK1L RARO. IARIWC RAISR ADI/1.0009 / / :::� •:•;+:'::::�'• a IS e K \\\\ _,,v. , ®y „. \1 t I9MbS 111. Rl fa I.OW Y(PMRME Iblf E) ,f,J r, ) k Ql -, r A V TO 501 d tt91tt0 IAKYS 10CLL MC 0$StLSS: 1.11/1,003 Y RAIN Yt 9.� 'a J J J J J J J J O SUMS NAl CCYKY 9M IK / IRS "A'"',• ''� 1(L� 'i ' .{ _I�It :�:Id; O • RdSS IV/ SIA.ROs M aVACI SILLS. / K itfl c c c��. �" _ c o•c c ':i f c c y� c�w4:0., Imo.�a I'(/) r� LEGEND / ytij.�, 'i.Y ,1l• �P I ® `, '1 =t .A%":. T�>1111dosm wa9Nc / / .;. ' _ (t]1 BB!!��1�t i1,a a o 1.'=„'a� a a)):. '� h I ;� cnnSR cvle a arrz! .:,�' � a71 .is �� ... � ® r.� t t C 1, I':��:: it t/, C t C/.. I\ ---Gar I 1 a a1, © ~-' jp, I �a J a a J a)a J �C�,, III '�::, .. I '' �//4/4' i( k .!.., 4 rmtsGOAN i. PMYWG M!p•L, ,� . :•C:i4"'. 1..-_ _"S 1 -_ _ ®y YAaS >. [MI CARL .� -► a a \ .'\®\" \�,�."i TRASH5T'�" ;.1;1:::::: Ir 11a s1 Y` Y`YY`Y' COYPACrOR SCKfN RLt'. *• ar Nna !1 iii t.;.1 , • • •\,;;:' _ PoND a 9R MIN � m�e. iTa �.� ..' iR':;� C ' r 1 ; - , \ 1RUCC::':•i. --4-t- C \ \ ..\ .:.. III if:/::�,, y RAC I r 1». t AS® y�\ YAW CC CRY/EkIT LOT 3 ®�:! :::�. '•:.; © J) S a J,,,,,:3 \1`ja�:: I,•' - 1 an I t � -. -, ANILI'':C I `> /{/.::::.' _ t t i[i E .:- RTAL 3 A:�::•:. .>.=.►rlO 1r KR r E NL fTC �,::..tI;:;:, •':.r ••- ~ I.VOSCAK 1 .,V:.:::::: MSUAI t/ C C AMA M IIw M ', �.: .": be -► �► i I ':;;:.:;;: I 11 R: 137,900$F- �'. MO 4 I.WIG) � ;A m. � am ® Iswos r» k Q' rMrw .�t-: 201• ti� > r3.naa :,] 1 ' ' vAas -180.0 i� r•(W%ED USE Q /.I Y ,IlY a � r : ,'IAL.,C=A•PLOYAABJT) O , -4........,,........,,,---,....0 sps" 14111 I '. lr ror vROros[R• 9R J�/ -:.° ^�":"Di:`igR4it iR9lw:::::::8 ::::::::::EE::[[ rl». O trilcaRn nGRAae AMA Y, ,,, I Ao. / y�. s!N._.�: ::::::..... ;:1 QI rlHOauea®IwAU q} 1}• �(' `\\\:::-:.'.�,..::.::flEiii[?jiEE i[E TEE::iit ii'j`ptiaf>:!pilc9uf:,10:I a,il 1 �� n 1s•KMIa I 6rwlain I �{yy;', 1 i�w••'§�y yVV�1��"y.O�� 1— — a 11 LOS. Mal. I[R I'AKWIi1 / Y' :�: :•::::;:;: IjP.A/• :A' [ C �:::::: v / 1 PAH9[Ni , IAKKMI MRCS l 1. 1 ,®.•I •yQyhPy� =� 56, , 31'f KI. f 11.r 1 15r •�/1 :1'4''''''''''' ..:•).: ,1nS o��\i Shh ..— - ,IPa I xi • O0 y .}O ��/ 6 1 �6- /�f ':;:;:f:;: 1, LOT g ! A(R ua �. :% .c:::..+• c c c 11;1111 f ? . a9..RY DARTMOUTH STREET• •::.: RETAIL 1 .- „q "': :: ::'::� 11.:;•,:.,:::•:;,:::::::::::::::::::::...,: ; S, :,. ;. E O O IMPROVEMENT SECTION >S> : '.� "000 Sri ? "► (1 .q O -►.:;::. d ': .. 1s'mtt.RDr :::r., i0'YMis� us.roe yaw.0A ,...1111:... ii' I .IDl11.y ::::5lw:�a,E::::::::::tr1 :: 5' 1 •' r ::'Ka9PWi: 1,a J a a a 'i'�i'�0 i::a ii`iii`iiii'S5''''''''"''''''""- is is'CRASS tw. , .:....:........................:.: 1 —11::::::::::::::::..:::.:.:11_ `�` O .•:111:(7•:::.•.'.1•: \\ w ... - ':.......:..:....::.:....... .:...:...7..:.:::.e........,:ii:i.::::,::. ® NSR 10(600 !AKIN AoL.1 I cos. , , / ♦ C ,f �'yy - _- r YAKS rAHWN1I rAHK1G / 1' ........ - .r w✓ •:•::'1�::::v:�::•: :i::•:: C,A•G Sr t'f If f SR�• `` 0-11.1 1 I 1' � i •703 r C r 1 i r -�'i I 1•1 •...YN._. .. ss•aASa9/ 7` n � ) 1 , \ 1 1 1 1 1 l l l l l C 1 HERMOSO WAY • O IMPROVEMENT SECTION GRAPHIC SCALE 9771 PacTRUSr TIGARD RETAIL CENTER REVISED DETAILED pc-11.0 August 5,2030 Tigard,Oregon DEVELOPMENT PLAN • • 0 • • , COJMJV%UNITY RECEIVED PLANNING NIEWSPAPERS OCT 2 0 2010 6605 SE Lake Road,Portland,OR 97222 PO Box 22109 Portland OR 97269-2109 CITY OF TIGARD Phone:503-684-0360 Fax:503-620-3433 E-mail: legals@commnewspapers.com • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 1 I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, The following will be considered by the depose and say that I am the Accounting Tigard Planning Commission on Monday Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, u November 1.2010 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall,• Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of 14 i : . .. Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and general circulation, published at Beaverton, written testimony is invited. in the aforesaid county and state, as defined The public hearing on this matter will be' by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that TIGARD conducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code and the rules of procedure City of Tigard adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or.the rules Public Hearing/PDR2010-00001 , of procedure set forth in Chapter 18.390. Testimony may be TT11496 submitted in writing prior to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an issue in person or by A copy of which is hereto annexed, was letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing accompanied published in the entire issue of said by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker for ; an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the newspaper Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure to 1 specify the criterion from the Community.Developnient Code or week in the following issue: Comprehensive Plan which a comment is directed precludes October 14, 2010 an appeal based on that criterion. A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable C�/�',(,� I criteria are available for inspection at no cost. A copy of the ■ staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manag r) least•seven(7)days prior to the hearing,and copies for all items can also be provided at a•reasonable cost. Subscribed and sworn to before me this Further information maybe obtained from the Planning Division October 14, 2010. i(staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard,Oregon 97223,by calling 503-718=2434,or by email to £w64i g azYP @tigard-or.gov.NOTARY PUBLIC FOR y"" PUBLIC HEARING ITEM:. . PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(PDR)2010-00001 My commission expires , , -TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS- Acct#10093001 REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to;the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development(PDR2008 Attn: Patty Lunsford 00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the City of Tigard Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 13125 SW Hall Blvd 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a-proposed 137,900 Tigard, OR 97223 square foot"big box" Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1.& 2). Size: 2x 16.25" The proposed modifications would change the design details and Amount Due: $271.38* color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details *Please remit to address above. and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final,Order No. 2009-02 PC. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street,west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. Washington County Tax'Assessor's . Map(WCTM)1 S 136CD,Tax Lot 04200,WCTM 2S 101 BA,Tax Lot 00101,and WCTM 2S 101AB Tax Lot 01400. ZONE: C-G (PD) General Commercial District with Planned Development ' Overlay. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences, which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of 'uses, including but_not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, arc permitted conditionally. (PD). The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City;'2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources,aesthetic appeal,and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the,rules of the Tigard Community Development Code;.3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents,use of open space, innovative transportation ,facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the.characteristics of existing neighborhoods through'appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities.(trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure(site design and analysis,presentation of alternatives, conceptual review,then detailed review)that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5)To consider an.amount of development on a site,within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6)To provide a means to better relate;the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390,•18.520, 18.620, 18.755,and 18.780. �I ^"-yj;C9'�_w + } VICINITY MAP I_ S I. f moo , / A f�/ / TgMO CEMER YWWICAl1ONS RETALL ,I - / / � --A, . ! j K,,,,,--- ' SISim"II _ ®' l').' • -i mss' .?Rr,,,�, „HMS Y• ! �o• La b '�� , Q i V i I y.4 iI '�� L V ■■ice`■/ .at .,. ... ., , lic____,.., 1 L 1 1 1:4-4 valus Iltzt M Publish 10/14/2010. • TT11496 iuuioJ/q and ui papuop ands pv • O • uo6aio `pu>eI}.god pnuud 116T • • • enrf u:ilpii°Ig • 11 P • • , COMMUNITY . NEWSPAPERS TatuoJ.uL aiOLU 100 6605 SE Lake Road,Portland,OR 97222 PO Box 22109 Portland OR 97269-2109 ;Red 'tor, to paLp) ors : sop Phone:503-684-0360 Fax:503-620-3433 E-mail: legals @commnewspapers.com Z6 `LalOH uo4[LH :aia.q j 'ppo `�C�ps.int�,l:uagM AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS `6u[uUL[d uoq.e1.10d$u • I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Accounting (ped .ieuol6ai 6Ul lnl Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of general circulation, published at Beaverton, in the aforesaid county and state, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that City of Tigard Public Hearing/PDR2010-00001 • TT11496 A copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 1 week in the following issue: October 14, 2010 `-V 17C (4 ,• Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manager) • Subscribed and sworn to before me this October 14, 2010. o OFFICIAL SEAL k'.,c LW o , ROBIN A BURGESS "'_ °,F, NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OR N �'°`4' COMMISSION NO.437285 My commission expires MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16,2013 Acct#10093001 • Attn: Patty Lunsford . City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd -... . .... . ... ... . . .. - . Tigard, OR 97223 Size: 2x16.25" Amount Due: $271.38* Please remit to address above. • • n AFFIDAVIT OF MAILINGna .13411 I: t N3 Eal I, Patricia L. Lunsford,being first dulysworn/affirm,on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Assistant for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Cluck Appmpun•Box(s)Below} © NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR PDR2010-00001/TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS (File No/Name Reference) ❑ AMENDED NOTICE HEARING BODY: HEARING DATE: ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer El Tigard l City Council (11/1/2010) Tigard A copy of the said notice being hereto attached,marked Exhibit"A",and by reference made a part hereof,was mailed to each named person(s) at the add _._ shown on the attached list(s),marked Exhibit "B", and by reference made a part hereof, on October 12,2010,and de posited - •••ted States Mail on October 12,2010,postage prepaid. / f 6//.4 �iP . /J (Person that P .. otice) > / STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ss. City of Tigard Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ( � day of O ,2010. OFFICIAL SEAL tV1 J/440) SHIRLEY L TREAT NOTARY P LIC OF O GON / PUBLIC•OREGON O ' COMMISSION NO.416771 My Commission Expires: �d� ( MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 25,2011 • EXHIBIT A NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE,LIENHOLDER,VENDOR OR SELR: THE TIGARD DEVFT.OPM NT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER TIGARD PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY NOVEMBER 1,2010 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.: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 FILE TITLE: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS APPLICANT/ Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. OWNER: Attn: Matthew Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy., Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008 00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot "big box" Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 & 2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street, west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map (WCTM) 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200, WCTM 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101, and WCTM 2S101AB Tax Lot 01400. ZONE: C-G (PD) General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences, which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. (PD). The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees,water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755 and 18.780. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MAI.1'ER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ••. t.kit• •••••Ii• \ :- I I I ••• " I •••••) ••• ONLA : I ; : I : . I I ' • I"44."-4,1 i• H i to. : : Ili . ."1 • :•.; ; i • : • 11 I ..1• it 11. . . FT Y Nit,A I t4f- Nn! •N..... • • • ,. LA I. ".• • • . . . . . "vz "-; I • • • •••• r'4" •• •••• t•••• • 411. PDR2010-0000.0 Pacific Realty Associates TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS Attn: N Piven 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy. #300 EXHIBIT Portland, OR 97224 Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. Attn: Matthew Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy., Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 • 411) 1S136DCO2504 2S101AB02700 AMERICAN INDUSTRIES INC EAGLE HARDWARE&GARDEN,INC 1750 NW FRONT AVE STE#106 ATTN:TAX DEPT(TA3) PORTLAND,OR 97209 PO BOX 1111 NORTH WILKESBORO,NC 28656 2S101AB01100 101AB02707 BAUER,BARBARA G EA HARD TARE&GARDEN,INC 12335 SW 72ND AVE ATTN: •EPT(TA3) TIGARD,OR 97223 PO :DX 11 +•RTH WILKESBORO,NC 28656 2S101AB01604 2S101BD00104 BEVELAND LLC EAST SIDE VAN AND STORAGE 7307 SW BEVELAND ST STE 200 INC TIGARD,OR 97223 4836 SE POWELL PORTLAND,OR 97206 2S101AB01800 2S101AB01200 BOEHM,GENE G BEATRICE G FRANK,BRIAN L& 7380 SW HERMOSA WAY KRAFVE,KENT B TIGARD,OR 97223 7275 SW HERMOSO WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB01606 2S101AB00100 CLARKE,THOMAS C&SUSAN L FRY,DOUGLAS 12439 SW 22ND AVE 23077 SW NEWLAND RD LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 2S101AB01403 2S101AB01602 COLWELL,GREGGORY W GIBSON FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 7435 SW HERMOSO WAY BY GIBSON,CORNELIA/KLAUS PETER TRS TIGARD,OR 97223 10904 SW PARKWOOD CT WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 1S136DC04600 1S136CD02000 COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY, INC GIRAFFE PROPERTIES LLC 450 S ORANGE AVE,STE 900 BY TOYS"R"US ORLANDO,FL 32801 ONE GEOFFREY WAY WAYNE,NJ 07470 1S136CD02200 2S101BD00103 COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION H G M CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT 111 BY NORRIS BEGGS&SIMPSON 999 LAKE DR ATTN:BLAKE HERING ISSAQUAH,WA 98027 121 SW MORRISON#200 PORTLAND,OR 97204 101BB01201 2S101AB01603 Cs=-TCO •LESALE CORPORATION HARLAN,BRIAN&MAI PRO'. Y TAX DEPT 111 7270 SW HERMOSO WAY 99• AK •R TIGARD,OR 97223 SAQUAH, A 98027 2 1BA00200 2S101AB01502 COS 0 LESALE CORPORATION HERMOSO LLC PROP Y TAX DEPT 111 PO BOX 1876 99 AKE D LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 AQUAH, A 98027 I 2S101AB01501 ' 101AB014•3 LIONEL LLC PA IC ''ALTY ASSOCIATES 7555 SW HERMOSO WAY STE 010 ATTN: • -IVEN TIGARD,OR 97223 153 S QUOIA PKWY#300 RTLAN D, Q R 97224 2S101AB01607 136CD04201 LUBY BUILDING LLC P'. FIC R , TY ASSOCIATES 7540 SW HERMOSO WAY ATT . k 'IVEN TIGARD,OR 97223 153 S EQUOIA PKWY#300 •RTLAND,OR 97224 1S136DCO2503 2S101BD00100 LURIA,MARK T AND PNWP LLC#2 WHEELES,DOYLE E PO BOX 2206 BY PETSMART INC/PROP MGMT BEAVERTON,OR 97075 19601 N 27TH AVE 4TH FL PHOENIX,AZ 85027 2S101AB01402 2S101AB01700 LYMAN,KYLE M ROTH,LINDA A 7395 SW HERMOSO WAY 7420 SW HERMOSO WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S101AB01401 2S101AB01605 LYMAN,KYLE M ROVIG,CAROLE A 7355 SW HERMOSO WAY 7460 SW HERMOSO WAY PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB01601 2S101AB01500 LYMAN,KYLE M SJP LLC PO BOX 231026 7615 SW BEVELAND RD TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB00101 2S101AB01600 MARTIN,GORDON R SPAAN,HARLOW T& 8565 SW BARBUR BLVD SORG,N JEFFREY& PORTLAND,OR 97219 MEYERS,CONI 7405 SW BEVELAND RD TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB02703 2S101BD00200 MCCAFFERY,HUGH R&NANCY J TRS TIGARD DISTRIBUTION 7450 SW BEVELAND ST STE 100 CENTER,LLC,THE TIGARD,OR 97223 4800 SW MACADAM,STE 120 PORTLAND,OR 97201 2S101AB01300 2S101BA00300 MM SHINMEN LLC TIGARD TRIANGLE DEVELOPMENT LLC 24600 SW MOUNTAIN RD 12265 SW 72ND AVE WEST LINN,OR 97068 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BA00101 01BA0040, PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES TIG; -s NGLE DEVELOPMENT LLC ATTN:N PIVEN 1226 .1• 2ND AVE 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300 T •RD,O' •7223 PORTLAND,OR 97224 O N 101BA0040 2S101AB01404 TIG NGLE DEVELOPMENT LLC VONRENCHLER, MARVIN J& 122 ND AVE MARY E ARD,OR 97223 7475 SW HERMOSO WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 101BDO0 2 2S101BB01400 TIG D, Y OF WALTON CWOR PARK BC 8 LLC 1312 HALL BLVD BY CTMT-WALTON RE TAX ARD, 97223 4678 WORLD PARKWAY OR ST LOUIS,MO 63134 2S101AC01900 2S101AB01608 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL WESTERN TIGARD HOLDINGS, LLC DISTRICT#23J 20019 SW ATEN RD 6960 SW SANDBURG ST BEAVERTON,OR 97007 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC04200 2S101AB01900 TLB LLC WHITETHORN,LLC PO BOX 25716 12465 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97298 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 136DC043 1S136CD04300 TL WINCO FOOD,LLC PO 5716 PO BOX 5756 RTLA ,OR 97298 BOISE,ID 83705 136DC044R2 -136DC04500 TL. L WI .• FO•l,LLC PO '• 25716 PO B• 6 -•RTLA •U,OR 97298 7. E,ID 8,705 2S101BA00100 TRI-COUNTY CENTER TRUST MARTIN,GORDON R TR BY ADAMS&STEWART 8565 SW BARBUR BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 2S101BA00401 TRI-COUNTY CENTER TRUST BY ADAMS&STEWART 8565 SW BARBUR BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 2S101AB01609 TRIANGLE PROPERTIES 7505 SW BEVELAND RD TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB02704 TRIANGLE PROPERTIES OF TIGARD LL 7410 SW BEVELAND RD TIGARD,OR 97223 1.11 Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Susan Beilke 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci Dayle D. & Evelyn 0. Beach 11285 SW 78th Avenue 11530 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Todd Harding and Blake Hering Jr. Norris Beggs & Simpson 121 SW Morrison, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97204 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 28-Sep-09 Pacific Realty Associates i PDR2008-00001 Attn: N. Piven &Matt Oyen,PE TIGARD RETAIL CENTER 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy., #300 Portland, OR 97224 "NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION" Brian Dickerson PacLand The two people below requested on 5/11/10 to be on 6400 SE Lake Road,Suite 300 this mailing list for any future revised plans for this file. Portland, OR 97222 Lilly is an attorney and Tom is his assistant. Kevin W. Luby Tomas C. Holmes 7540 SW Hermoso Way Office of Michael J.Lilly Tigard, OR 97223 4800 SW Griffith Drive, Suite 325 Beaverton, OR 97005 Mark Butorac Michael J. Lilly Kittelson &Associates 4800 SW Griffith Drive, Suite 325 610 SW Alder Street, Suite 700 Beaverton, OR 97005 Portland, OR 97205 Matt Muldoon The person below requested on 6/2/10 to be on this Oregon Public Utility Commission mailing list for any future revised plans for this file. Utility Program 550 Capitol Street NE, Suite 215 Salem, OR 97301-2551 ODOT Region 1 Planning Don Forest Development Review Fred Meyer Stores, Inc. Attn: Marah Danielson 3800 SE 22nd 123 NW Flanders Street Portland, OR 97202 Portland, OR 97209 The person below requested on 6/16/10 to be on this mailing list for any future revised plans for this file. Chris Girard, President& CEO Plaid Pantries, Inc. 10025 SW Allen Blvd. Beaverton, OR 97005 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, HOLDER,VENDOR OR SEIR: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, q IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER 11,1 e 'TIGARD PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY NOVEMBER 1,2010 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.: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 FILE TITLE: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS APPLICANT/ Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. OWNER: Attn: Matthew Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy., Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008 00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot "big box" Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 & 2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street,west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map (WCTM) 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200, WCTM 2S101BA,Tax Lot 00101, and WCTM 2S101AB Tax Lot 01400. ZONE: C-G (PD) General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences, which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations,are permitted conditionally. (PD). The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees,water resources,ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community.Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755 and 18.780. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MAI II ER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH I IRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRAN FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAG INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 2438 (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 PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE OR DOCUMENTS LESS THAN 7 DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE, THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY MAY ALLOW A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING, SUBJECT TO ORS 215.428 OR 227.178. 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 AFIER 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 PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE BASED UPON THE CRITERIA LISTED OR OTHER CRITERIA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH THE PERSON BELIEVES TO APPLY TO THE DECISION. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. 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 (25C) 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 (25G) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER GARY PAGENSTECHER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER AT (503) 718-2434, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD,TIGARD, OREGON 97223, OR BY E-MAIL TO GARYP @TIGARD-OR.GOV. �� r� s '•" \J • -.:--' VICINITY MAP Aa main A /pA PDR2010 00001•Nib 1 ~` ! \;• -.-_.� &',� a ar _ v� .• ,}-..�;;,;'s, re, TIGARD RETAIL CENTER 1 •"' / MODIFICATIONS y r�r a W �f i II Subject Site \,..\ \ I : 2 six ,, L . , Air �`�7 .!f f le: 111 l J1 y t w - , • - ti t,' •� . ...??,i -'. ^_� 1 �7-� '_`c, :Y. it •� \', f�'� ici ' ..... 'ALL J •ij� t- mo' J 1 .: - -�-,'.i .,� .. r;;,' •. , All 4,_ t I --7–. (1-'::::\ ',„ ' - -MAS*2441 ayl,11 ma* ill ' /+ � ;4 ^�,• 5 —IN , Wonnolba on ltpf= mgeneral location ' mya.eawaetwuntreranlerge.eto�..a•\\\\ • �� •t•. .�� 6anlns qW�m. \1 ' o i1.) i t�r II �r b.:a•a t°.4R+.t u_t.yl r �, al ` �`• vae� >N a;vi:a rN Cn:u.-rtav 4 . ''---,/,s,„„, i ' .:_. \:\ , , . dip!: ri, :. ., :.1 iii 'tirg:::,':,,,,.."‘A''... ..,'-ii,14i,t,',.':',,:,,,':,:::,,,:' 71/ T_ Feet M NIV N T N 101:111111. r r i d�c t�e 0 1000 ._ �yv��' I `ctI 1I 11 ' 11 fig I� • AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF A LAND USE PROPOSAL TIGARD IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED ON THE SITE. In the Matter of the Proposed Land Use Applications for: Land Use File Nos.: PDR2010-00001 Land Use File Name: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS I, Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner for the City of Tigard, do affirm that I posted notice of the land use proposal affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s), currently l �7 y.L W registered) .`� ' t �►-,c` �J�n?l�z�- J and did personally post notice of the proposed land use application(s) by means of weatherproof posting in the general vicinity of the affected territory, a copy of said notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the 6 day of V 7 . , 2010. Signature of Person Jep r Posting h:\login\party\masters\affidavit of posting for applicant to post public hearing.doc NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN6 The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission on Monday November 1, 2010 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with Chapter 18.390 of the Tigard Municipal Code, and the rules of procedures adopted by the Planning Commission. Testimony may be submitted in writing prior to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker an oppor ity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue and failure to specify the criterion arm the Community Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223 by calling 503-718-2434, or by e-mail to garyp @tigard-or.gov. A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost. A copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 - TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS - • REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008 00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot "big box" Target retail building (Retail 3) and two additional '12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 & 2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final Order No. 2009-02 PC. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street, west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map (WCTM) 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200, WCTM 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00101, and WCTM 2S101AB Tax Lot 01400. ZONE: C-G (PD) General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences, which are located on the same site as'a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. (PD). The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architect accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, wMle respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.755, and 18.780. • lig : n i • TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS G 60 DATE: October 14,2008 `` TO: PER ATTACHED O � 1 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division 0 0 STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner (x2434) •�I Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 624-3680% m.•.t?LAO 0. ,,: d-or..ov PLANNED DEVELOPMENT t : N , �00 0.. - TIGARD RE :. r ., - 1 -. t#C° REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Developmen \ ap- t e for ent - of a Planned Development concept plan and detailed development plan(PDR2008-00001) for dev ‘\. \ ent o'. • ..16-1 ant .`.., with a proposed 137,900 square foot Target retail building and two additional 12,000 square fo \ + b . ., •• In .. ;,.. , th be surface parking, landscaping, lighting, access and utility infrastructure improvements. The Co nd I 14.e. Plan 1 .e re • separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at successive hearin s C• \. - •.erty i ted south of SW Dartmouth Street,west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. Washin oun a sses • .p 1S136CD,Tax Lot 04200,WCTM 2S101BA,Tax Lot 00101, and WCTM 2S101AB Tax Lot 01 0 -G 1 , t-ner o ercial District with Planned Development Overlay. The C-G zoning district is designed to acco ate a ge o' t. ,offi civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming,residenti are o s •y re es which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but no d to ul ente k A -nt, a tive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports,medical centers,major ev tert�,an. . e s do are permitted conditionally. (PD). The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: rovi a ans o \.‘.pe ' •• -.•pment that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible st. w side •tiga . he potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas o •� spa he ema: . a ding designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources,aesthetic ap ,a d oth es of a t hat • 'trite to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Commu elo od To ac '-v:�. que neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space . ativ orta �ciliti: ,, , .ch will retain their character and city benefits,while respecting the characteristics of existing neigh rhaods t ap ria bu : and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape f : and ties , wat 'Nources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presenta r.. • f alte ti s,co 1 re ' en detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To( p •er a t of de opme a site,within the limits of density requirements,which will balance the interests of the owner, de A , ne. , and the City; . L To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through •a .. abl d ' ovative buil.' ' . d public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: II L. L evelopment Cod:• .pters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 8.795 8.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: OCTOBER 28.2008. 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 or email. Written comments attached: — Name&Number of Person Commenting. . . ITY OF TIGARD REQUEST F COMMENTS NOTIFICN LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITYELOPMENT APPLICATIONS /40 t FILE NOS.: - PR20t 0 - 0e6)o( FILE NAME: /[6411-D (2E7fL CL`WTk& CITY OFFICES 1if _C.D.ADMINISTRATION/Ron Bunch,CD Director X DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/Gus Duenas,Development Engineer _PUBLIC WORKS/Brian Rager,Assistant PW Director _C.D.ADMINISTRATION/Susan Hartnett,Asst.CD Director _DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/Todd Prager,Assoc.Planner/Arborist _PUBLIC WORKS/Steve Martin,Parks Manager _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder _BUILDING DIVISION/Mark Vandomelen,Building Official _PUBLIC WORKS/Ted Kyle,City Engineer . _DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/Planning-Engineering Techs. _POLICE DEPARTMENT/Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer HEARINGS OFFICER(+2 sets) _LONG RANGE PLANNING/Christine Darnell,Code Compliance Specialist(DCA) PLANNING COMMISSION(+12 sets) X FILE/REFERENCE(+2 sets) SPECIAL DISTRICTS _ TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.*_ TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE• _ TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* _ CLEAN WATER SERVICES Planning Manager North Division Administrative Office Development Services Department 15707 SW Walker Road John K.Dalby,Deputy Fire Marshall 1850 SW 170th Avenue David Schweitzer/SWM Program Beaverton,OR 97006 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton,OR 97006 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway Beaverton,OR 97005-1152 Hillsboro,OR 97123 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS • CITY OF BEAVERTON * _ CITY OF TUALATIN * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS _ Planning Manager Planning Manager Devin Simmons,Habitat Biologist Melinda Wood(WLUN Form Required) _ Steven Sparks,Dev.Svcs.Manager 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue North Willamette Watershed District 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road Salem,OR 97301-1279 Beaverton,OR 97076 Portland,OR 97231 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE _ CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 17160 SW Upper Boones Fry.Rd. _ Joanna Mensher, ;.Rsource Center(ZCA) _US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97224 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. Kathryn Harris(Maps scws Letter Only) _ O.Gerald Uba,Ph.D.,(CPNOCATZON) Mara Ulloa(Comp.Plan Amendments 8 Measure 37) Routing CENWP-OP-G • _CITY OF KING CITY* 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946 City Manager Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 15300 SW 116th Avenue King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY _ OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY(Powedines in Area) _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION(Monopole Towers) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,Planning 155 N.First Avenue CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * Routing TTRC–Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 _Naomi Vogel-Beattie(General Apps Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _Planning Division(ZCA)MS 14 _ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 * _Brent Curtis(CPA) _CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _Development Review Coordinator _Doria Mateja RCA)MS14 Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section(vacations) _Sr.Cartographer(CPA2CA)MS to 1900 SW 4th Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,surveyor(ZCA)MS in Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 OR.PARKS&REC.DEPT. _WA.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A• _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION STATE HISTORIC Dave Austin(wcccA)',911"(Monooa.Towers) Chad Gordon,Assistant District Manager (Notify if ODOT R/R-Hwy.Crossing is Only Access to Land) PRESERVATION OFFICE PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road Dave Lanning,Sr.Crossing Safety Specialist (Notify if Property Has HD Overlay) Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221 555-13th Street,NE,Suite 3 725 Sumner Street NE,Suite C Salem,OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Bruce Carswell, President&General Manager 200 Hawthorne Avenue SE,Suite C320 Salem,OR 97301-5294 _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations Only) Gerald Backhaus(See Mao forams Contact) (If Project is Within'/.Mile of a Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 _PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC —NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _VERIZON _QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Mike Hieb Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. John Cousineau,OSP Network Lynn Smith,Eng.ROW Mgr. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue 4155 SW Cedar Hills Blvd. 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97005 Portland,OR 97219 _TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC. Teri Brady,Administrative Offices Jennifer Garland,Demographics Alex Silantiev (smiaprww.conga) Brian Every(AOOSe.o1HawN.or 99W) 6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg. 12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Beaverton,OR 97008 Tigard,OR 97223-4203 * INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h:\patty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED: 8-Mar-10) (Also update:i:\curpin\setup\labels\annexations\annexation_utilities and franchises.doc,mailing labels&auto text when updating this document) • • MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner FROM: Gus Duenas Engineer RE: Engineering Comments —PDR2010-00001 Tigard Retail Center DATE: August 23, 2010 The applicant has submitted a land use application to make minor modifications to the Tigard Retail Center project previously approved under PDR2008-0001.. The changes proposed are to revise the existing Target-specific structure to provide building elevations and main entry that can accommodate a wider range of users. Because the proposed action does not alter or affect any of the public improvements approved under the previous Planning Commission order (PC Order No. 2009-02), no additional public improvements are required with this land use application. is\eng\gus\development review\land use comments\pdr\engineering review comments-pdr2010-00001 tigard retail center.doc PNIN & ScRet4Ry /4ATERIALS SiTE DATA BUILDING DATA Ml gaff I 0 IW y% \'\ 1 pAgp LAMA KM i ii:0°0°DD At f KM L01 11 SOe Kf M14 3 IJ],900 SIf // 1�'E [ `T M142101 t.5P Kf /C `\`\ O� 1 M14 J 11101 J lilt Kf MU BALING AKA 16+,900 Yf 1 xRNOw Ar Y aos K: �` \ C1� Tote 1016 AL: PROVOY01RArrN:sIPW pp / �, \1` O 67'55 ZONE (MIXED PARKING DATA �� A:A.,"H-„ I ©IoBJEwAL coMMERCIAL) - \\�.,_ .. .\; ACCESS us[u[Nr R[an7m ■ 1 EMPLOYINENT) KM 1 (1x990 of MOM AMA) �\ .;:.. I.:`;,,,,,,,,,,;,, .,": \__� ' NOTES SWARD s,07. u SNITS I.DRAINS BASED a SUNK BY YaAY AID Cca j STALLS I$1,0115 ii:l:::: _ ' \\ i tI SPOSI,o,INC DMID APNL It 7001 IMAM 4KR9AC[Axp 10'H01 wA. '::•:l:• ::.: ±',:.\:: PORNIYL NNM © ALIXSSBIf SIUlS J SINIS /::`` , ��'�\ ! nCaff lOGBW ` AAY N.70011 10,55 Y STALLS 1�ql x` /� PARIA4 RAm 561/1,OL Y II40 ff YAN 10,55) SI I :O:•1•:}>}�...... Y1R04G\..\ Y -_�4 Y-�as•�i 4 LLL�.. (I7,000 YS BMOC AREA)•IA A .:': . :•:3990.110_SA •f. t..•i.Y-�•4.ta-�'4-4' -4 Q M14 1 / [ �``1 , I -_ PARING PAIA mrz5 SIAN:ALI 515515 5e SIUn nl�F'•6 S _ I.All CALSONS F BASED W iD1U SSaS 515515 3 STULS /II:IIIII:::,!".II...1 67 Y:I I I i 4 r I�CC1Yft�irli1 O fISS SOJAM NpIAfA a ACC[SSBI[Si5515 1 515515'��,: 10155 e1 515515 ':':�:': I0q�0)AthC `;.::.:i::':(::...::i::i.:.Pl... w AarSSBIC S,ULS 410 StUlS' • � '`Y. :.[im0$?06-:: � ):..: .. 0 P4LUF RAM Sti i:. I ��:�1��`�.�� PPIR:::..:.::. iQ.::::.:'.::::::::�'�::::::..."{ O VSLO Br CYl[tlIPUS) /1.000 SC ._.� ``....sw� :'::::::i'::.VI`:::::': 1.PARNG SgwV CaT1UN5 7.10.5' KI4 3 (131.900 fff NOM URA) ]//iI LOT 2 �► ef�R+ I ]�'��' 3�'! �o ,�.: O so rAw.t s,uls MOAN sAwARO slug In NAILS '::• ':�'I/I \ r� O STALLS ARE 9'115'L 9'.16•AS i N h 8 NON NM N'AISLE NDM M. Aar550[TSiEST 1]STALLS 1�1 S W.REMIND FARM CYI CORM 515515 14 515515 CCC CCC ;:'.i OtU 561 STALLS F b�qI-� SAC O xaao Sr Y4LLA1 vAlttrc RAm :i:;:;:;:•/l• W N w JC\ �.„ 1 R 0 ~ .t �, \ R, RIArM,re. TW 67 MR 1,000 Sr(PARING ZaTE B) PARING RAm 407/1.000 Sr LLl ]]S SSS ,1 i] D]]] "'" ' O .L A.LP 10 501 a M0.0RD PARING TOUT STE 691 5IN[S 471/+,000 Si RAM / '::6 Q- � Id ' N IA( I�', STALLS VAT COMPLY NM 0( / / ,. rNiLAnp :,. •PCRRR 0 �" Q • 91[[Plx / 51uCYwi TOP MiKI STALLS • ti/ [[AR I CCC!�t I '. .:I cc •ccc �:::. : � s'`.*.a.�s,L'i.U� iz,, ._:, 'S r ©•- ®c\ 7,m LEGEND 'y+:i' �'ayii : � 5e. :am n �(]i\ ]]�]]. ..::. Y�•glfl,•'4�jiirro,,.�', i.i • �iaaR[1[CU�xBpa GUTTER Il T ::'/ I,F es.∎ I C C CP• I"II!! C C Ci. CCC �� ,\ �..�..�ROP[R,Y ZINC ... �} J� —LCMANOS nK / :�/:/0C'9N" !`� y 8 ®®•►--_1 ': ®� F u 9't'P. 9'119. I '''''•.', ��. _ pe K14 J PARING STALLS MR RON■/ • l:.}P1r 91EY tiE<: r' ]]]] .,]]] :;jp:I j-; ■�[�i 11]]]] ]] ]]]]11 D—BIT �� 5; NADER a 001107 PAINING STAID KR RCN ... :7 ].1. ...... ::.:.: 1 CONCRETE / _� 1 NNNNN� NNNNN� - ,.._..-._....-4.". _.�,. ::i.:.i:i::asis.: � '—! .SO[wMN TMRKIN' ,. , ill �';:.:• -N. .. _. ��A W[C110NK PAMY[NI YARWa9 .: .( -C C C C CCC�i [ �D BCrOE •'a 5'K051PoY MOAN STALL / ANVI>i ii',::� _,70--. ,:..PAN e Aarssa!STALL . ]:( Ic ]ul \• \\;• Ef(14Au*• SCM[N wNl Y om''•. arzNiCN Ca CYI MGM•I� Y\YY\YY\Y� \�= .: !- t l. Srz ISNING !# a��\��\\�� \\y mu- 's`°Ne I , II 9 C�,. ��^\:♦,♦��!� ,♦.\ - /GAME• a •w IOW INN ASPN.AIIC CMCKIE PAHYENT I f LANOSGK 9 IP * • S - w[MID MOIR /IJ1 26'1 © ti IYYDS irr. I P R At, y \-• MAIN ENIRr/ELIi LOT `_ •:•I :'`�•.•.• I J] - 0., ]]]1Ali \ I % ; © BM PEDESTRIAN KAlAS NLL ACCESS 1illlf[ Amat ::. ::.,J:.,.5.1 •� L :.. „� ® C01CMR Br nR[MIKCI I.��''^^ KNI ��/eai:•:• <::r C C C I.` !1 0i ^lilt C C :;::. .-'�.■ pC� AC.10t SIN p' I' • ET RETAIL 7 •:"•:.: ASPHALT PAM•TO Sr KR TALE AM . I.AVQ •7.-.45..y,::.. •'• t ~ I~ IA.aSCAK Z-I ®~ :' .•___K t379 O p� I :./I'1:../:•:•:•:•:•..:::::.'. : ® N9•N CMARYR MA 17 Mal YAA I ,,:„..� S '.:>,f —© WAS 119. Y.1. ��_ T7 KIM Y/NI SR Y pw sr wN im55) [A tro :: .v , �d yNl.=�y I _1 PhE•1�.� . f/::t'T• <t-:'- ZONE we, � R - as O .eo: U WEND .:".:::.:.. ':Ic:' :i:.. j- I 9!RON m°OSID b. :w~; IPLRYIRa11E:..:. _II- 9'119. Q® y - Qda aiICRO BIGIA(E AIEA ;: © Y4nc `YT 9rz /y///� : l:.=''- ::"i acfRE9ieaiiS AEii;: •I ]]] - __ wHOCUILa®6MAU I p{` Nc•7 .x :: :>::5 `,... . :4 - - I .StKARIM 1 X15.41Ass �y 1 :::: ��®j�C, , .:'\I i C C I Mat [941K I[N PAV[YEN�• •i•v PAMYEN, PAMNENI VARS KaslRUx PLA:A '.:a:' • ��' 6i f °� L'3 I O f�P7?: a r u: n.Y: / <II! I AMA :;:(.:;:... ..••► ,, IG _ 0 1--`-6• I 1,4_1� " LOT 1 = �' i/ DRUID I c4:>:<>i's. RETAIL 1 �<: ; c C ® ':::: t__' B`awAR, DARTMOUTH STREET .::::::::3::::::::::::::::::::::', T D.DDO sr: a * A? It OO -_I >:''::: I ® O IMPROVEMENT SECTION �4N' : I Ott .i71,:�::::% ' i:. ::� .....: \::::::;:W';::::!:.::::.:, �?:is is is ::ti:i�:i:: 1 i. ` c C c - iL i::::. , %fOP05(D 55•TO MO RON IN i $T:i, Mt :IISIND . f 1''st ... _ F� n' y J7 a :>r>: ♦ y'is ::0:":' ::'..'::... 1PVYis° ImN¢AN YN6,Y IR Y0 ',i}:.:>::�:: .� 3 :EEERUaiRWiE:;:.:iii:,sj% 33ii ( 'i::: ';ii-' •Sff22::::}' ® 1 "<•i:•::•i, ;:K&9WW: i ':,::.44075':'"•QQ] ]]] ]]9 3] ;..:..: i9 5'-7l'f Op Vii::.:::•i:: ::.d1�MM: �"`•. _ .. ......w; ........ ....... .,'::v ! 35'OfA55 1�•�� $ • 1tw vAMLCNI A INC INc t •:�::1 [R [uS A1, __ _ I DA I VARS at, PAMY[NI o• oz,..,. ♦ 7-7Yx •I x 1 i e'f e i I. Y1 i R Y Y. 1• L a nlzluc m K .06„,,V.",`�� [NHYIXK 'C . Q:� •may••" iiw� PLAY lu — ...16,6! )----- �l 1 1 1 ll�hhhhl�l•1 ) l l l l •�� 3?f ��® HERMOSO WAY O IMPROVEMENT SECTION GRAPHIC SCALE I 1 . i AU G 1 0 2010 PAdtk TIGARD RETAIL CENTER CITY OF 71(�AF�O August 5,2010 llgerd,Oregon PLAN 'NifEN(31I�iEERIN��ELOPMENTAiPL N PC '1.(1 I A .. a i -1?.. .•''..... ..???...,..., .. . . "I.'"'"). • I •:-...•.-.. . . •.!.... .• .' :;:c.'•••'fl:,,,. ' * r x. I f —— XXX• *P.•:: ...;P‘ k4 • ... . .•• : • : • • • • PP• • x - ... i . _ ... • I RETAIL 1 1 RETAIL 2 F.. ....:;• 0.1 Px . . i' . : X' 3 x •P•x P. ......., • • .. •• • *P. x Pi, ... :P X • - :x I •• • • : , ... - •-- •• . - :,i:X l • • X •Xi . . . •.- x• . x ' - X I 1 .: X 'X • • -: X - i * • . -- I I - <3-4,--33.----). ... . . • . . , . . . . ......._.. ... :- , : - • 3 . - r . • i . . . i . ...e,,.../:_i.K..4::,,..7....:::.'„,:+7".'.' ,:;4,..'.;,,...ye.:t:/.1,•47.!: I.„..N.IIII/;:,... II .,::. s . .s.. - • :' • 1/4 / \ . / II! .., s s s . _• . „... . ........ ...... .... . .......—. _ ... Ne • is. . .........,. ...... —. - . .. \ sr • . — ••••• • •• Rf TAR. i . •' ..-. i•-•,:i I !. ...1..N:-' ...: .- ..... . • • . . • • . . . . . . ___,.. „ * _.......... .., i ••-"."• .' .. '.. .•-'•• ' , f ... .::•:::..• •:-. -::::• „. : . . .. ..... . . . . . . ... :. . •..• i •••,,•.k..,4:: .. 1•••• . . ': ..,.1. . ' Kits, • 1 ••*;.\III:L44.4:: ' ••i, :1 01,111;r:17:::::111111i1..5'""lariOlii:::. '''' • • • ' • • ..i... `..... ,.. • .. ..4;•>,1,.. ....* ..•,•.i.:, ' ;.• 111:!:41'•':1:1:,!::::!••%!.ill'i''.' > I ELEVATION ',I' ,,, - . ,, . . maa. ,, . , ., •.- .- 4:p.,*•$."1"?`;.z.;.'"•:•:: I ii „:-•..:... . ..... :. ..„ .:... . . .. ._. ...„.„. ... : : . •• • •- ..• •• • :... . . . . 0.:••:4- . . 41111 .A.Z.,•'!'iv4 , . •••:k- !;•:"."41.111:::E1:1 • . :. •• • •. :.: . .: .••••• . . , I . : •••7 • 1.;:i•.:: s in 1 1144:,A,':;,.4.,44.,4:4;:, .1..I.4::::::.;Ij,kt":1,-',,,..... II:."::::::44tiij.41-1::,:,-,;-- ,',.:;;4:4:j'',-, '''•••• :'-.I.-:,..- ..,:.,,„ 1 . •.: . . . . ... : ........ .. ...., .„, , . . i . .. .,..,.. .„ ...„.. . . .. .. . .. .. [ :::k.:',..4•1k.. . . :44V,14.3gf•:: . V„," Pi. k. :44''•I..:0 •- ...••• •,1 le"• • 1 > •• -• ••• •• ••:::::,:, • 1: i' " . .• ■:,•'. k.• I •,* ',,.. , . • ...... • 1 • 1 '''';'141 • 9..j ' f IM f :17,ff;i4iffif ff f'f 1,1fIliffIfiffiffiffeffff-ff'fif"ff-Ai fl,fli-xv•-•f-,f .f f .—-•• ..,., . . . --:• - • i ••4 ff..4 . ..: ....4, . Alf;'''': fftf..• . f • ,, ,. . .••• • • • : • 44.4;...4-..,1.. • 1 , 1 REAR ELEVATION ,•"•,„,..I.I,"„,,,,,,i < i • • 1 i 1.• a ' . ,,,,,,,'„",,A„,,,,,":,,,,I,,..— ', --, , ,":"•"..".,,,,,,„,,,,,,,-,N,m-,•4,04, ,,,,,„ .. a ) E. ......_ ____....... "- ••••••••••••• -••••••••••.... ... ...... ......... ii........:::::::::::.iii...............7:7---..........._ ....__ •••••• •••••••••...........••••••••••••••........ „„...„............---.............„........... - . ...-- --,--- .... ...................................:. •-•••-•'-'--.-..-••••-••••-••••••••.::::::..._: .• , ....-.:.•-•::::,..,........,....:::.:...-....... ......................... ••••••"""'•• """'• It J' ••••••••??....:';••••iiii.••••<....••••••••.• .......... ..::. '.......-::..' .........••••• • ..•.••••••••••• -••••• ••••••••••••1•, , ,,44444.+4ei,;:14:* 11122,..'.......:',1:•'......;:.1!;11„..h,•....,;......,.„---f----.-t-04•4;;;;;:zi.....,:•••:•-1..:....i•••••.:.:::::...••••;-.i.iaf..,.. .„..;4:::•;,....4i :. . . „„..:... ..... •••=-- - ....4%4.•:... . . . . .... ......... . ........ . „ ... „ . .. ,,,- • 4 - • t- .. - ......i...!••..!:•.1:::::•.::::•....:„.•':-:•:' ...-.:.••-'::•••:...........?....:.-,1:::„::::.....i.............', . .......:••.••;•.........!....1::•..,....f.2...:::::--- -.---'.....!•••...„:„.„.„•••:„--.4-----4•• . . ::::•-•:•••••.::::::•!••••.-•!•••:!.....•::::.•:... ''.'..1", ... „ - • I 1r.:::::;h.... ..•- ••••:•:.-1:1.....4.,:::1:•::••„,... . •.•,----•:•.;.•:-..:-.1.•-•::::IT:::. ; ...-. .:::,::::::::::•-•:,:.:::,:-:.:.:•:,:,:•:::••: .... .......•••••.......1:::.:,....:::::::•:-•:-: -„ '..-.,.......,:..',: ;, :#4, ,., : -• 4'4:4. ., T.;,i ::.1,1•,t.44 - •, • •... ... , . ..,.....-...::::::::..........,!.....,.....:,.... ..::::::::!..; ,...•,t: : • • • 3‘ ..........:::::........::::......1....,....filiglig .. .... 1 i ..,,•• k..,..,.....::::::: :.: . . . • .... -, ; •.7..i ...- ••: F..!......•'...."......::1.-.1.:;:r.:.1........:''.':...... ! i I„.. . .. ... . . .: . H : r.10 :.- :• ''....!...:::::',r.- iii!:':: .4.. ' ',.. fo,., .... •.... '-.....:...:.:::::.......,,..- •-•• ......s:: ...."..;•;. ill. .4 . w___ ,_.: ••••••• ... • • •• ... ..if444.4:44:::::,..4:4.1. li. •. . . 4 :::::..,....., .:::::.,,. ... • . 4 .- ::::::......-.::=.-. .......1:-.: -..,-4. •4 t- • ••••••••••••••••• - , • ,„........424.. = ,.;", •-:..•:: .. .111114.":'#I"? ..,•....,••••:,.. . .. . . ....••• • • ......_...................... • " .........".■•;;;E-..,.,•• ..#,r..4;•.•7.-.4.-::::1•5..:7,..7:•••••:.'----'1": • -'4i* • ? . •%3•*.' k irl'oei•'' 1 "' 16,. ...': •' b. ...1..4. ...LI.:..-- • .- r --,- .. .. ..v, . ... • , ,,,,... ...r.*:.:',.. _. . . . ..•• : •• ..-7—!..:777 ,....._.- _- . _. -......41, ,.........::::,,, !lit.,...-.)., .. ..,:.., .• ., . : .:.• . •.... ..• . : . -• • L • • . . '-:' ..7.:..---:-.:-.;•,• :`..7:77.-'.-- - ••••.' - -:.:.: .- ' ,.:1:r....-4'.;44,tti4/0,* ..'',!-:' - ...,„.:.:.:.;ii,.„::::::•:: ••• •. ._.., .. : •.-••. ....- - ::: .0.7,::: .. . . .. . .... . . . .. .•.. •..• . ,-,44:;;:.„.•::.:..-.... 1:zri?.i5.::':?:i!.:'.:::'.,..f. .':--'' ::• . - '.' " '. ' ' '''' ' -'-- ---- ''.-r4.41::'411kr:ilf:'!e::::::'.-.i'''.7:•:;i:'''::::7::::,-;':'..a-..-'-'--.• -.: ... ....... . . .... ,:...-. .1..-.z.;:.:.-r.;:.::".:-..:•:r.•::-.:-:::...:...:7.!:...":''':::-;:z....:. .;•-101!%!.i.:*::z...:P.:•:::. : -- -•t's.q:::. ..-..., 44. . . ..:........1. '411..?":4,. 'i'''t: ..'.'-. - .--- .:...i...!'": .; -.;;....:.- '.'..-',......-..'-.."......::,"'' ., :,":-•-•;......;,..--4:::-':ir;.;'.'S.J:.-•.:. ...1(...;:....'s:-.:!.:':11!V-.•-:..7......er.•;';':.....:.i:,' .:'-:::, '...;:.",..1..:-:.."-.z:•.;.:.,:''''.....'•:.:::.:;-,.......--..- .-.-.':-'':1::;:;:<;-::!!.i.iv:::..7.:•1.i.:;"17.E:%'%:;?.tr.14 :.!:-';;;;-':'..i:.. ... ''''-.:"'.....--....i.":•:-'''''.;:;•.4:1::''-'^:".'-'''1:.??.':...'''''''-''''..'.7-'7"r':'::::',:"..i.:'-:-.,"?':.C.:4'::•'...%:,';;.-.::,,firbit,;M:51?..4:7;11'...:::14.!h;:'..4::::::...!-.F...:-4.ii:.:!'..;iiitz:1:::',0,... .,',.'n'-:,...-...;,.,,,,,...„ :.;.---;.:ii....jkjw: ,:'`.:; :i.:::.-.:-:-.'. .:s....'7.---:'-...:,-,:....-;:,, ;--7:-....,. .:.:.z....::I.e...:.:•.-..- --.. • •- .--.':''' '''•''''..'''' '• TX.,.. :)1. ' • .,..„. '' - ''7.:. ' '-•-. ',' ,"i:Yr]..'''-. '''''4:.:.:2'.::;:''43v ■..:- .,.A.P;f:'?;:!:%.;-':::-:'-'-,:.''.:.-..:----'......i:'!.'..:t... --:..'''''':--"..",'' J:....::..5.::.'..:7:717.,:5"::: „1: ._. ••• ......:."—...It.3 .-•••. •.• - . •i'.....:i I...,11\ir.:Pl.i•••:••-•n•,..11......i. '•••1 .:.>I icf.--....1,-.1 •:..,,,--.. .::1-1 ••. . • • • • • • • - • 1S136CD04200 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES ATTN:N PIVEN 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300 q/ )//PORTLAND,OR 97224 v A012,AA, 2S101BA00101 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES 76647.4 ATTN:N PIVEN 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300 PORTLAND,OR 97224 2S101AB01400 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES ATTN:N PIVEN 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300 PORTLAND,OR 97224 ':. *****)•••)))))))::::::::::::::::::0:)........)::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::................ 1. : •4", • . „ .••••••• Li. ..• : • • . 0 ... .. • •• . : . : 0 • • i . . . ..:,...: . . 1 • . ... ! . • . • . . • . • • • • ! . • . ....; . . ... •,. . . . •• .4.... , • . . ""0 . • • • . : . •••••• • .. . • • . r.o .... , . .. : . . : • • • .. 1 .. ........ - • . • • 0 :) .. ..)) . : • • :. . . . • . . Z . .. ))). . •. : .. )))). : ..•••• . . . • .. . ).....)) . . . . ........ : . 0 ••.. . ***).. . . . .. .... ..• 0) ....). . •. . • ... . . . .. : ......) ..••• 0 ....... )))). • • . . : . < ....... . : .••• ..•• . : . ...... ----------.......00..0..00.0)„ . ..... 0 .. ...) )11 3AV tri,1399 • • •••••••• • ....... • < . ......1 A.,,Y 1-41.fri 9 I.— . . . . Z. : . <r. • ...1111\r irf I...Z.9 i:::: . . : • z z . >1,r.,1•1-•4 1.S. '••• I••••••••••••••• .. . • • i • • •• A 17k Zs, TU.8 9. • • . . .. rs 9. • . . - 7,:::Ar H1.13.9- • • • • • • . . . : . : • . . : ' : . ..... .. •• .. .. • 3.,6 V' 1416 31 ,..,,r . •• z• .••• . . ....... • . . — . . . ........ . . . ..• • •• .• • • 3.A.V 131:04..:. r..............ZZZ, z1,0.z. • I:••••• •.••• . • • -• • • • " . 3%31' • • • . )-• i 3 MI? i..11f.)4 ,, • 3 Ay ,0.4 . i•.. • . 4/k. 1 : • . >0 ? • • i . ...et • . , .1"." • • .rz, ! . ••••• z. .... ••• • : i• •• !,;1,. . ' .. , . i• ...• . -„,a •"*. • ::—:, f 1 ii • ? = 1 .... . . . • i : : Z7 • "' 10.t 004111 3AV CINZZ •••• •• • •• 7,"1; • : k..., • •..:. - < Z.:1 . 1 I •• k••••• r i i f j• t•--, .3.. 3,, ...... Z. i I • I ::•' i „,. 1 ik 1 : I: I ;:::-...'..,,f--•••••••:., ••••>,r-- , • i I ' . I ; i if I 1 t`*•• r---4,...., f.,..----i ;i"i I ii _......... . , . . ..• 0, • •••••• ./. -1 I, 11, . • .••• .••• • . • I 0,„11 . • . , 1 I 1...4' 11"0...11111101117 I 1 .• . . .. , . . . i 'f•••••11: :i i . I • —1 .......; • '. • :I:. ..., /-1---1 I—...-"a 1............ i„..," I .. . . . ..• • : }. : • •• - 1AV :H...1.Z.t..••. ei•••••-:71 1 i f--.......A4 1111.1 ..1.1 1110 1 • ..• • • . ..• . . • . ' ..• 11 111.1.11114 •111••••••••••11 L. 11 ... • i I . • , .1 101 .• • . . . t '. ***1 1.• • . . . . . ..• . 11111"1";111-1.--.1 I ..—.7., . • . . ... -. •• • • ••• • • 1 . . t--‘,............. ...—• ; 1 , ... .. . .. ..... .•— —...... . i •-‘,.... . . .. .,-. i,,oz:• : . • • .••• ,..... J.,-...),,, i T -6•••,•: i I :: • . : . „:1/4„, ..../ •.",. : • .. • • i ' ..,--......c..,...1/4:::::" I 1 ; . .•••• 1/4: .........1/4, i : . . : .•••• ' *. • .., ',a, • . Z r .....\ .1 . • . :• ..••• . . . . ..•• • zz,z‹,,,e/t ... . ... : • • . .. . .. . ..• • ••••••• . 5•—••• --4......, • i • . . . . . . . . •• . ,• .c.,... . • . . . . . ..• • • „... . . i• . : • . • • •.... , . , • , • • ___ . • • • : ..• , . . i . ,• i ,..„,- ••,..,.• .....- ..•••• ::. • ..• 3.51/ 1.4iV...L........ • •‘ ,6 . .6::• „.„6 , : • ; /,i : 61:6•T•6 6/66• 46.' '.• :, : • •• •• ••:::, .... .••• : : : : . • • . . . . . . . . . .. . ••-i° .. .: ... • .. • . ..• • • . '‘.6, ,L„. i ••••••••••'6 '.7: • 6 i ....• . .. .• .. • . . . . ....1.1YV.....H.1.61.. —444 ... .....'4.\ ... .. .. .. .• . • / .. .• . . • ...."6„.„, , . I 001 0,..,,, 000.* t . .< 1".°11111111.11 • •.?). 0041 ii•ii• . 1 *110 • • ! 4, : . I ■ . ..1.1.11V..1110 51 1..61: 1 :,:11'1...7/ • • :1111001.... . . .1 • '." ' 4 ...""*. r % I 1 , • .....„. . . . , : % • .. . . .. I% • •. . . •V''..... `..." . . I 1 ..... 3.AV ZNZZ : 7. :. • .3„. : I I •: " . ..,• . .. ...•. .. . .. • • . • . ........... .. .. . .. \ k .2 ) • .. I . ••• ••• ..• .. • • • /1 i .... .. .3.1)V..PlUTT3 •• .:•:::.6:• •.• , • 6 .,,,, • -• : , • . • . . . . . . : • • . cip.,14,:r„),„,,t4:"V'T • ; . , -4' . • • .... •., , ....:. ; . ' --.,. ... • . , . . . : . ... . • . ..4r.C.., ••, . . , .... , i 70 . . . :• . • 61‘•••• • . . . . •••• • • • • . , . : t..,`k.:45:5'.. . •••• • jiek • .• 0'...4. I • • • • . ' • : . •' \440 .. .. . . ..' . , W .. .•••• , • •• . • . . . • . • .,ELA,LL B L;6 Apti ...a • : i ......... .....•'................ ................. ......-................................. • • 1S136DCO2504 2S101AB02700 AMERICAN INDUSTRIES INC EAGLE HARDWARE&GARDEN, INC 1750 NW FRONT AVE STE#106 ATTN:TAX DEPT(TA3) PORTLAND,OR 97209 PO BOX 1111 NORTH WILKESBORO,NC 28656 2S101AB01100 101AB02707 BAUER,BARBARA G EA . HARD TARE&GARDEN,INC 12335 SW 72ND AVE ATTN: - DEPT(TA3) TIGARD,OR 97223 POs•X 11 •RTH WILKESBORO,NC 28656 2S101AB01604 2S101BD00104 BEVELAND LLC EAST SIDE VAN AND STORAGE 7307 SW BEVELAND ST STE 200 INC TIGARD,OR 97223 4836 SE POWELL PORTLAND,OR 97206 2S101AB01800 2S101AB01200 BOEHM,GENE G BEATRICE G FRANK,BRIAN L& 7380 SW HERMOSA WAY KRAFVE,KENT B TIGARD,OR 97223 7275 SW HERMOSO WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB01606 2S101AB00100 CLARKE,THOMAS C&SUSAN L FRY,DOUGLAS 12439 SW 22ND AVE 23077 SW NEWLAND RD LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 2S101AB01403 2S101AB01602 COLWELL,GREGGORY W GIBSON FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 7435 SW HERMOSO WAY BY GIBSON,CORNELIA/KLAUS PETER TRS TIGARD,OR 97223 10904 SW PARKWOOD CT WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 1S136DC04600 1S136CD02000 COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY, INC GIRAFFE PROPERTIES LLC 450 S ORANGE AVE,STE 900 BY TOYS"R"US ORLANDO,FL 32801 ONE GEOFFREY WAY WAYNE,NJ 07470 1S136CD02200 2S101BD00103 COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION H G M CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT 111 BY NORRIS BEGGS&SIMPSON 999 LAKE DR ATTN:BLAKE HERING ISSAQUAH,WA 98027 121 SW MORRISON#200 PORTLAND,OR 97204 -..101BB01201 2S101AB01603 C•,TCO •LESALE CORPORATION HARLAN,BRIAN&MAI PRO". ' Y TAX DEPT 111 7270 SW HERMOSO WAY 99• AK •R TIGARD,OR 97223 AQUAH, A 98027 2 1BA00200 2S101AB01502 COS 0 LESALE CORPORATION HERMOSO LLC PROP Y TAX DEPT 111 PO BOX 1876 99 AKE D LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 AQUAH, A 98027 2S101AB01501 '• 101AB014Ia • LIONEL LLC PA IC "ALTY ASSOCIATES 7555 SW HERMOSO WAY STE 010 ATTN: • "IVEN TIGARD,OR 97223 153 . S • QUOIA PKWY#300 RTLAN D, R 97224 2S101AB01607 136CD0420 LUBY BUILDING LLC P FIC R TY ASSOCIATES 7540 SW HERMOSO WAY ATT . IVEN TIGARD,OR 97223 153 S EQUOIA PKWY#300 RTLAND,OR 97224 1S136DCO2503 2S101BD00100 LURIA,MARK T AND PNWP LLC#2 WHEELES,DOYLE E PO BOX 2206 BY PETSMART INC/PROP MGMT BEAVERTON,OR 97075 19601 N 27TH AVE 4TH FL PHOENIX,AZ 85027 2S101AB01402 2S101AB01700 LYMAN,KYLE M ROTH,LINDA A 7395 SW HERMOSO WAY 7420 SW HERMOSO WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S101AB01401 2S101AB01605 LYMAN,KYLE M ROVIG,CAROLE A 7355 SW HERMOSO WAY 7460 SW HERMOSO WAY PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB01601 2S101AB01500 LYMAN,KYLE M SJP LLC PO BOX 231026 7615 SW BEVELAND RD TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB00101 2S101AB01600 MARTIN,GORDON R SPAAN,HARLOW T& 8565 SW BARBUR BLVD SORG,N JEFFREY& PORTLAND,OR 97219 MEYERS,CONI 7405 SW BEVELAND RD TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB02703 2S101BD00200 MCCAFFERY,HUGH R&NANCY J TRS TIGARD DISTRIBUTION 7450 SW BEVELAND ST STE 100 CENTER,LLC,THE TIGARD,OR 97223 4800 SW MACADAM,STE 120 PORTLAND,OR 97201 2S101AB01300 2S101BA00300 MM SHINMEN LLC TIGARD TRIANGLE DEVELOPMENT LLC 24600 SW MOUNTAIN RD 12265 SW 72ND AVE WEST LINN,OR 97068 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BA00101 01BA0040 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES TIG NGLE DEVELOPMENT LLC ATTN:N PIVEN 1226 2ND AVE 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300 T RD,0 7223 PORTLAND,OR 97224 101BA0040 • 2S101AB01404 • TIG•'• ' •NGLE DEVELOPMENT LLC VONRENCHLER,MARVIN J& 12 ND AVE MARY E • ARD,OR 97223 7475 SW HERMOSO WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 101BDO0 2 2S101BB01400 TIG D, Y OF WALTON CWOR PARK BC 8 LLC 1312 HALL BLVD BY CTMT-WALTON RE TAX ARD, 97223 4678 WORLD PARKWAY CIR ST LOUIS,MO 63134 2S101AC01900 2S101AB01608 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL WESTERN TIGARD HOLDINGS,LLC DISTRICT#23J 20019 SW ATEN RD 6960 SW SANDBURG ST •BEAVERTON,OR 97007 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC04200 2S101AB01900 TLB LLC WHITETHORN,LLC PO BOX 25716 12465 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97298 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 136DC04 1S136CD04300 TL WINCO FOOD,LLC PO 5716 PO BOX 5756 RTLA ,OR 97298 BOISE,ID 83705 .136DC044 2 136DC04500 TL= L WI .• FOP d,LLC PO '• 25716 PO B• 6 •RTLA 0,OR 97298 E,ID 8, 05 2S101 BA00100 TRI-COUNTY CENTER TRUST MARTIN,GORDON R TR BY ADAMS&STEWART 8565 SW BARBUR BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 2S101BA00401 TRI-COUNTY CENTER TRUST • BY ADAMS&STEWART 8565 SW BARBUR BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 2S101AB01609 TRIANGLE PROPERTIES 7505 SW BEVELAND RD TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB02704 TRIANGLE PROPERTIES OF TIGARD LL 7410 SW BEVELAND RD TIGARD,OR 97223 • • Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Susan Beilke 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci Dayle D. & Evelyn 0. Beach 11285 SW 78th Avenue 11530 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Todd Harding and Blake Hering Jr. Norris Beggs & Simpson 121 SW Morrison, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97204 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 28-Sep-09 • • • • Patty Lunsford From: Patty Lunsford Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 11:14 AM To: 'Matt Oyen' Subject: RE: Mailing Labels for PDR2010-00001 Hi Matt, Your request for mailing labels is ready to be picked up. The cost is $27.00. I will leave your labels in "will-call" at the planning/engineering counter in the Permit Center. If you have any questions, please feel free to call or e-mail me. Best Regards, Patty Lansford 2.. , e Assistant ✓`' gcrof/Current Tanning 5c,-3.77.°. 43U/patty @tigard-or.gov From: Matt Oyen [mailto:MattO @PacTrust.com] Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 10:23 AM To: Patty Lunsford Subject: Mailing Labels for PDR2010-00001 Patty- Please find attached our mailing labels request for our Minor Modification application. If you have any questions regarding the attached please call me at 503-523-7619. Thanks, Matt 1 s.. • • CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION 111 A 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD Cs . TIGARD, OREGON 97223 i --- PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-718-2748(Attn: Patty/Planning) EMAIL: patty a,tigard-or.gov `I (�,jM REQUEST FOR 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER MAILING LIST Property owner information is valid for 3 months from the date of your request INDICATE ALL PROJECT MAP&TAX LOT NUMBERS (i.e. 1S134AB,Tax Lot 00100) OR THE ADDRESSES FOR ALL PROJECT PARCELS BELOW: (If more than 1 tax lot or if the parcel has no address,you must separately identify each tax lot associated with the project.) 1S1S136CD-04200, 2S101BA-00101, 2S101AB-01400 PLEASE BE AWARE THAT ONLY 1 SET OF LABELS WILL BE PROVIDED AT THIS TIME FOR HOLDING YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. After submitting your land use application to the City, and the project planner has reviewed your application for completeness, you will be notified by means of an incompleteness letter to obtain your 2 final sets of labels. IF YOU HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED BY PLANNING TO OBTAIN YOUR LABELS, PLEASE INDICATE BELOW THAT YOU NEED 2 SETS OF LABELS. Completeness Letter Received Indicating 2 Sets of Envelopes w/Affixed Address Labels Required The 2 final sets of labels need to be placed on envelopes (no self-adhesive envelopes please) with first class letter- rate postage on the envelopes in the form of postage stamps (no metered envelopes and no return address) and resubmitted to the City for the purpose of providing notice to property owners of the proposed land use application and the decision. The 2 sets of envelopes must be kept separate. The person listed below will be called to pick up and pay for the labels when they are ready. NAME OF CONTACT PERSON: Matthew Oyen PHONE:, (503 )_ 603 _ 5492 NAME OF COMPANY: PacTrust FAX: ( )- - EMAIL: matto @pactrust. corn This request may be emailed, mailed, faxed, or hand delivered to the City of Tigard. Please allow a 2-day minimum for processing requests. Upon completion of your request, the contact person listed will be called to pick up their request that will be placed in "Will Call" by the company name (or by the contact person's last name if no company) at the Planning/Engineering Counter at the Permit Center. The cost of processing your request must be paid at the time of pick up, as exact cost can not be pre-determined. PLEASE NOTE: FOR REASONS OF ACCURACY, ONLY ORIGINAL MAILING LABELS PROVIDED BY THE CITY VS. RE-TYPED MAILING LABELS WILL BE ACCEPTED. Cost Description: $11 to generate the mailing list,plus$2 per sheet for printing the list onto labels (20 addresses per sheet). Then,multiply the cost to print one set of labels by the number of sets requested. -EXAMPLE - - COST FOR/T�HIS REQUEST - Q 4 sheets of labels x S2/sheet=S8.00 x 2 sets= $16.00 �J sheet(s)of labels x$2/sheet=S (Q x 4L sets= 0 I sheets of labels x$2/sheet for interested parties x 2 sets= $ 4.00 / sheet(s)of labels x$2/sheet for interested parties= x� sets= 0 GENERATE LIST = $11.00 GENERATE LIST = $11.00 TOTAL = $31.00 TOTAL — • I Iti q. = .. LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION TIGARD 120 DAYS = 12/30/2010 FILE NO.: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2010-00001 FILE TITLE: TIGARD RETAIL CENTER MODIFICATIONS APPLICANT/ Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. OWNER: Attn:Matthew Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy.,Suite 300 Portland,OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicant requests minor modifications to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008 00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot"big box"Target retail building(Retail 3)and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 & 2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with Tigard Retail Center detailed plan approval and Planning Commission Final Order No.2009-02 PC. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street,west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map(WCTM) 1S136CD,Tax Lot 04200,WCTM 2S101BA,Tax Lot 00101,and WCTM 2S101AB Tax Lot 01400. ZONE: C-G (PD) General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences,which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses,including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment,and gasoline stations,are permitted conditionally. (PD). The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources,aesthetic appeal,and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents,use of open space,innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning;4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis,presentation of alternatives,conceptual review,then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site,within the limits of density requirements,which will balance the interests of the owner,developer,neighbors,and the City;and 6)To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520,18.620,18.755,and 18.780. DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I ❑ TYPE II ® TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV COMMENTS WERE SENT: N/A COMMENTS ARE DUE: N/A El HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM ®PLANNING COMMISSION (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: NOVEMBER 1.2010 TIME: 7:00 PM ❑CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM ❑ STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) DATE OF DECISION: COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION ® VICINITY MAP ❑ DRAINAGE PLAN ❑ IMPACT STUDY ® SITE PLAN ❑ STORM WATER ANALYSIS ❑ TRAFFIC STUDY ® NARRATIVE ❑ TREE PLAN ® OTHER:MISCELLANEOUS STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher.Associate Planner (503)718-2434 • j • TI.GAR D City of Tigard September 20, 2010 Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. Attn: Matthew Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 RE: Completeness Review for Tigard Retail Center Modification (Case File No. PDR2010-00001) Dear Mr. Oyen: The City received your supplemental application materials on September 1, 2010 for review of a proposed modification to the Planned Development detailed development plan (PDR2008-00001) approved under Planning Commission Order No. 2009-02. The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 ("big box" Target building) by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned color scheme. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. The project would otherwise be consistent with the approved Tigard Retail Center permit. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the application can be deemed complete: A hearing has been tentatively scheduled for November 1, 2010 before the Planning Commission. It should be noted that staff has not reviewed the application submittal for compliance with the relevant code criteria, and that additional items may arise during the application review which may require further clarification. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 503-718-2434. Sincerely, A Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: PDR2010-00001 Land Use File 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ° Tigard, Oregon 97223 ° 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 ° www.tigard-or.gov ! • PACTRUST 15350 S.W., Sequoia Pkwy., Suite 300 Portland Oregon 97224 Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. 503/624-6300 • Facsimile: 503/624-7755 TRANSMITTAL RECEIVED DATE: September 1, 2010 Mailed: SEP 0 1 2010 Delivered: X TO: City of Tigard CITY OF TIGARD Picked Up: Attn: Gary PagenstecherP f_AIyFlIK.�^a./ENGINEER6 ►rt 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 FROM: Matthew Oyen RE: Tigard Retail Center PDR2010-00001 —Completeness Submittal • Enclosed please find the following: # of Copies Date Description 16 08/31/10 Tigard Retail Center, Revised Application Binders 2 08/31/10 Tigard Retail Center, Full Size Plans 1 08/31/10 Tigard Retail Center, 8 '/2" x 11" reduced plan set 1 08/31/10 Tigard Retail Center, CD of Submittal Package 2 Sets 08/31/10 #10 Envelops with postage and labels By: atthew Oyen • ill . ,�'T IfGAi��D August 24, 2010 City of Tigard . Pacific Realty Associates,L.P. Attn: Mathew Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 RE: Completeness Review for Tigard Retail Center — Minor Modification to Approved Planned Development PDR2008-00001 (Case File No. PDR2010- 00001) Dear Mr. Oyen: The City received your application August 10, 2010 for minor modification to the approved Tigard Retail Center Planned Development (PDR2008-00001). The 18.16-acre vacant property is located within the Tigard Triangle southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. The approved plan includes a proposed 137,900 square foot "big box" Target retail building (Retail'3) and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings (Retail 1 & 2). The proposed modifications would change the design details and color pattern of Retail 3 by removing all Target related details and replacing them with a generic earth-toned palate. A 1,800 square foot recycling area is also proposed at the rear of the site. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before the application can be deemed complete: • 1. Application Materials. Your application is for minor modifications to the site, primarily to the elevations of Retail 3 from the Target-specific elevations to non-specific user elevations. It would be useful to include the approved elevations in your application •packet to provide an easy reference for the Commission. I/ 2. Envelopes with postage. Please supply two sets of pre-addressed (no return address), stamped (not metered), #10 size envelopes. Addresses must have been obtained within • the previous three months from the date of application completeness. V 3. Number of Application Copies. As this is a planned development request, all members of the commission will receive copies. Please submit 16P—full sets of your revised application materials (each set shall be an exact duplicate of all information pertaining to the application, narrative, forms, letters, studies, plans, etc.). In addition, two full-size plan sets, one 8 1" x` 11" reduced plan set for our files, and a CD of the submittal package shall be included. Once the application has been deemed complete, a hearing before the Planning Commission will be scheduled. It should be noted that staff has not reviewed the application submittal for compliance with the relevant code criteria, and that additional items may arise during the application review which may require further clarification. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov • If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 503-718-2434. Sincerely, /7-L" • e. Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: PDR2010-00001 Land Use File 2 LAND USE Project: 1 IG p -frwi, �' J,Ai„ t> PPLIC I®N Date: g /0 COMPLETENESS REVIEW COMPLETE (y] INCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: ANA Np�❑ Deed/Title/Proof of Ownership Aft❑ Neighborhood Mtg.Affidavits, Minutes, List of Attendees ❑ Impact Study (18.390) USA Service Provider Letter g44❑ Construction Cost Estimate ❑ ' Envelopes with Postage(Verify Count) #Sets Of Application Materials/Plans- "Paper Copies" Pre-Application Conference Notes ......❑ #Sets Of Application Materials/Plans-"CD's" • PROJECT STATISTICS: ,12, Building Footprint Size J - %of Landscaping On Site o .®° Lot Square Footage • /o of Building Impervious Surface On Site PLANS DIMENSIONED: e- Building Footprint e®' Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible&Bike Parking)e Truck Loading Space Where Applicable - Building Height 12- Access Approach and Aisle oEt• Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: ❑ • Vicinity Map o® Architectural Plan ❑ Existing Conditions Plan ❑ Landscape Plan ❑ Tree Inventory • 2' Site Plan ❑ Lighting Plan TREE PLAN I MITIGATION PLAN: ❑ • ❑ . ❑ ❑ • ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) ❑ ❑ ❑ • ❑ ❑ ❑ RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) ❑ 18.340(Directors Interpretation) • ❑ 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) e®' 18.780(Signs) , 18.350(Planned Development) ❑ 18.710(Accessory Residential Units)ry ) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) ❑ 18,360(Site Development Review) ❑ 18.715(Density Computations) ❑ 18.790(Tree Removal) ❑ 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) ❑ 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) . ❑ 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) 18.390(Decision n Making Procedures/Impact Study) ❑ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) ❑ 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) ❑ 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) ❑ 18.430(Subdivisions) ❑ 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) ❑ 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) LI 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) • 2 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) 0 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) ❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) • ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) es 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) ❑ 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) .ADDITIONAL ITEMS: • . I:\curpin\masters\forms-revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 6-Jun-07 • PACTRUST 15350 S.W.Sequoia Pkwy., Suite 300 Portland,Oregon 97224 RECEIVED Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. 503/624-6300• Facsimile:503/624-7755 AUG 1 0 2010 CITY OF TIGARD TRANSMITTAL PLAT i NG NEERING DATE: August 10, 2010 Mailed: Delivered: X TO: Gary Pagenstecher Picked Up: City of Tigard Fed X 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Courier: Tigard, OR 97223 FROM: Matt Oyen RE: Facility No dar000 Tigard Retail Center PDR-2008-001 —PC Order No. 2009-02 Enclosed please find the following: # of Copies Date Description 3 8/2010 Land Use Application Binders 3 8/5/10 Full—Size Folded Sets Proposed Site Plan 1 8/5/10 8 1/2" X 11" Set of Proposed Site Plan & Elevations 1 8/6/10 Check#103615 in the amount of$2,313.00 payable to City of Tigard for PDR-Modifications. Remarks: Thank you! By: 4CC.PitAltz-e- Lyn Zachrisson for Matt Oyen • MN NM MN • MN I MN OM • = MO OM • • • • • 1 PACTR U ST ' Pacific Realty Associates, L,P. 1 . 1 Tigard Retail Center Land Use Permit 1 Application for Planned Development MODIFICATION Tigard, OR August, 2010 1 1 1 1 REC8VED ' SEP 0 1 2010 ' CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING 1 1 I • • I Tigard Retail Center ITigard, Oregon Land Use Permit Application for IPlanned Development Modification 1 Table of Contents I • Land Use Permit Application Form • Written Summary of Proposal/Narrative I • Response to Development Standards • Pre-Application Conference Notes I • Proposed Site Plan • Architectural Drawings 1 • Signage • Previously Approved Elevations 1 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 • • 1 PRB-APB HEID> CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION " LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION City of Tigard Permit Center 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 T I G A R D Phone: 503.639.4171 Fax:503.598.1960 ' File P Pe- -t,-all DO 1 Other Case# _00c0 1?'(0>"1 Date 8110(1 D By I '-1 P.I I Receipt# I 0 I Fee 313.O v Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR I ❑Adjustment/Variance(I or II) ❑Minor Land Partition(II) ❑Zone Change(HI) ❑Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) ®Planned Development(III) ❑Zone Change Annexation(IV) I ❑Conditional Use(III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑Development Code Amendment(IV) ❑Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑Site Development Review(II) I ❑Home Occupation(H) ❑Subdivision(II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY WILL OCCUR(Address if available) SW Dartmouth Road West of SW 72nd Ave ' TAX MAPS&TAX LOT NOS. 1 S 1 S 136CD-04200, 2S 101 BA-00101, 2S 101 AB-0140013 TOTAL SITE SIZE ZONING CLASSIFICATION • I18.16 ACRES C-G, MUE APPLICANT* • PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES, L.P I MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY, SUITE 300 PORTLAND, OR 97224 PHONE NO. FAX NO. I 503-624-6300 503-624-7755 PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON PHONE NO. MATTHEW OYEN 503-624-6300 I PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES, L.P MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP I15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY, SUITE 300 PORTLAND, OR 97224 • PHONE NO. FAX NO. 503-624-6300 503-624-7755 I *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. ' PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) REFER TO PROJECT NARRATIVE 1 IAPPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE'BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS"INFORMATION SHEET. ' is\curpin\masters\land use applications\other land use applications.doc ' • • THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ' ♦ All,the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments,and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued,based on this application,map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. ' ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria,and understands pp pp � g p the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). ' SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED.[ 61 I ' Owner's Signatu e !� U sznivn Date UtCe �/LcS��rNi Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date 1 CITY OF TIGARD RECEIPT _ 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard OR 97223 . 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt Number: 179027 - 08/10/2010 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID PDR2010-00001 Detailed Plan Review 1003100-43116 $2,313.00 Total: $2,313.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Check 103615 STREAT 08/10/2010 $2,313.00 Payor: PacTrust Total Payments: $2,313.00 Balance Due: $0.00 ■ Page 1 of 1 I • !2010 CITY OF TIGARD Date: Augus I LAND USE APPLICATIONS Tigard Retail Center BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Project: I APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL SUBMITTALS. ALL ITEMS MUST BE SUBMITTED AT ONE TIME. I > Include this form with submittal packet. The applicant must check the box next to the item verifying that the information is present. Staff will check off the items at intake. I > Three copies of all materials are required for the initial review process. The balance of the copies will be requested once your submittal is deemed complete. *Note: This application proposes minor modifications D Each packet must be collated. to the previously approved Detailed Development Plan ➢ Plans are required to be a minimum of 24" x 36". (PC Order No. 2009-02 PDR2008-001). Documents I D Plans must be FOLDED,rolled plans are not accepted. noted as"NA"were included in the original application and remain unchanged. licant 1 Staff Documents, Copies and Fees Required I X I Completed Master"Land Use Permit" Application with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization Title transfer instrument or grant deed 1 � Written summary of proposal Ix X Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval a criteria (as specified in the Pre- Application Conference notes) Documentary evidence of Neighborhood Meeting:Neighborhood Meeting Affidavits of I NA* Posting&Mailing Notice,Minutes,Sign-in Sheets NA* . Service Provider Letter NA* Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2(e) II X ] X Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes I Filing Fee (see fee schedule) NA* I I Preliminary Sight Distance Certification I NA* ' NA* Preliminary Storm Calculations ! Arborisr Report NA* I Traffic Report (if Required) X Maps or Plans (Plans must be at least 24" x 36" II X j Architectural Drawings (elevations &floor plans) NA* ' Existing Conditions Map N * Landscape Plan IA NA* _ Preliminary Grag/Erosion Control Plan NA* 1 Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjusefient Plan NA* Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan I NA* l NA* Preliminary Utilities Plan Public Improvements/Streets Plan X Site Development Plan I NA* Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map NA* 4 _ Topography Map NA* "Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan NA* I Vicinity Map I > Once your application has been deemed complete you will be notified by the Planning Division in the form of a completeness letter indicating that you will need to provide the following: I Two (2) sets of stamped,addressed# 10 envelopes for all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property (the 2 sets must remain separated for the purpose of 2 mailings). Mailing envelopes shall be standard legal-size (N 10),addressed with 1" X 4" labels (please see envelope submittal requirements). Property owner mailing lists Imust be prepared by the City for a minimal fee(please see request for 500'property owner mailing list form). IA cuKPLNAmas(ers\sublmtug Req:x ements Check LisLcioc (ik_.dated:20-May-08) • 0)? • I • • PROJECT NARRATIVE I TIGARD RETAIL CENTER I TIGARD, OR DETAILED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW- MINOR MODIFICATIONS ILOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST AND NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, AND THE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION I 36, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, W.M. CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON TAX LOTS: 1S136CD-04200, 2S101BA-00101, 2S101AB-01400 I Order No. 2009-02 PC (PDR 2008-00001) IDevelopment Description: In August 2008, a planned development application was submitted to the City of Tigard Irequesting Planned Development Review approval for concurrent review of a Planned Development concept and detailed development plan for development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a proposed 137,900 square foot Target retail building and two Iadditional 12,000 square foot retail buildings. The Concept and Detailed plans were reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at successive hearings. In December 2008, the Planning Commission approved the Concept IPlan. In May 2008, the Planning Commission approved the Detailed Plan with conditions. The approval decision for the Tigard Retail Center was finalized on June 2, 2009 and became effective on June 17, 2009. Since Target has decided not to proceed with Iconstructing a store at this location, this project proposes to modify the existing detailed development approval associated with Order No. 2009-02 PC (PDR2008-0001) in order to make minor revisions to the site plan and approved building elevations to better Iaccommodate a non-specific user and market the property. Based on coordination with City Staff, the proposed minor revisions will require a public I hearing before the Planning Commission to ensure that changes to the building elevations are consistent with the standards of the development code and the Commission's prior approval. IProject Location: I The project site is located within the Tigard Triangle, south of SW Dartmouth Street, approximately 400 feet west of SW 72nd Avenue in the NE and NW 1/4 of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, and the SE and SW 1/4 of Section 36, Township 1 South, IRange 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, within the limits of Tigard, I Tigard Retail Center— Narrative Page 1 of 3 August 5, 2010 I I • • I Oregon. This site is comprised of three separate tax lots: TL 04200 of Map 1 S136CD, TL I00101 of Map 25101 BA, and TL 01400 of Map 2S101 AB. Prior Land Use Action: IThe Tigard Retail Center received Planned Development Review approval for Planned Development concept and detailed development plan for development of an 18.16-acre I vacant property with a proposed 137,900 square foot Target retail building and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings. The approval decision for the Tigard Retail Center became effective on June 17, 2009 and was associated with PC Order No. 2009-02 I (PDR2008-0001). Approvals Requested: IThe applicant seeks approval to make minor site plan and building elevation modifications to an approved Planned Development Detailed Plan Review approval to accommodate a Inon-specific user. Proposed Site Areas: IA minor update to the site plan is being proposed to include a recycling storage area behind the store. The proposed revision has a nominal affect on the impervious to pervious area Iratio, as demonstrated below. Site Item Currently Currently Proposed Proposed I Retail 1 Building Area Approved Approved Revision Revision 12,000 SF 1.5% Retail 2 Building Area 12,000 SF 1.5% - - Retail 3 Building Area 137,900 SF 17.4% - - ITotal Building Area 161,900 SF 20.5% - - Parking/Drive Aisles/Loading Areas 327,715 SF 41.4% 329,095 SF 41.6% I Pedestrian Areas/Plazas/Hardscape 40,075 SF 5.1% — — TOTAL ON-SITE IMPERVIOUS AREA 529,690 SF 67.0% 531,070 SF 67.2% I Wetland Area 65,629 SF 8.3% _ - Vegetated Corridor Area (including 125,198 SF 15.8% mitigation area) I Landscape Area outside 70,533 SF 8.9% 69,153 SF 8.7% WetlandNegetated Corridor TOTAL ON-SITE PERVIOUS AREA 261,360 SF 33.0% 259,980 SF 32.8% ITotal Site Plan Area 791,050 SF 100.0% 791,050 SF 100.0% (18.16 acres): I I Tigard Retail Center— Narrative Page 2 of 3 August 5, 2010 I I • • I Site Access/Circulation: INo changes to the approved site access and circulation plan are proposed with this application. IParking: INo changes to the approved parking plan are proposed with this application. Transportation: INo changes to the approved traffic impact mitigation measures are proposed with this application. IUtility Infrastructure: INo changes to the approved utility infrastructure system are proposed with this application. Stormwater Management: INo changes to the approved stormwater management system are proposed with this application. IErosion Control: No changes to the approved erosion control approach are proposed with this application. I WetlandsNegetated Corridors: INo changes to the approved wetlands/vegetated corridor management approach are proposed with this application. I I I I I I Tigard Retail Center— Narrative Page 3 of 3 August 5, 2010 � I- tn Z • 2 (2c I • • I Tigard Retail Center - Code Response IDetailed Development Plan Modification ITable of Contents Chapter Title Page I18.350 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 1 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 11 I18.520 18.620 TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS 12 MIXED SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING STORAGE 17 I18.755 18.780 SIGNS 20 I I NOTE: I The project proposes minor modifications to the approved building elevations and site plan to accommodate a non-specific user. Unless otherwise noted in the code sections below, the project is consistent with the approved 2008 Tigard Retail Center application I (PC Order No. 2009-02 PDR2008-0001). I I I I I I I I I • • I 18.350 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS I18.350.020 Process I B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: I1. The approval of the planned development concept plan. 2. The approval of the detailed development plan; and I3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. I Response: The subject property previously received planned development approval for concurrent review of a planned development concept and detailed plan (PC Order no. 2009-02 (PDR 2008-00001). The current proposal is for modification of the existing I detailed development plan approval to make minor revisions to both the approved site plan and building elevations to accommodate a non-specific user for the Retail 3 building. I18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application I containing all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following: I1. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement Ishould include: a. A description of the character of the proposed development and the rationale Ibehind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant. Response: Changes from the previous application are in design specific I elements unique to Target. No changes to the overall approved character of the development are proposed with this application. Revisions associated with this application are limited to the addition of a screened recycling area behind IRetail 3 and building elevations revisions to accommodate a non-specific user b. An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning I principals are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed. I Response: No significant modifications to the approved design concept are proposed with this application. I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 1 of 21 August 5, 2010 I • • I I The design concept is still to provide buildings that establish a modern presence within a natural landscape, enhanced to provide an expression of quality enduring architecture in a sustainably responsible environment that transcends I period trends to create a special shopping experience. The proposed modifications pertain to removing elements of the buildings associated specifically with the Target store in order to accommodate a non-specific user. IThe Retail 3 building concept proposes an architectural design of exceptional quality and construction, compatible with the Tigard Triangle Design Standards I that will blend with the character of the surrounding area. The contemporary style of the architecture will create a continuous and unified composition throughout the development. IArchitectural design of the building entrance area allows pedestrian visibility from various points across the site. The main entry features storefront, I windows, decorative lighting, and a canopy for weather protection. Pilasters add vertical elements which, along with the use of color, modulate the horizontal aspects of the building. The color palette will be comprised of warm I earth-tone colors. Planters placed along the front façade provide further interest, articulation, and scale. I The entry canopy, storefront, windows, lighting and planters further articulate the north (front) façade, adding pedestrian scaled interest along the front sidewalk. The front façade includes three planters strategically placed and will I include native ornamental shrubs and trees. The front sidewalk will also include lit and standard bollards, benches and bicycle racks as well as lighting to illuminate the building and sidewalk. IAs a condition of approval, a free-standing canopy element, similar to the one proposed over the building's entrance, has been located near the right front I corner of the building and a planter has also been located near the front corner of the right (west) façade. I All of these design elements work together to produce a variation in texture, color, and scale to provide visual interest and a pedestrian-friendly experience. I The rest of the development concept remains unchanged from the previously approved submittal. I c. An explanation of how the proposal relates to the purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010. IThe purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 2 of 21 August 5, 2010 • • 1. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with ' Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; and t Response: Consistent with the approved 2008 Tigard Retail Center application (PC Order No. 2009-02 PDR2008-0001), the proposed revisions meet all applicable standards and will mitigate all potential impacts to the ' City by complying with the 2008 project conditions of approval. 2. To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in ' the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many ' of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; and Response: The proposed modifications will not impact the previously t planned and approved natural areas and open space available for public use. ' Consistent with the original approval, the building architectural features provide an aesthetically pleasing appearance along the street frontage and other building elevations by use of building articulation, changes in ' materials and colors, parapets, and awnings. All of these assets contribute to the larger community above and beyond strict adherence to the development code. Consistent with the spirit of sustainable development, potential Retail 3 users will be worked with to promote and encourage sustainable features in the construction and operation of the Retail 3 building at this location. 3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through ' architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefit, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through ' appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; and Response: No changes are proposed. 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a ' planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; and ' Response: No changes are proposed. ' Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 3 of 21 August 5, 2010 I • • I I 5. To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and IResponse: No changes are proposed. I 6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. (Ord. 06-16) IResponse: No changes are proposed. I d. An explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commission's Toolbox. I Response: No changes are proposed to the utilization of the Planning Commission's Toolbox. This application seeks a modification to the previously approved Detailed Development Plan to accommodate a non-specific user. No Ivariations to the other development standards are requested. 2. A general development schedule indicating the approximate dates when I construction of the planned development and its various phases are expected to be initiated and completed. I Response:As noted in the approved 2008 planned development application, all development with this plan will be constructed concurrently. Any phasing will be dictated by construction schedule only. All of the on and off-site improvements I necessary for the erection and occupancy of retail buildings 1, 2, and 3 will be completed in a timely fashion in order to open the stores within the earliest time frame possible. Depending on the economy and the market, it is hopeful that the Ioverall planned development will start construction in the summer of 2011. 3. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or I leasing of all or portions of the planned development. In the case where a residential subdivision is proposed, the statement shall include the applicant's intentions whether the applicant will build the homes, or sell the lots to other Ibuilders. Response:As market conditions allow, PacTrust will sell or lease the property to Iinterested users. A. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in I Subsection A above, the concept plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information, the detailed content of which can be obtained from the Director: I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 4 of 21 August 5, 2010 I • • I I 1. Existing site conditions; 2. A site concept including the types of proposed land uses and structures, including housing types, and their general arrangement on the site; I 3. A grading concept; 4. A landscape concept indicating a percentage range for the amount of proposed open space and landscaping, and general location and types of proposed open I space(s); 5. Parking concept; 6. A sign concept; and I7. A streets and utility concept; and Response: The required plans noted above were included with the approved 2008 I application. Refer to plan set for application case file PDR 2008-0001. As a condition of approval for the prior application, the original site plan was revised to include larger interior landscape islands within the parking field. A final landscape I plan depicting the approved layout was included with the conditions of approval for the original application. I The only proposed modification to the original site plan is the addition of a screened recycling storage area located behind Retail 3. This modification does not affect the proposed land uses and has no impact on the open space areas. The I impact to landscape areas is nominal as identified in the Project Narrative included with this application. This modification is shown on the current site concept plan (sheet PC-1.0) included with this application. IThis application requests modification to the approved site signage, as well as building signage, in order to remove the Target-specific signage. No change to the I signage area is proposed. The proposed site sign concept has been revised to accommodate a wide range of potential end-users. These plans can be found in the Signage portion of the application binder. INo changes are proposed to the street and utility concept plan associated with this application. I8. Structure Setback and Development Standards concept, including the proposed residential density target if applicable. IResponse: No changes are proposed. I18.350.50 Concept Plan Approval Criteria A. The concept plan may be approved by the Commission only if all of the following Icriteria are met: I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 5 of 21 August 5, 2010 • 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for areas of ' open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. Response: No changes are proposed. 2. The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and ' identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management. Response: No changes are proposed. 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the 1 existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space ' buffers. Response: No changes are proposed. 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridership, such methods may include separated parking bays, off street walking paths, ' shorter pedestrian routes than vehicular routes, linkages to or other provisions for bus stops, etc. ' Response: No changes are proposed. 5. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general arrangement on site. In the case of projects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. ' Response: No changes are proposed to the approved proposed use and general arrangement of the buildings with this application. Building users are unidentified ' at this time. 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to • ' the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is ' located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. (Ord. 06-16) 1 ' Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 6 of 21 August 5, 2010 I I • • I Response: No changes are proposed to the approved concept plan, with the t exception of removing the Target-specific information, as well as the inclusion of a screened recycling area behind Retail 3. I18.350.060 Detailed Development Plan Submission Requirements B. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in I Subsection A above, the detailed development plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information: I 1. Contour intervals of 2 to 5 ft, depending on slope gradients, and spot elevations at breaks in grade, along drainage channels or swales, and at selected points, as needed IResponse: The grading and drainage plans will be consistent with the previously approved application. I2. A specific development schedule indicating the approximate dates of construction activity, including demolition, tree protection installation, tree removal, ground I breaking, grading, public improvements, and building construction for each phase. I Response:As noted in the approved 2008 planned development application, all development with this plan will be constructed concurrently. Any phasing will be dictated by construction schedule only. All of the on and off-site improvements I necessary for the erection and occupancy of retail buildings 1, 2, and 3 will be completed in a timely fashion in order to open the stores within the earliest time frame possible. Depending on the economy and the market, it is hopeful that the I overall planned development will start construction in the summer of 2011. It is estimated that tree protection and ground breaking would begin at the start the summer of 2011 with site work and building improvements following shortly after Iin the summer of 2011 with anticipated completion by the summer of 2012. 3. A copy of all existing and/or proposed restrictions or covenants. IResponse: No changes are proposed. I C. Compliance with specific development standards. The Detailed Development Plan shall show compliance with base zone provisions, with the following modifications: IResponse: No changes are proposed. I I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 7 of 21 August 5, 2010 I I • I 18.350.070 Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria IA. Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria. A detailed development plan may be approved only if all the following criteria are met: I1. The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan. Minor changes from the concept plan do not make the detailed plan inconsistent with the concept Iplan unless: a. The change increases the residential densities, increases the lot coverage by I buildings or reduces the amount of parking; b. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping; c. The change involves a change in use; I d. The change commits land to development which is environmentally sensitive or subject to a potential hazard; and e. The change involves a major shift in the location of buildings, proposed Istreets, parking lots, landscaping or other site improvements. Response: The proposed site plan modification is for the inclusion of a screened I recycling area behind Retail 3 and is consistent with the approved concept and detailed plan. No significant changes are proposed to the site plan. I 2. All the provisions of the land division provisions, Chapters 18.420 Partitions and 18.430 Subdivisions, shall be met if applicable; IResponse: No changes are proposed. 3. Except as noted, the provisions of the following chapters shall be utilized I as guidelines. A planned development need not meet these requirements where a development plan provides alternative designs and methods, if acceptable to the Commission, that promote the purpose of this chapter. In I each case, the applicant must provide findings to justify the modification of the standards in the chapters listed below. The applicant shall respond to all the applicable criteria of each chapter as part of these findings and clearly identify I where their proposal is seeking a modification to the strict application of the standards. For those chapters not specifically exempted, the applicant bears the burden of fully complying with those standards, unless a variance or adjustment Ihas been requested. a. Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review. The provisions of Chapter 18.360, I Site Development Review, are not applicable to Planned Development Reviews. The detailed development plan review is intended to address the same type of issues as the Site Development Review. I I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 8 of 21 August 5, 2010 I • • I Response:As noted above, the applicant is requesting a Detailed Planned I Development Review to make minor modifications to the approved site plan and building elevations to accommodate a non-specific user. As such, and based on coordination with City Staff during the pre-application meeting, no I response has been provided for Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, since this section is not applicable. Ib. Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation. — No changes are proposed. c. Chapter 18.715, Density Computation and limitations. — No changes are Iproposed. d. Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening. — No changes are proposed. Ie. Chapter 18.765, Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements. — No changes are proposed. If. Chapter 18.780, Signs. ' Response: The proposed development complies with, and has responded to, the requirements of Chapter 18.780, Signs. No exception is needed or requested. Ig. Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas. - No changes are proposed. h. Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Improvements, - No changes are proposed. I4. In addition, the following criteria shall be met: a. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: - No changes are Iproposed. b. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: IResponse: No changes are proposed to the approved on-site screening areas previously identified with this application. The proposed addition of the I recycling storage area behind Retail 3 will be screened by means of a 10'-0' high painted split face CMU screen wall. Ic. Privacy and noise: - No changes are proposed. d. Exterior elevations-single-family attached and multiple-family structures: IResponse: This criterion does not apply. Ie. Private outdoor area— residential use: I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 9 of 21 August 5, 2010 I • • I Response: This criterion does not apply. If. Shared outdoor recreation areas— residential use: IResponse: This criterion does not apply. g. Access and circulation: - No changes are proposed. Ih. Landscaping and open space: I1) Residential Development: Response: This criterion does not apply. Ii. Public transit: - No changes are proposed. Ij. Parking: - No changes are proposed. k. Drainage: - No changes are proposed. II. Floodplain dedication: - No changes are proposed. Im. Shared Open Space. - No changes are proposed. n. Open Space Conveyance. Where a proposed park, playground or other public I use shown in a plan adopted by the City is located in whole or in part in a subdivision, the Commission may require the dedication or reservation of such area within the subdivision, provided that the reservation or dedication is Iroughly proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the park system. Response: This criterion does not apply. I I I I I I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 10 of 21 August 5, 2010 I ' . • 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS ' The ro osed modifications are still consistent with the requirements of this P P q section. 1 1 ' Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 11 of 21 August 5, 2010 I • • I 18.620 TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS 18.620.010 Purpose and Applicability I A. Design principles. Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principals adopted for the I Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. IResponse:As noted in the approved 2008 application, the proposed development has incorporated the design standards provided in the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. IB. Development conformance. All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in uses other than single family residential use, are I expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described in this chapter and other development standards required by the Community Development and Building Codes, such Idevelopments will be required to: 1. Dedicate and improve public streets, to the extent that such dedication and I improvement is directly related and roughly proportional to an impact of the development; I Response: No changes are proposed to the approved public roadway improvements and right of way dedications identified in the project conditions of approvals. I2. Connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage; IResponse: No changes are proposed to the approved connections to public utilities with this application. I3. Participate in funding future transportation and other public improvement projects in the Tigard Triangle, provided that the requirement to participate is directly related and roughly proportional to an impact of the development. IResponse: The applicant will participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects in the Tigard Triangle by means of paying System IDevelopment Fees including Traffic Impact Fees. In addition, as noted in the 2008 application, the applicant will participate in a proportionate share contribution to the planned traffic signal at the SW Dartmouth Street/SW 68th Avenue intersection, I consistent with the City of Tigard's current policy of collecting funds on a per-trip basis at this intersection. Based on staff comments associated with the original I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 12 of 21 August 5, 2010 I • • I approval, it is understood that while the signal at 68th and Dartmouth was a I condition of approval for a Specht Development (SDR2007-00003), Tigard Retail development will coordinate with the LID to install the signal if it requests occupancy prior to occupancy request by Specht Development. IC. Conflicting standards. The following design standards apply to all development located within the Tigard Triangle within both the C-G and the MUE zones. If a I standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. (Ord. 99-22) I Response:As noted in the 2008 application and based on coordination with City staff, this proposal has applied the standards from the Planned Development Overlay Zone, General Commercial Zone, and Tigard Triangle Design Standards in order to comply Iwith all requirements. 18.620.020 Street Connectivity IResponse: No changes are proposed. I18.620.030 Site Design Standards Response: No changes are proposed. I18.620.040 Building Design Standards I A. Non-residential buildings. All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. I1. Ground floor windows-All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground I floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window I requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located Iat a building corner. Response: No changes are proposed to the approved ground floor windows within Ithe Building Setback with this application. 2. Building facades- Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 I feet without providing at least one of the following features: a) a variation in building materials; I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 13 of 21 August 5, 2010 I • • I b) a building off-set of at least 1 foot; I c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No I building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. I Response: No building façade facing a public street extends more than 50 feet without providing building offsets and architectural design features, as well as variations in building materials. INo changes are proposed for Retail 1 and 2 with this application. I For Retail 3, the north (front) façade is the only façade that faces a public street. This façade has been designed to meet the design guidelines of providing architectural features at least every 50 feet with the following: IThe north (front) elevations provide a variety of pattern, texture, and material. Pilasters and offset corners occur in less than 50' intervals along this façade. The I entry utilizes a storefront system comprised of anodized aluminum and glass, additional glazing occurs to the right and left of the entry vestibule. An EIFS (Exterior Insulated Finish System)panel wall extends to the right to emphasize entry Iand display user identity signage. As in the original submission, the architectural treatment continues to the sides and Irear with a similar vocabulary of materials, texture, and color. No building facades extend more than 300'without a pedestrian connection Ibetween or through the building. 3. Weather protection -Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, I canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a I building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. I Response: No changes are proposed to the approved weather protection measures with this application. I 4. Building Materials - Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 14 of 21 August 5, 2010 ' • • 1 Response: No change is proposed to the material pallet. ' 5. Roofs and roof lines- Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and ' should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. Response: False fronts and false roofs are not used. 6. Roof-mounted equipment-All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from ' view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. Response: All roof-mounted equipment is proposed to be screened from view of ' adjacent public streets by the building's parapets. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: 1. Zoning district regulations- Residential only developments within the C-G and MUE zones shall meet the sign requirements for the R-25 zone 18.780.130B; non- residential developments within the C-G zone shall meet the sign requirements for the commercial zones, 18.780.130C; and non residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone,18.780.130D. 1 Response: The proposed development site is covered by two land use districts, General Commercial (C-G) and Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The sign requirements of Commercial Zones will be met for signs in the C-G zoned portion of the site per code chapter 18.780.130C. See a more detailed code response in that section. No signs are proposed in the MUE portion of the site. ' 2. Sign area limits-The maximum sign area limits found in 18.780.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Response:All Proposed signs will meet the area limits of 18.780.130.C. See a more detailed code response in that section. No area limit increase is being ' sought. 3. Height limits -The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 ' feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 15 of 21 August 5, 2010 ' • • Response: No free-standing sign is proposed to exceed the 10'maximum height limit. No building signage will extend above the roof line of the wall on which it is located. No height increase is being sought. ' 4. Sign location - Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. Response: No changes are proposed for the freestanding sign location with this application. 18.620.060 Entry Portals ' A. Required locations. Entry portals shall be required at the primary access points into the Tigard Triangle. ' Response: This criterion does not apply. No changes are proposed. 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening ' Response: No changes are proposed. ' 18.620.080 Street and Accessway Standards Response: No changes are proposed. 18.620.090 Design Evaluation ' Response: This application complies with the applicable standards; no review by the City Design Evaluation Team is requested. 1 Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 16 of 21 August 5, 2010 ' • 18.755 MIXED SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING STORAGE 18.755.010 Purpose and Applicability ' A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that certain new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source-separated recyclable materials prior to ' pick-up and removal by haulers. B. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage ' standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and non-residential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for ' such uses. 18.755.030 Materials Accepted A. Materials accepted. Except as provided for in 18.755.040 G and I, the storage area must be able to accept at least all "principle recyclable materials"designated by the ' Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other source-separated recyclable the local government identifies by regulation. ' Response:As noted in the approved 2008 application, the proposed development includes storage areas that will be able to accept all "principal recyclable materials." ' 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance A. Alternative methods of compliance. An applicant shall choose one of the following ' four methods to demonstrate compliance: 1. Minimum standards; ' 2. Waste assessment; 3. Comprehensive recycling plan; or 4. Franchised hauler review and sign-off. Response: No changes are proposed to the approved trash enclosure locations with this application. A recycling storage area has been added behind Retail 3. ' As noted in the approved 2008 application, the minimum standards method was used to adequately size the trash enclosures for the proposed retail pads for this site. The trash enclosure for the Retail 3 building is based on typical building requirements of retailers. The addition of a recycling storage area is based on coordination with other Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 17 of 21 August 5, 2010 I i • 1 retailers as a typical requirement. In addition, the franchised hauler, Pride Disposal 1 Company, reviewed the original site plan and signed-off on the proposed trash enclosure locations. 1 C. Minimum standards method. 4. General requirements: 1 a. The storage area requirement is based on the predominant use(s) of the building, (i.e. residential, office, retail, wholesale/warehouse/ manufacturing, 1 educational/institutional, or other). If a building has more than one of the uses listed herein and that use occupies 20 percent or less of the floor area of the building, the floor area occupied by that use shall be counted toward the floor ' area of the predominant use(s). If a building has more than one of the uses listed herein and that use occupies more than 20% of the floor area of the building, then the storage area requirement for the whole building shall be the ' sum of the requirement for the area of each use. b. Storage areas for multiple uses on a single site may be combined and shared. c. The specific requirements are based on an assumed storage height of 4 feet for ' solid waste/recyclable. Vertical storage higher than 4 feet but no higher than 7 feet may be used to accommodate the same volume of storage in a reduced floor space (potential reduction of 43% of specific requirements). Where ' vertical or stacked storage is proposed, the site plan shall include drawings to illustrate the layout of the storage area and dimensions of containers. ' Response:As noted in the approved 2008 application, the predominant use of the smaller pad buildings will be retail. Due to the proximity of the retail pads, the storage areas will not be shared. No reduction in storage area is sought. 5. Specific requirements: ' a. Multi-unit residential buildings containing 5-10 units shall provide a minimum storage area of 50 square feet. Buildings containing more than 10 residential units shall provide an additional 5 square feet per unit for each unit above 10. b. Non-residential buildings shall provide a minimum storage area of 10 square feet, plus: (1) Office: 4 square feet/1,000 square feet gross floor area (GFA). (2) Retail: 10 square feet/1,000 square feet GFA. (3) Industrial: 6 square ' feet/1,000 square feet GFA. (4) Institutional: 4 square feet/1,000 square feet GFA. (5) Other: 4 square feet/1,000 square feet GFA. ' Response: No changes are proposed to the approved trash enclosure sizes or locations with this application. D. Waste assessment method. Not Applicable Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 18 of 21 August 5, 2010 1 • E. Comprehensive recycling plan method. 1. Description of method: The comprehensive recycling plan method is most ' appropriate when an applicant has independently developed a comprehensive recycling plan that addresses materials collection and storage for the proposed use; ' 2. Typical application of method: This method can be used when a comprehensive recycling plan has been developed for a specific facility. It is most suited to large ' nonresidential uses such as hospitals, schools and industrial facilities. The comprehensive recycling plan method can be used for new construction or expansion that is subject to full Site Development Review, as governed by Chapter 1 18.360; 3. Application requirements and review procedure: The comprehensive recycling ' plan shall be submitted to the local solid waste coordinator at the same time site plans are submitted for site plan review. The applicant shall submit plans and text that show how mixed solid waste and recyclable generated by the proposed ' development will be served under a comprehensive recycling plan. The location, design and access standards set forth in 18.755.050 are applicable to new storage areas only. ' Response: Most large retailers have an aggressive program to reduce waste and promote recycling. It is anticipated that future users of Retail 3 will utilize compactors which are internally loaded watertight containers. No exterior, freestanding dumpsters are used for the Retail 3 store. In order to maximize marketability of the Retail 3 store, a screened outdoor recycling area is proposed behind the store. It is anticipated that ' the trash compactor and recycling containers will be provided by the Retail 3 user. F. Franchised hauler review method. ' Response: As noted in the approved 2008 application, the proposed development will use Pride Disposal Company as the franchise hauler. The site is within Pride ' Disposal Company's service area. The Preliminary Site Plan included with the original application was reviewed and approved by Pride Disposal. 18.755.050 Location, Design and Access Standards for Storage Areas ' Response: No changes are proposed to the approved trash enclosure locations with this application. No changes are proposed to the screening approach identified in the approved 2008 application. The new recycling storage area behind Retail 3 will be screened by a 10,-0'split face CMU wall. ' Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 19 of 21 August 5, 2010 1 I • • 1 18.780 SIGNS 18.780.130 Zoning District Regulations 1 C. In the C-G and CBD zones. No sign shall be permitted in the C-G and CBD zones except for the following: 1 1. Freestanding signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties in commercial zones: 1 Response: The freestanding signs have been modified to remove the Target specific signage and provide signage for a non-specific retailer (Retail 3). No modifications to the previously approved free-standing sign location or height are proposed. The modifications to the freestanding signs are further described below. 2. Wall Signs: 1 Response: No modifications are proposed to the wall signage for the retail shops buildings. As noted in the approved 2008 application, the total number and area of ' wall signs for the proposed retail shop buildings will be dependent on the tenant mix, but will comply with the requirements of this section. ' Without a user identified for Retail 3, the total number and area of wall signs for that building is also unknown at this time, but will comply with the requirements of this section. 1 G. Additional requirements in commercial and industrial zones. 6. Shopping centers in the C-G zoning district shall be entitled to freestanding signage according to the following optional standards: ' a. A maximum of two freestanding signs shall be permitted per roadway frontage provided they can meet both sign area and sign height requirements as set forth in this subsection; ' b. The combined height of two signs shall not exceed 150% 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; ' c. Total combined sign area for both signs shall not exceed 150% of what is normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the area normally allowed in the same zoning ' district; ' Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 20 of 21 August 5, 2010 1 S d. Neither sign shall pose a vision clearance problem or shall project into the public right-of-way; e. A sign permit shall be required prior to erection of any freestanding sign referred to in this subsection. Response: As identified in the 2008 application, the proposed development is ' defined as a shopping center and will include two freestanding signs as approved with the original application. There is no change to the proposed height or location of the freestanding signs. ' The freestanding signs have been modified to remove the Target specific signage and provide signage for a non-specific user (Retail 3). The sign area for the ' proposed monument signs are 66-sf per face, for a total of 264-sf for all four faces between the two signs. This meets both the 70-sf allowed per face, as well as the 270-sf allowed for the total sign face area on both signs (4-sides total). The ' following description of allowed sign area is taken from the original application: The allowed area for a freestanding sign in the underlying C-G zoning district is ' 70-sf per face, or a total of 140-sf for all sign faces. However, per section 18.780.130.C.1(d), this can be increased one square foot for each lineal foot the sign is moved back from the front property line up to 90-sf per face or a total of ' 180-sf for all faces. Since both monument signs are located more than 30 feet back from the property line, the maximum allowable sign area per this code section is 90-sf per face or a total of 180-sf for all faces. ' Based on this code section, a total of 270-sf (150% of 180-sf) is allowed for the total sign face area when using two monument signs. The proposed monument ' signs are 66-sf per face, with four faces between the two signs. This provides a total freestanding sign area of 264-sf. This is also consistent with the Tigard Triangle standards identified in section 18.620.050 in that both signs comply ' with the base zone requirements without the need for an increased sign area. A sign permit will be obtained prior to construction. I Tigard Retail Center-Code Response Page 21 of 21 August 5, 2010 • O v • 'c I w c► CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ' °. .:, (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six(6)Months) T I G A R D PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: March 11,2011 STAFF AT PRE-APP.: GBP - NON-RESIDENTIAL • APPLICANT: Pacific Realty Associates AGENT: Mathew Oyen Phone: (503) 624-6300 Phone: ( ) - PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: South of SW Dartmouth and West of 72nd Avenue TAX MAPS)/LOT#(S): 1S136CD04200, 2S101 BA00101, 2S101AB01400 NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: Detailed Plan Review (PDR) PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: Modification of existing detailed development approval associated with Order NO. 2009-02 PC (PDR2008-00001), specifically changes to the Target building elevations (big box) to non tenant specific building elevations, utilizing a similar building footprint of 137,900 square feet. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: General Commercial ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: C-G (PD) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS • (Refer to Code Section 18.520) MINIMUM LOT SIZE: sq. ft. Average Min.lot width: ft. Max.building height: ft. Setbacks: Front: ft. Side: ft. Rear: ft. Corner: ft. from street. MAXIMUM STYE COVERAGE: %. Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: %. ❑ NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED PARTIES, AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. ® NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18.390) The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section . • ❑ IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system,the parks system,the water system,the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the condusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. ❑ ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.765) Minimum number of accesses: . Minimum access width: Minimum pavement width: All driveways and parking areas,except for some fleet storage parking areas,must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: ❑ WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.705.030) WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. ❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) ➢ STREETS: feet from the centerline of ➢ LOWER INIENSITY ZONES: feet,along the site's boundary. ➢ FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SEIBACK. ❑ SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.B.) • BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS -Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: Ilk A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; ■ All actual building setbacks will be at least half(1/2) of the building's height; and P. The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. ❑ BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.745) In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS applicable to your proposal area are: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION,SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • • ❑ LANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.705) STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms,decorative walls,and raised planters. ❑ RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Pride Disposal can be reached at(503) 625-6177. ❑ PARKING (Refer to Code Section 18.765.040) REQUIRED parking for this type of use: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNA LED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: lo Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet,6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. . Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet,6 inches x 16 feet,6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. HANDICAPPED PARKING: M. All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions,is mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. • OP BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. ❑ LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.765.080) Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. El BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.765) BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicyde racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • • ❑ SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.775) The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS,WETLAND AREAS,ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT,OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries;is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBI 1'ED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. ❑ STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.775.080.C) When Sl'EEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. ❑ CLEAN WATER SERVICES (CWS) BUFFER STANDARDS (Refer to CWS R&O 07-20/USA Regulations-Chapter 3) • LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE•AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION&ORDER 07-20 • • SENSITIVE AREADEFINITION: SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTH OF VEGETATED • TO'SENSITIVE AREA4 CORRIDOR PER SIDES • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 10 to <50 acres 15 feet >50 to <100 acres 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands<0.5 acre 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers,streams,and springs with year-round flow • Streams with intermittent flow draining>100 acres • Natural lakes and ponds • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% I 10 to <50 acres 30 feet I >50 to <100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure in 25- • Rivers,streams,and springs with year-round flow foot increments from the starting point to • Streams with intermittent flow draining>100 acres the top of ravine(break in<25%slope), • Natural lakes and ponds add 35 feet past the top of ravine° 4Starting point for measurement=edge of the defined channel(bankful flow)for streams/rivers,delineated wetland boundary,delineated spring boundary,and/or average high water for lakes or ponds,whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs,located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. 5Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 6The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet,if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section . • Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor,except as provided for in the CWS Design and Construction Standards. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREA'T'ES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership,such as a subdivision,the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract,and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the CWS R&O 07-20 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas,CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. ® SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively,a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. ❑ TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.0 and the "Tree Plan Requirements Handout" included in your pre-application conference packet) A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING,REMOVAL AND PRO I'ECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot,parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. PROTECTION IS PREFERRED OVER REMOVAL WHEREVER POSSIBLE (Address all items in the City's Tree Plan Requirements Handout). THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: • Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; • Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; • Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed;and • A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LIS'T'ED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. • CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • • • • • ❑ MITIGATION (Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.E.) REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: • A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. • If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. • If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: I The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city,either public property or, with the consent of the owner,private property. • The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN-LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may,with the consent of the Director,elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. ❑ CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.795) . The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. • ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot-wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH,unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. CODE CHAPTERS ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ® 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) ❑ 18.340(Director's Interpretation) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ❑ 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) ® 18.350(Planned Development) ❑ 18.640(Durham Quarry Design Standards) ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) ❑ 18.360(Site Development Review) ❑ 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) ® 18.780(Signs) ❑ 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) ❑ 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) ❑ 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ❑ 18.715(Density Computations) ❑ 18.790(Tree Removal) ❑ 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) ❑ 18.795-(Visual Clearance Areas) ® 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) ❑ 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) ❑ 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) • ❑ 18.430(Subdivisions) ❑ 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) ❑ 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) • ® 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) ❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS Olt OMMENTS: • Process and Review Criteria for modification to an approved planned development review: In response to the Planning Commission's comments on the concept plan at its December 1, 2008 hearing, the applicant submitted revised architectural elevations exhibits at the May 18, 2009 Commission Hearing for the detailed plan. These exhibits were approved by reference when the Commission approved the detailed plan. Pursuant to TDC 18.350.030.F the proposed changes to Target big box architectural elevations could lead to noncompliance with the detailed development plan and result in a violation. Therefore, to ensure changes to the elevations are consistent with the standards of the development code and the Commission's approval, proposed changes must be reviewed and approved by the Commission through a Type III-PC process (18.390.050). Review Criteria will include the process provisions in TDC 18.390.050 and the Building Design Standards for the Tigard Triangle in section 18.620.040. Revised elevations are also subject to the base zone development standards governing building height (Table 18.520.2). In addition, sign standards may be applicable (18.620.050 and 18.780.130.D). PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. The Planning counter closes at 5:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2" x 11". One,81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project shall be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Applications with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard City Council. A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE IN'1'FNDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUTT DING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEP'1'ED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section p • • Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any. questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-624-3681 DIRECT: 503-718-2434 EMAIL: garyp @tigard-or.gov TITLE 18 (CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE) INTERNET ADDRESS: www.tigard-or.gov H:\patty\masters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc • Updated: 16-May-08 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section 40 3A/4 C.) DATE: PLANS CHECK NO.: a 0 / DT200 7-0OW . PROJE TITLE: /i G4-it-eD ,/('iLi-. fiT/k COUNTYWIDE r .92Ge.:) TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE APPLICANT77/96 SUS 7---- WORKSHEET MAILING ADDRESS: (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) . CITY/ZIP/PHONE: TAX MAP . RATE PER !,S/3G NO.el O•S/20D� .2$/O/'9 4 e'/O/) LAND USE CATEGORY TRIP S • "ESIDENTIAL $339.00 a_ V/ O/ 3 'Woo re, BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL .$$5:.. '3/,®O ' c ‘t1/"D.og6Z -1-101)7-74 • OFFICE $312.00 • INDUSTRIAL $327.00 1 / ! �D� d )nP /1� 7E. i • INSTITUTIONAL $141.00 3 4.-5 ; /3 9005/ A.x /2, v-oD 4 PAYMENT METHOD: Wt,- /Dom. a'eS , CASH/CHECK ' ,e frd S 0 7304 6)4 l'�'i r a �/ CREDIT INSTIT ZONAL ONLY: BANCROFT(PROMISSORY NOTE) LAND USE CATEGORY I DESCRIPTION WEEKDAY AVG.TRIP WEEKEND AVG.TRIP —E DEFER TO OCCUPANCY _O Z( C_. U /./Ip � RATE 66,ej RATE BASIS: 6- 6F i 6/.`I i. x Coo•Go v e i� = /© � 5. ,77�r�e/ns, ff-z ,epi(u17 P / O/ 7,5-4 /ps X _ �/ /T 10, 7 r/ yr- — -0/ 7-/9h I/, Z t214 to 90)3®4/ CALCULATIONS: I� / ,/ _//0 �D/2 Zo/hG�/,1C-I De e/-i/i/' p—p ON eve_ 2� �Ly �/ if #-6 % 44._ -cliznyG-pe/rI% /4777-> 6,/,(a 'P�Se` Zt PR/C)/T N pRATION: 4--2-1-4-1-ip "7-/-t-Ar f- 6 7o `p-/- -, I x../g i i f,i i mod, 6-2-/.. .-6774/L.--fi e � O / g- FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES / ONLY Ale ONALNO S: /G/, [�O ÷-.4/0 9p '344 u s, f 1pe'q) p/ D. 99 TRANS T AMT .: ��' 71//G//a� :/� i� 1 I� _� J SM June 30,2008 Worksheet 08-09.doc CC: WASHINGTON COUNTY TIF NOTEBOOK • • • 1111 • IIII MI MEMORANDUM TIGARD: TO: Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner FROM: Gus Duenas Development Engineer RE: Engineering Comments —PRE2010-00005 Tigard Retail Center DATE: March 3, 2010 The applicant proposes changes to the existing detailed development,plan approval associated with Order No. 2009-02 PC. The changes proposed are to revise the existing Target-specific structure to provide building elevations and main entry that can accommodate a wider range of users. For the proposed action, as long as all the previous conditions in the original order remain unchanged and improvements to be constructed are not altered, no additional requirements regarding public improvements are necessary. • • 711 q PRE-APPLICATION • x CONFERENCE ON NCE REQUE t � M City of Tigard Permit Center 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223FEB 2 6 2010 'TIGARD GARL7`' Phone: 503.639.4171 Fax:503.598.1960 CITY OF TIGARD GENERAL INFORMATION PLANNING/ENGINEERING Applicant: PAC IF IC' R ALr-? PSSoC AI€S FOR STAFF USE ONLY Address: IS 3S-0 SW 56Iw; R64rr 5uiv303Phone:(5O3)GrZM-6300 pp � City: 9O PJ TLA O D2 Zip: q 2-2.4 Case No.: f I'2- -J0(O`071-07, Receipt No.: ( 7 7 M C) ' 9 Contact Person: 1 r 1nTFXJ OYE\J Phone:1 0.3) 6Z-!-6300 C H//�� Application Accepted By: s..--0204--c- Property Owner/Deed Holder(s): SAIME 5 LJWwEQ Date: DATE OF PRE-APP.: 3I inI I Address: Phone: TIME OF PRE-APP.: tO ;0 City: Zip: PRE-APP.HELD WITH: c Rev.10/19/09 Property Address/Location(s): S�T14 np Jt3 AQr(Pour I{ is\curpin\masters\land use applications\Pre-App Request App.doc acAn tIST CAP 'I ZN° Aug- T w'), 02 91 ZZ3 REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Tax Map&Tax Lot#(s): t (3f COQy 2 ZS(f?11 COlUi (Note: applications will not be accepted ZS(0I fke 011400 without the required submittal elements) Zoning: C-t W n1 ) ruby ❑ Pre-Application Conf.Request Form Site Size: R O 6 COPIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING; ❑ Brief Description of the Proposal and any PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE INFORMATION site-specific questions/issues that you would like to have staff research prior to the • All of the information identified on this form are required to be submitted by meeting. the applicant and received by the Planning Division a minimum of one (1) ❑ Site Plan. The site plan must show the week prior to officially scheduling a pre-application conference date/time to proposed lots and/or building layouts drawn allow staff ample time to prepare for the meeting. to scale. Also, show the location of the • subject property in relation to the nearest A pre-application conference can usually be scheduled within 1-2 weeks of the streets; and the locations of driveways on the Planning Division's receipt of the request for either Tuesday or Thursday subject property and across the street. mornings. Pre-application conferences are one (1) hour long and are typically ❑ Vicinity Map. held between the hours of 9:00-11:00 AM. ❑ The Proposed Uses. PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCES MUST BE SCHEDULED IN ❑ Topographic Information. Include Contour PERSON AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER Lines if Possible. FROM 8:00-4:00/MONDAY-FRIDAY. ❑ If the Pre-Application C. -rence is for a IF MORE THAN 4 PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND THE MONOPOLE projec the applicant must PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IN YOUR GROUP, PLEASE attach a copy of t•- letter and proof in the INFORM THE CITY IN ADVANCE SO THAT ALTERNATE ROOM form of an a :davit of mailing, that the ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE collocation .rotocol was completed (see GROUP. Section :. 98.080 of the Tigard Community Devele.ment Code). ❑ Filing Fee$373.00 q CITY OF TIGARA • RECEIPT tt . . 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt Number: 177049 - 02/26/2010 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID PRE2010-00005 Pre-Application Conference 1003100-43116 $326.00 PRE2010-00005 Pre-Application Conference-LRP 1003100-43117 $47.00 Total: $373.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Credit Card 05588C 05588C STREAT 02/26/2010 $373.00 Payor: Matthew Oyen Total Payments: $373.00 Balance Due: $0.00 Page 1 of 1 Ail 1 February 2010 March 2010 ' April 2010 40 .„... ...,... ..,,,..,..!„...,;,.,,, ,, ,,,„.,,,,,..:('-'-<; . ; ',','-'- ,'''-',. ''''',' '"<', -.'"'" ': WiWit'sq**:#::13111/F,4.11.,MMIttrO ,R1. '14):,',CatIrVIVP-v•-1 '"! 1231 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6...,. .:.,„.,, ......!.,,,,,,r 4,,.■,-, .,.,4,?44-4,—,•c ;;'',"r :,,,t-,,,,•,- r-/- :: c,',?'-L'; '+' ' ..-:,'... .,„„„....: , , , , ...,- ...,.- .<,...' ',--- - 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ' 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 : 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 !<,-<.,,, ,;, .. ,...,, . ,:,..< , , ,,,,, .<< 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .'iMatch-2 '0,-- -- -- , '-'7/:- 28 28 29 30 31 ' 25 26 27 28 29 30 ,. t;r,,;,,,: ',„,.....,-,,„„...,,,,,,,.;,,,-"--- ,.. ,-='."'<,, <,„,.. ;:-', -,k, ,," -:,,,, ,, •,'"'''''4 ''',.'.... ' '-' '''''' Day 70,295 Left Week 11 8 00 30 9 00 30 10 00'Pre-App Pacific Realty Assoc. Matthew()yen 503-624-6300 Tigard Retail Center • ' „ ' „ CR#1 , „ „.:,,,..,,,,„„,..,,,, .. ,,,,3, s ,, ,,, ,, -; : '3,„',.„ ',., . • ' ° '-'''"- ''' :: :,-,..,:,—,‘„''2, ; ,,,: .. ::,•"„':,'. :, ‘..!,:„.,:,.-,, '‘'.;,:,'_.'`-' ';',,,l'''..-0' --,-- , , ' ' 30 5 3..,.. . -.:4 o u,,,,, ,,,,,,,„ i", ;,. g'4,, 441 4; ,,• , ,•,"''•''''' ''' '' , 4,, ,,, ,,,,,,, g .."1 ' ''',4',44,.,,,K';;;;‘,4,,,•,;>,„14‘';'4,, 1100 30 12" PM 30 1 00 30 2 00 30 300 30 4 00 30 5 00 30 2/26/2010 4:10 PM 1/1 Network Services • TIGARD RETAIL CENTER Proposed Detailed Development Plan Modification PDR 2008-00001/Order No. 2009-02 PC SW Dartmouth Street Tigard, Oregon PRE-APPLICATION NARRATIVE Property Owner/Applicant Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. PacTrust Contact: Matthew Oyen 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97224 (503) 624-6300 Proposal Description: The proposed application is for modification of the existing detailed development plan approval associated with Order No. 2009-02 PC. The original approval was for development of the 18.16 acre vacant property with a proposed 137,900 sf Target retail building and two additional 12,000 sf retail shop buildings. The proposed modification to the approved detailed development plan would be for changes to the approved Target building elevations to non tenant specific building elevations. The proposal would utilize a similar building footprint of 137,900 sf with changes to the building elevations and main entry location to better accommodate a non-tenant specific user. Site Specific Questions: • What will the Land Use Application process for the proposed modifications to the building elevations associated with the prior PDR approval consist of and what are the applicable approval criteria? • • R a `/` II c-0 ZONE f SITE DATA 8.�•� I "..v�; VACAN LAND (cEo- A1_ `'� �� •_R7sm 7RR l9 r• Ns.` - �, ,Rrt!x A:.:1 i°n;2 3.7 He Mk % 1ars[rmar 4R++m wuE zoW BUILDING DATA _ I EWLOLO ME gal> n W Y. '�— "F I .Rut 1RA 7 rrr sa tV r-1. (:( M i 1 ;Y�, ..%,.wnP __—- Nt Yt P S IIrU r PA t wa+u:.'�uµ ;K,Rt . x. ':CCl� i' .RS.� a�--._--..�._ _�•-y.— PARKING DATA f 4xK 1 10x.®4!1 �txl//'Gp _ I > ' . ntLLf MSnYt OT .cr+mRZ sr7u t sx ..'�OU'T2 1 _ ay, o-nowic _.®® '-i 9"> , "k'i' , i., mr� a I '/.L• - _ _ MOO 37x/3700 Y t 1! ` t( ''tea :rer-...,n 7„,r, xx� i tt t rtrx o®Yt> • •_ - Ro..nut n nRu �'/ ' ,. :„: r m.tr plus isr113 ':` ::' as" :i �� I ] c [< : RESDa+1IAL USE rass.z sNR1 R s ia - .>/1 k U —� E®® X but 70. INA=v nut I m..1 Rlxtm Yil . : ,:s : !t .r _ .e=1,. f�1 .x .•gams./t .ew n.us t••� :$ ';`:;:;:;::;. - i , ', � �� mr¢r nut w tswu / . _. �y t ,1 i xi sruswls r in'us :.. �� >/` R !o @� ® k imm. , .•.. 1p:+..c.nx t.n.Imv trus .l •] i POHL SR 05NIt tNn7WYM0Y • r' is �� tRl� !fit♦ n...:'.-.. ...03.11073 Itsm PN0.CROSS /�:.i ::., l/1 E .yt f MRt WRrtRS 33177 MOW CP H1.777 1777 77777 , +�.�...�_ III .411.%.*.. II (��.fJ(j/;{f. x o 1 1 ,Y x x x o x oil `�'1 ‘..... `."�- _ WAY _COMM(SUNS NH sm.us°17 Nun •• t••f,i @g�E ]�,] 1 =—Gt: hW^alaub... E..,... 1 SiMLC W:trNts AR r7s m t ( .,,•..''. ±! c c cy` c c i:'1 .' nrcvE x - C4Z rrta... `�.... and-mom I �? - . Y YIi YY Y. �' mrotcrax Vim'. to RR4 a.Rr7tOY O% ` are7vvax= 'Ir�m1o��.\ LOT3 : x MN,777RRS`O110073NO07.7.1 ��, :::`::? ' t NOTFR• �,Ax.mss '.,•St',`mR, j.. :•:::a: ', �I � , 1 :-. n Ana um Wm. /.I i� �iw+R = RETAIL 3 N.»t1 777 l Mira 71/ •ire mru :i!1YlP ® ..` s`I ,,,1 :_ a�Kms t37.9oo SF: ( z.'MUE zorF l� s ° FFE-180.0 ° i:U)A®tME fTai.1� Jim,.r. +' -iI:• .'. •O �,'�,ry7 -_ :,1:1.FLOYMIBtf1 • . .,:...".................... , .... . 1 • -°,�OUTL T v n c 1 rr .,1.RETAIL t\ '°""'"' 'r is 1 a..4! t<i 0 i/`Il cc 0 — " 6./1"."' �• i ' LEGEND •i:i::::i: .. ` I / Q 4i11 I.tmK MIC 1.1 b <KIK //�� t,L t' :�-;]/ .; A O.:y trw R tract 0..t W.MI o 4x�R~ y°� ®x1 ] N[«twi �/ :?i:`:i� _<- m:CDN sx.R[.17.1.2 .G:::::i:%iii`-i: .� _, '�' .:.• 14A m.lcr nun g� `may.:....;':. -. __•'a o • i \ c+x m.ta �v l8 E.x`. D l r.- 7(.37 MN HON.311C COMA 77003 V:iIIIII:4 77.701177111 —..-. „41,, ,---....,-�-.. UNDEVELOP®WETLAND AREA F—I tnoRa n.lo.m >v WINO PAN GRAPHIC SCALE ,914 RUI.R..A J • 2 r- 411. aC . I 9 . ... . . . . vi ..,..„ ....... •,. L j 0 • ••••••••• ,!..,FAi0-.......:Di nc...3 :•,....A TA. • . :• .• . .. . • I I ....t• 1 8••.°•.o .1 .1'''°•• . - -8„ ..,..., -,...8, O , • •. , • • • • . • : • • • Of TT, •-. • °-,I oo,....:g :r.f.)!V....: 1,..1....,g::.0:-.(...:400.-: 'A'..:4.0.:',0(.0 DAT A • -----..104F-4-4,",'' , :' '•:•.'e••• • 02#7220 222 E I . .i./a;-,i,..-..........„L, >,."..-.-, '0.... I . ‘...„... .„. •... • .. . „el. 122,4222222##AEN2. 2 22 222-2 ... . . •. - •• • . .. • 2 i i • •-22-2 2'2\ '. • .1: • . .. . . .., . . . ' I I.I„;,„>., 5.,s t-•.:.„' I...„ -I: • • i • • - • - II I . .;.• I11:11--•:1...„..„.75„5.5.\.L.. .1 >0 ,.••.. .-. .0.0.•.. Ai ma MOM*a E• Mt *0"*44.440.=.0**M I < . .. . . • ; 1 a I . ' 4,4• `44, :' • *. • • § 1 al 2 1•' .. • .2, 2 . . . •. .. .' • i fa, • 4......." • :-...• 1 . .. .. .. . .. : op I I I.: 1 1 1 i ,..N - Il , .. '•)..1 ...... ..., '.111 . 0 Z • -' • .'- .„..... .. • . • I : •,.. .. I • i 0 14 , .. , . -. . • . - •+-,•: I .- : • --I°11:11: , ZI ., ..• • a I • i'•• 0 ( . • • Pr':•,! f... -. . • • ......... ' :•• I •4, 0 1 I.• 1 ...., 4 t • • L nit • • I_,.1 ::, 1 '."',0.00-#:.0„-,,.,,,,, • '..' '''' °18 • • •— ° : • • O...or::: I.'1:°:°° ' 1 '• • °88°8 ft . „, Io oF POOOO-NOOO : I r. • : : '•i . . . ...4... . . o .1 ; • 1.....4 - . I • • A . • ... -—....... . . . : „.... i I 04--- : • i lir' • • ' . > 4 : f • — , ... I 1;• \--,....kii iE ZONE,' i. '..S' • • f•-•-- 1( ' o...4 1 !' ••°• • . I 1•1•.'l -8.- : .• . ---8 8O.8 788 I : •• ° r ' 'nk--.0. ..1 0'..- / 7 • n .../` • " : * I , * - . . : . I . , t i :. . t ..\-k, v• t, ...----N, .. . . • . . . , . .: ,.----, • I I O °:°•* • •- Of .,' i .*+ -4 44+ . .• a.-*44•4 222.#2222-#,f• , • • , • #:'• 4 • 4+•••!• a..• • •• I r 1 i • . - I`-1 • ''' ' '. : ... ... .: :'...1.• - - i. f -• - • ..--—--• • • • . _ . .....i . .. I .. (....?. - . '1 ::; I . l'-'". • ; • 1 • • • LOT 3 • . . o •' , : '• P • .0._ -.... • d ------- . , : ed. ;i f.-0.:in..: . . • . ..n * . ' : I - 1 • 1 I • I 0• 1 ....',i i I I i ..• 1.-j I + 1. LI ,--../ 7-•• -.../ . , • • • .• i',1! • • . i.i (g-gt;...„,,....,__,, leigg.:...: .1 ,..40, '• ". ' . > I ? .....:: • .Th': ne- i :.---# -:. -- -• „ ••.-- .-- : i --.° an „ • 1.37 C...0).0•SF:'. , I e „,,.... , . 1 i 1-4):: P I : - n ' ' • ' ) I* •'''C'x„„:„,„*„. n , ..... • , .. .....„„„...:„ .„..„„....„ „...,, , ..„,..„„...„... , FFE..;1E(.0.0 ) : , •„22,22• (2#212 22 ....2222:- •, n... . , .. . • . . T/4.-;. • ..- „ , . .— —. . " '. • .. . , . I I I. • ' •• • • — . .• . . . . . . . . .. • • .•. ...• .. . .. ! '•.' '°. °•• :°• °° • o .... o .. • : .-• .• - ......'•/ !. • ' • 1 . . ' °:. • :..** :":"` : f • . . : • • .. i • . r- : , . /;.. ,./. . • -- . . : .. . • , . : : . • . - ,...... , .. .....1.i::.'• 1 I . . (..•-•• • AEI AIL. 1 •,.. ..0 •••• .00- : --•„ „,y,,A n:„...1•...,.00 .:0!1.0 n;7::1 , # • • 04- I ,; ,,,, ,e1 ( .0; - . 1 .. . \ • . . • . .. . . :, . '...\:°/......---, •• .;0' .... I II. - i•,... ' I .•••• . ‘ 40.--- • - : I 81 8:•••- / ; .. 1 a - ' • ; I 4. N-4- / cc.....sc--; . . ,c--pp .. • •PP- -• :..'. i pc\ V -•• •, .... .„. • ' , . :: •• . ;. •i,. c c.... P._•(...-.'-•":•-----.....„ .:'....... .-..1 . ....... . - - '... .. i I • . , . ... -- ., .. , „ „ , , r ,•• • % . %)))/1 I ••—• _ I N . . . . . . . ,,,.. . .... ...7...1. ..-...„.. . .' .• ..**WA*•4 +. .,....see ye 4,488 E,. 6 V'.\1...•■■ ••S'***104.1444M,* * % W'M 6.'*.444 .*/U 404+ V M *............*W 0 * ..<4 044*", .+4W+. 3+ ....4+0** N,* • * V."''' ** a . .i i.---.E';';•.k.A.7."..E.:'•C' W 1.'..Y In , -....... ,n:-"1;-)r...1...01:.::.:VI f::....isf-.' (..••'•'....::..".....:•-T!.......••;`...; „,-... I . . ..-. :.: . .• • PA 0:910 L...000 T TI - RD RETAIL CR R REVISED DETELED . I ... ... .. Tigard. OA D EVE1.OPMENT Pt....AN PC-1.0 410 77•77.177 Ci•e•9-1911977pral Cold: :•177.9-6Ty. MN 68777 6 6ad- Crean ci...„ion Biend- .97 • • •pa7inted r".Canopy E1•r•nt 19•••••7 iaftrellis Sp77.•Sace 17:7717 7• 27- Pc79 " l"Cp.bble 977.776-1 7977 77,979 : ••• • . I 99.9.gral 979:71 Split-Face CNIU I 9 lil 97119 .•••• : "Irvir : ..: an" • •.• mtl . l I Color Slit-. e C.f A .• . • : . . .. ,..... , .• ' • • ' ' • ' •• ' a.41::...:...::i . .'• :.: : : • . . .:•..:II Ili!: • ' • • - :•• . :• •.. ••••••••••• ••••••-••••••••••• ••••••••••••'...•••• .'" -1'41°1' I: ....... ..:...... ...- ..:!:;:ii......... '''......................................... i....,..........,...........i.i.i........iiiii...i.:' ...„L'....,... . iiiii.........,a."...*:.................iiiii.i.......iiiiiii....,....;.....1.4i•...Ji,..,...,..,:fi,......iiiiii...................... 11..........:11....iii...........1....1.........$11:Ei fille«,...1/2A1.1.4...4.,..,....,:lmii[...1,1.11...... .........!...1.1.1,11,..k..i.i..41......1.......11.....!....f.4.,.............;1:;.....,..... .1.,411.11.1.1.1.1iniwil.1.,4..1.1,11.1...11111.,.,:fu.,...;.......1. ..F.........mol.1191....1.11....i...1....1.1.1.1.111.1.11.1.. ...A.„..... ..1".1..................0..... ..... .I.J.: ...,... ..,......................,:y . ... ....-. H .;;Niiii!.......... iii.'iii.hiliiirIS L.. kJ ir..:*::::!::]*...... iiIii..........iiii..1 IIIIIITi::::....f..ilu '.1.1.....41 :. 'Y. : .; ...1 .w.1111 '................iiii"....."............'"."."..........."'il........".::::::::::1 a :ENV .. •• ••••••••••.•,...,....• .............•• ,.............. ............— „: ..,:: -.:::::::::::::::,111 gi•••.: :. •,.. ,iiilliail .•••••"•••••; •••••••• . 11:::::::::::flihm.... ..: ---15-'-ill:---i---ilaiiir ' . • Ell lii I ‘.A - • • ' .. •••-• . • on Nrimitiontimaseillifir _...,...-.....,...i..........-6...es• ••• lion. NM MM. MRS 1111111VIIIIIIMIN11111111111111111 um FRONT ELE'." : 1 .....E i IR:-..1...r...,71. :,'....'..i................ I ..Split fa(e.C.9719 jpaintpd Split" e Chid)pacnted .Split fm.:17.7.777:Li painted ...Split F.....,.....f.,..:T.N.t.i....1 1........11.:ItA...2,:j •irvifig Lreafri 11...f.......„..,.-......... l "Row House Tan"SW 7689 ••97:97mmsori Clay'S719 2827, I"Row liousa Tan"SW 7889 . 179:9996:71 Clay. `..,,,A1 28.23 1 Spitt-Face.CNALI • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : ,• " • . • 99 .. .......: ::::: -:::.: •- .:d• .. • 1 l •:. :':.:::•:l:::::.:i:•:i:l:•:.l:•: • ,mp,m,- •':. ....::::.:::::::•:::::::::.:H.l... .. 1 OPO . 9:.: • • mr"'ea . . . . ... ........... :!::::::::. ::::.•.:...•:..:::.:..:•:::::•:.::::::!:.:*:::::•::•:•::::::::•:::;t:t.:::.: iiiiiimiNMEN■ 4':::::''''"' :•••• .,. ••::. ...•• 11:1::::.:':::::•:::::11::::::: ....-...—:: ' LEFT ELEVATION • .....fit f' :Split.fam.:7 m!i p.,:=InT^ci ...5p10:•:6.97 CP 9 .6:7ted r Split.99.6•7.9799 ptlinte...1• 'P,:...)k....,,,:-..,..1(...1...,;(....:V"./i..."...2"; i.1-c.,. ,-„7/ ..9. ...:, l•'Pow Ke...1<,,,..7796777,77 77••,96 I '••.t 6 CW S77,i 2823 I Row siou777-9.99.6,7•9 7767797 . 1 . .••• I 1 . .••• i 9:4979:777,79.7.,::;"••79 c, • •• 9••••••• •999..7,777977•••••••::• •••• ••:•::7•:•:•::••:::•••:.•••••• „ ....,„:„....111111. ::::::::::::::::::99:71:171. A:PVT 97...9.:::.'.7....9.....77.9.477::...:779,777:7:777.77.9".....",..."........„.............7.7,47......."..........................— .., •• • • • . . . . • i . : . : . ......... .. ............„. 111 :•:••:•:!:•:::•:•8:::•::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•::::::: : •: I:K*86899 : • •:•::•:•:•::•:::••::•:•:::•::86.9. i '..li'liii 1.1,2l.ii. ill'il.illl. :•:::•::::::: l :::::::::::::•::::::::::::::::::.::::::::•8:::9: 1 1:1 , z„ „ :1::•::::::::::•::::.•.1:...::::.:.:•:•::..:•:•:::::::::1::.:l:••.........C.........:.•........ • ••.: .:• ...• ::•::::::::::::...•..•6:::::::;:l:•::::.:l'll:::••••4:::•:::•:..•:•:•:..•..•....•:•:::::::;:::::::::::::.:.........•..:...•...l...l.:.:•::::•::•::•:;•:1;...::::.....:.„:.::„:::::.:.::::::::.:•:::::.:..:.:.:.:.:...:. '::::::::::•::::::::::::•::::::::•:::::::::•::::•:•:•:•:::::::::::::•::::::...:...•.•:•::::::•::::::::::::11:..•.::..:.::::::::::•:•::*:•:::•:.:::::b:•::::•::b:•:•::•:::::•:::::::•:•:•:::•::...•.::::::::::::::::::•:•:•:•: RFA F ELLR, _... • .Split face.C:997 pail 799 l•9..a6677:77 C979-9•(.976;Ef:k SPfrti f<)<......:?f::::\l'ij ti.:iinth....'d 1"9.97„9 House Tari•Sdi/77717.97 •"Row ciol.pe 9:977:;977 7999 I „ .. ....... : , I -6-99:19 dreprp'9-7977,:a 97.99 . :.••:::•::: I Split-9;79d(..9777.1 . • •: • "9•777.9997779.1 9769 77717 28,271 .i.. .. 1 I .. 4 . ... . . 1 A •• 4,. •••••••• . . 3 : .•••• . • • 1 „..:. .... -.4 r :::::::.:.: t• -::::::::...:7- • . ... ....... .... I,• • . v4.97: ... .. ....: . .:......... 11.01 . .••• I.r.:. i - •.. '' -.:1:11:!:::0:::::':::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::N::::::!:::::::::::::::*::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::111110111111:::mviiimili : .• • • " • ..•' •- ''::::::::::::::::::::::::::::!:::::::::::::::::::::1::::::::::::::::::0:::::::::::::1011:111:11:121:1EM10:11:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::F::::iii:PI:011111101go:11:1:11PPIP111111 I: • A ••,:::::::::::::::::::,::::::::::::::::: • , RI 77 • El...FVrATION . . . . • . .. . . .... ... .. ............................................... .... ••• RETAIL 3 •• . :• .••• :• • ALIciust: OS; 2C).1() 2 . ..• : • ...Firiarci; C.)r,:::(:...y.-..,,t1 . . I . . .. . I . .. .. • 1 41.■ I • • • ••••• "• ......... ... • • -• .. • • • -•• . . . . . . • -• - -- ••• • •- ... . .. . .. . .... •• •-- • ••• . . • • . .......---.• .*:•:..."...".....: ..• ••••••••.••••*•-•:'•'''........:'•:-......::::::'...•:.--.•1•.....• • .. .. . ... . . • . • . . ..:..........•••.•.•...........•:•...•••.• .....••'•'.. • • .. ..•• ...-.........._..............„............................... .......... _...... . ..... ... ._. .. _.. .... .. ....... . _..... ...,.... .. _... .... ..... •:.•••••••::::::::::::::......... ••••••••........ •'"••••••••••••"••••••••••••-•" - "••••••••••••••••••••• ••••• • •••••••• lii::::::::::':!:::::::::.:::q---- . .,.. .......:••••••••• :.:::::.•:::::::::::::::::::::: . :.„..:.....:..... .1 . • •• . -• 7:...........•••••................— --: - "'-'••••••'''.-:n.,.••••t.:4,7,-.7..•;:.•x..-- ... .:. • .... . . . . I ... ':r ::::.:44-.1::-•'-7:•••?"zi•........:*:Fi.......3t4..5:i'..*:• ••••••••• ::::::•,:::::::::........:••••••L.........a...---.-----"......:-....•.:-...i::::T:' .....• ,............ .Y..: -...::::.:If7",.?ir......'::::"..i;•:;:r:::::::•I':'•••::::'......-.a..."- wei .... ,T. . • .. •I.i .. . Iiia:::I.75.1;.'IIIII.: . ...I.I..,.....,IIII ,III II...I.I.......I...I..IIIIIIIIIII...... -III." ..II. .....III-.....:I.;IIII.'IIII.......I'7....,L,........II;kIII...g....;:f•::•:`;44.Iiiiiiiiii • . ' ,e .. . :. ... .0. •.. '.IIIIIII I ..' •• ._. - . -,x..z....: . ---- •• ' A ...c .44. • . .........:-..:...::'-:::.:..:::.•%::::*:......1-•:::-........:::::...1:-.....::..... -...••••••: ••'..::.J.I. •'.•-:• ... ... . . . . . 4-:-..............i.:::::,....::......,....::.:.:.::-.-'•,...... .. .-- K ..,••I•...•..........I. • • .... . .••• - I .....•• • • • • . • •• -'•• • • • '• • "75rI K...... 'A... . . F .:.., ., • ...„.„.....„:„......::::::::"...:„.......„:„:„.............„....... „.„ ... . ,.... ..„... ......... ,.. . .. ,...„„ • • • • ... I .... ......, . _ .-4 j■WC ,..,... ..;:•••••1F;;:!......1:.....r.„......!...1..:,,.....,:...::...I.i...,:•„....•••••,..i.!:-.1!•1E.i..1...:,.....i..:•:•..:.• .•■ 1:1.41111:;1., . .4.04.4i...M ..7: Ilk ": :. :. "17 -• • • • ,••q,::•:•:.,i :::::::,,::: . .. ... . . • , . . . • . : 1 ::::.', ... .. .•.. .. . .. i 1 1 . . . . ..., . • MB I 1 . . .. ....•.•••.. 1:1 . • 1 ••>:...-:-..!'....±.-.•'••••:-...-.......':** ..: ....,.........I I 4 1: • .. , • • 2 . .. iiii . .Tip ,-..-. . .. . .t.,,,... .1•' .. . ... wi, IIII - .i.i' I . ..:: I . .,. . ... • . . .:::.........-..::„.....:-........„.... ....- •z•-••...-:...........-... 1: p..:.::::: I I , . ..-....... I . ..... - .. ... ... o.a. As .. .6,••••••,,.. . . .....: ..!:. : 11: IN 11111 MI OOZE II .. . ... . ;:: ^ -4-.). , •.:. , . .........,........... ....... ••• •••-• ...• .... ..., cAb: 4--....-tti,.. . -- --------, .. ....1-,..•.. - „. ;:t. ''. •"..i;: 1111::;1.5:. • ••.- .•... .• .• ,..44...,1406",,,,i:0 .. : ........1..i.;•.....:::::::: IdF 10.151.0.' , ' •• ly; •• II: 4 III •^- • "" "LT ..7•- .: .-.-:' Pi I'•::' - 4 ilp :1'. ••. ... :.,....,"7:...:1„..,,,i ......i.....n. :::.... I .: ; ---:::::.7- - .'. 1. f..0,..... 111 ••-••-............!..:::::.....i. 1:::::::::.• . '.•.•••• • ..... .:.... .- •:••••••,•-• . lit! i,,.. . I 00°. ......................: ... ..,..,.41:: ••-• • • . -.L., r-,-....-:= . . . :–.:s........4 T. . .. ' .. • 4+3.. t..: '-'.1V;f„::..,....' •T --.. ....T Af.:.•..... ... la-• • - •-,::::t , f.,••....... • • .......•••• x. ..,.. 14; • -•.:. i dlir ,....... 4iiii_ittttttt;Lm4,_.,...,.. .. . ......,...:....:............-..............•• •••......••••• ,.. ..:....4.q,_ .. " - ,‘..i.:::„..- . .:...-s,,!*--:,.:.,....::: ::. • •• • ...........!.......i.it'''' .•.... ''''t..'.' ito I ...... ..,......;;.....e...;•.......,,,,,.... .... .. .. .. . .. .. •. ...• '".•:••: ' - - •• ••• - • -::-:.:••::.•::-f:..,-..;•:?:i;:!'• I -- . ••••••:: • • . ..• . ..... ••• . • . ••-;• 6iAll, . . .•. - ...- ,___-....,.......imiiiimmiditiftit ............ 0 - 1 •1 - ..:.:Am.lrlief;it eto,":: ::':••••:: .".. -. -- .-----:%--,-.:: --.• ''' :-•'• -•.:' .•,.:...,...._.,.,..-.,-.-::.1..,;...v.:e..:0:'!4:2,..e;PV.,:...!;.•;•.7"..:41A;..;:••.:iiii 1,..,...-:•-?: '.-:."••:•-:---i......--...:.....,.-. ...:...:,."-.:••••••••::........-,........• - - .. • I ..:., :::::(- -..:.:::::.,::.7.!:.-;c1::::::,FR,..74,:re,i‘'0:1-146..,741)101.149.:'.:?i.....::1-. .--;i::::.:'::.:'.-'.... ........: :.::.7-...::,•.;.:5i :.....:..:.:4- -.":...:.??':;-.:;..:::;',. .-.:Y. , ,. ...'•-:::.7,:,.. k-•-• • :::- -,,,.5:. ,,i.4:...:,..!.;74.: 0,.....,:1..,,,,tii.-.•:-.:7•.;•,::;s.:-•-:...57.,.:•,.,...:-,•,..-----.-;.,..:-,.5..:-.:,..:':,..:'•,,".,::.;r:•----..---':::,:••A-.1,1e.t*:::..',:4"..ii!:,..:1":•r•••."-jr.:iait,.%..2:‘-..z....-......:::01-.,.,.%,:%,,,.....,,, .. . . . ..-,.444".*:,:.:1::1..:':•:::'''.4:1:1:..:R:.4:::in.: -1 • --, 4r.4.1.0,tio'7%•■;..- . • -- - .-...:A. ...fr. ISI".., ,."....., . f.'r.....4e...,44..... .. c :,:......... ... :...,. ..,,, ';:-:;C:■:.21:!+iL,;-c.. " .?::: ..;-;d1: ii7:',...i....:7.41;::::!'::::".......,:t.,•...t,,i. %3.!1... .:;...,:•:!:1:ZZ.':•:..,......!....:;:7..,,',: :.••%:;•;....-,::::#:•‘ •2••*.......:4 :.1:4: ::; .Z. :.•:-.;•:.-• ..:::.•:_.n......:,:ic-; ...:.-. • - •ZI!!!"..:4,7!•;%-"...-;•:1: . ,1•,•;•v--':' •'•" 1.--•-•:-''.-.*" • ...• •- •• - ..".7 P.,x,-.---,, .. .'.•:::,: iji. ; illirl,MRX*-?'"•• -mit...,A.-74r.:':: ::::•:.,-: - . . ..-••:•.::...:.-:,,,.....,...:.v .. ,-::....... . ........„,,,,....,..,.. - • •• .,:•• ...:. .. •.i.•••-..-. '-::-'--••••-...::•.....wirq;a4.tie....,:-.Tii•1.-24...... ::: : ::.:1........::1•...... ....-!-•'''..".- ...:•.::-:':.'::•'.....--i;"•;-777:17-••:•Ir: 41;:,::•'..2::;-:I.e.- :: •'.7:•:: :..... ::...• ..., nsio; -4...?.. ::.•• •••.!,--:,...%4P-At:..:...1.. ,.,..;`,.......0.-1.....7 ,„ -4.,.:---•-•-■•••-,.;:,....i....- “--...4. :-....,.: '..a.q.."7-, -^s4155i.!:4211W.L3..:..-1,:..):. — „• ..,..-‘141 ......, ...., • . ,;:.W.':::01=gg. 7-•• -4,c••-.7...-.. ..,-,-..... -::::!:..,.6.1.1k:A.:12:::::.....'::::fl Aue:..!..:,.;--4..,,.....:.-. I '."• t'.Xiep.::•:4C.:•47101tritxr:vg':.'44.: ^.-..i-A.,..::-:.:•,-,-,:•.! .•'::.-.;..c.--- ' t.....ir.... :..•- • • -••••-.7.-::..-9...',.:sAL,•:':-'.,- -:::.',.,:-.-. .. ."•::..':-.......-:4:!.. :.-.:' •. ::. .-:•4'--',.,.;--::.::•,2;...:.‘.:,&. ".'•:-...:'''...-..-:*-...'.:;*r:'''-', 2.!:-1:.:-.437:N. :::'44;77_4 V"."'.*:::.W.r1.1.1';1'.X....,...7...'4,...,CN;:tft. ...','''....,.. 'I.. r...-'?'!,.:A.,.",:r.r.,.',!%"...,,,,,,,,,',..-•-:;;i:r.,').:,•,,,..,... ..'2.!es'.;\v.. •:'.......... . .. t.....- ....,7,4\.,..1.,...,,:c,.:....,n...............-..3..,.,...,....„...!.:;...: ..... ....w...7.,,,f,,,A.y.,y..„..-i..,.11.1;!:..%:4. 7, :.,..,..„: ,,..,,,,,-,..s., ..:.1.,..7r.f...:.,- .,,-.',..o.':vii.:;1-.:%7.:"!::k t•... ..:41.*..%4; • i,...,.• •• ..:-.:, . •. -,--.--!r,....:.-.--•.....,-,,,,..-:. i.r............. •-.40-r...---... ••:.--....,.-0...t....•.1..f.-4-,. 1: ■ f... 4.4.....-4:,...• .."-,-.:44,1r re.,,,rz--...,ittra.,I,:-...,5.'.:.. ...6.-.:.,.--','-t-,,,,..:-.7.11‘.4•1.4,71...:,'....i.VmX,...f...,:?•.tik,,:.!,*: •w.C. .. •'•,,,. 1".- 4.."--. - el:•- .::.-- -.-.•,:,,,.... --,.'.,:-..'.,;;.-,--: :::.t.;:e-.4'...-.::.::.....: .- ;0.1,4:4 VIE:r.74-s?6,10figr./"*.:::..f:Q:.:51"•:,--.'I-,)4411K)::.••24.141.7.::::::':...1:!•:.-4:.f.o...„,:..•::;,-;,.,...,.;:-...%.„.-li, <-•,4;:.:-...c.-...,,..1.,:..0.c.:4.....z.l.....71..ziagre,....„..,"...i.r....t.c.....,:i.....,...,...ss*:.,. 4. ... ••,. .r.a. ;', ft, ... . , .........0 • - n a?".14..- -: -4'- •'-:'-':;4;•.-::-;'•••:'"::•:.?'-'"'!:..;.;.•'417:t:•:-::gy :. . ''...;:;,..d.-C"::!•1•- •••W-...-.."'.:IN:t'..,..,:,..,: felr..4..--g:.P..1.■ 7....,..--.:"...7!:.:Y.:C.-,S.";•;4.;#0.-.4.,;.!..e7:,.7.:',1"7;7.1'.i'.." -'10.10tal0;Xl.'.;'-: 'la.-..1.1.%.3'',...e.:::'.P/4!n.......6,-...n------A,-.-.., .-- -.- - ..-..,-4,1!.7.!,- - ''' '''''''' -.,---4.4: . ,.... ' mak - 1; •..•t.;...-..;.-:.‘":t.7:44't,.v,A ju,..:. .-. -,. . ...... t":::1.::r i.,:p. - - –At.•.•Pi:7,,_4.-.:•;.:;:,...4:,:%.,.:,-4±1,41/4.ns.R..f1470:6-:-.W. - •..:' .e.,:.- '4t-4.•''''YX"..r.:e'r".,`'..=......-:'let..-,•;.-..4...''''''''"'""' • '' • ..1••,.. '' :''''''":''' ' • . k.e-•'•7;;V;:ff;4'-:',""'3.4-^.......'"'r. '1:- . • .. . '7" - - • — - '' ' • MK, 111 . ....... -..................... . .. .... . 111 ....... . ............................ ... . .. - -2 ..•.1 .....................................................................................---.............—.................................................. .... ...... I•. I I ' 3 • • _ :f,■ r-)t-[..::........1,-)I::(...T1 v F.....- I BI,J11.1..iliNf...-.1 r LI.,.....: ,....,. 4 v.• ••• \11 •• J••' ,..........), z....../1',.., • O .. .. .......................:.........:.... . . :. .. . . . . • • .• ' • .. • • g NommosimummENNE • th) CC. • �r ---;1 I 0 0 I i s I K. ',.. i I I i 1 / A I ,. 1 ., : ' : I i ............-. i i f , .44,. .... RETAIL 'I 1 RETAIL 2 -55.........) . ... i Int. I 54' 5 ..5 A -...... I ..#: 5.- I ..Z.....i. i 0 ...:1 . .......... # .——ow..wea ma ggg som no an am m•mks,,ft.:1(a.r.:....4 M. .-. . i I y —.• gg g .0g '. 5 i i 5 4.. '' .4.,445 woo Mg gg . , ....., il .4/ ( ... - I g.. , g A , - . , g I N ,. ... ,..) \*.... I I IT i c i a r c I ,f.iirecion I 1 • Ti2,EviousLy PPROVED ELENAmoNs i i I 41 _.........— ............——.— I --,........._. ,............. ----.....rn . . ... ..........___ ...............—.... In ,.. . . . . 1 4,1e4•:• .... .. , , • . ' ,••:3::::1:4::::'i.i..*.******.*.*..'::'i::':::::::::::::1111:::::::::'..••• — • . . • . . • ... .. . . • • - • , 'f: •.i. ..,Wittilt4e:.Ve"44144.:• '.::::1:4N.•4'...:::'.::..,..'4'f..::''1:'4••......,,;•.:::. ****,..,...•4.:** :;:ii.”..4::;0:;:''::r;::!.•:'::::*****FE.::::*.j..• -4.1K.,1•41,• ' i' .':„ • • '• 1:T1'141j liturw ''''''''• ' .. ''''';'..:"4:... ,••11:1!••••• f.•61111'11111.11:1-' Itf.:•....s.• : •••• I..imoNii.,__, FRONT ELEVATION I III .. .. ... .. .• • .• . ,„v..,..:}•-.4$• . . . . .. • .4..i..: - .... : .... - . . .• . .• ..„ 'flf••1•••••,111'•••• ,••,.*- . ;:' 4. ...,„,..„..,:...5,4, .• .• . • .• .• .• : ;a. 4,,,,,..?4: .,„,, i>.:1•., ..i •••:.•.... . 4 • , 11!.4., '•' , • . 1...., : A ...v..:::,:::::::.2!:.•!. . i . ...-:. - ' GHT ELEVATION ■ . . . .• . 3 ' • • *** ••'..V.it ' ... •Etik .• • . .. . 4 . , . . .• ,....0 ::. ,...• ......A. .• .• .• .• -...„4.- „,,,,.. • .• .• .• „. .• .• .• .• Mg .• .• .• .• : .• .• .i. • . '1 • : 11 41'• . m ill i 44 .• P l S ..r IIIIIIIIIM 111111111111LIM111.11111111111111111111111111.11 i .• i .. . .. . I . . .,.,.,...,,..tpo, . . • .• . .• . • .• ' '—...-e. •. 0‘,:.•,,:..,,„.. ., . .• ...9,4:46!•,tstix., • .• .• .• .• . .• .• .• . .• .• .• • ... .. 1111116.... t6'• .• .• .• •,..':0:... ..pk. • : .• . .• . . .• . . ... . : .• .• . . .• . .• .• .• : .• . . .• . 11 ............... ■I, 4 .• .• .• .• .• .• .• .• .• iNggiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggiN 10 . I LEFT ENTRY LEFT DOCK TARGET STORE DESIGN 10 CONFIGURATION MAY 18,2009 ,.. -..........................__--------- — — — .-...-.-. ........................... . —,—................„---..------.„,.---- , i 1 i i .. I Iot I * 0 * ,,,,,„4'."';ki • ,,,,,,,,, • 1 • • • 1 • R-1 • • 01 ...,.4..: - *14" I 16*. 0 21 MUF- ZONE • C-G 70N E • • . . . ...,,, • •4.4.,•:; -4,,....r.',..,.-----------:::...„...,, ., (63/4----: j.---11 --\.,4,,.,;..,,..s.40.,,,.,,,,,, .;.;..1.......:..:40,..1 .....,,:__j „I.\ ...._ r,,,, 1 MASONRY CAP .:.. . ..: ".. ...„,.. - . - •-•':•ir IN- ' \ ! :::::\ .E. F. A...._ COM IV L.R,„.• AL) :, I (Emm. x LE op y mu sE NE >---- „....... . - . . .... . . „ . ....... ... ,, i <-Z- ....„,.„,... A 4 . .a'' . ' a'"T:A.... .;',',5.;1.''''+++ ,...:+a+..'"',.'4.'''.''''..11.`4;i7t:e ■,!.:.'Z'e:''''',- 14', !hi::: .., .:.. ...,.......a, , ..._ -- 12''..0" ' ' +++'',,''a.'+'a+t'f,A174,a%■,,. 1.!.,'.;14.5,,.,;'701,1:::..*. - i..11::` , \ ... ,....-.....--....... ....., -...., .,.....,...........: ,,,,..... - ..... ,.... .._._.- .................. ....., .......: ........ --,..--- 44.11 '' ,...?!. 1: : .. ,..,' : : : .+4;.'':q; IV.;*;,",0...1::*..;, ::->":"1:'!:;:. ..l'ir11:.i.... \*... ..,. .,,;',41,;;;•;;; ,\\ lrilr2.1III:: :::;:...;40.; \It,' :::-- ;* - : ;; - * ...., ;i•::::'' •'; . 19 40+1;;''' I'I + +•'.-I'I'%II?' 1`-'1'.1441imairieNiss;1'4' ..... - , ,,,,.....,. ....,. .„..... ..,........,y,.............,.. ..:". ...,,... ..„.........,,,,............... ........ ... , :...... ............. .• .. ,. ..., 0 ,.....„=„.....„..„.......... .._. .........., . . v1,-.1: + . -` ' .1.. 1-..,., \ , , I I - .1. 1 i: . , .." ..... A _ ...,,,,,,..„..-,,.:„.....,,,,•-••••r•t•n•-.... •.......... -- .:„.. ....- ...: ...„ .. -.- ..--.....---..... ,,•.: 71 . .-.-.:-:.......,:-.,,-...,• 62' !,..,' .'i:',., ., , t . , I ■ . • .. . . •• ''' ,, , 1 1 I 1 1 . 1 I . $ i 1 i I $ i i ' 1 +I (,:in ::111: . ... . ..._ . . - ........„...„..........„,„,„.„:„:„.„i:i.,,:„....1.i....i.i::::. .1.4:. .....,,, --'..,,,,„...,.......„.. -__ ____ 1 , 1 . , „ ' 11-1 1----11''‘NN\ ,.,-.. - ........,....,..........................--..................... (f-z\ • ,•-• . . . .. .................................„......... . ....... .. . ,,,. ...._. '''''......,,,,400.4 . . . . .... .. .. ................._„:„.„.._ „............ -' \....._,..i -4,......,.. ...:*:.:.:,:-..:-:-... 0, ,..4: ,,..• - ,..„„,,.....4,,,,,:,..„ g .• , , ,_ ... . .......... ___ .. ........ .. ...... . :: : ..„....:.... . . ..::. ... ..++.+++ . . ,.,,, „. .... . . „.......::::::. . ::.:.:.:.:::::.: :::.:. ....... ....... . . . . . .............. .....::::::„ ::„ ..:...„,..,..,..: ......... .. ....: .. ... .. . . - .." ...... - . ........... ....... 4,:,...- - • . ... .. ... . '. - - - , . 4 ,,, 1 Al..1:4 '''..1'; ,:+: CD ...'........ .............. '...'.. '.....f.........".. '. ' .......": .... . ......." i''111,:' . ' '':.:+:.:.';' ' + . .' ,4,,,,,,, ,,..if ' ,.. 1 --, ,a71,.. a aVV-Pa, ..`.;.>.,31?;.",.`""l'e a ; tat 0 0 0 I .,.....":".:',.......::„:„0,::: ........ ' ..'" ..' ....... '. .a.r.-a'a+4'-4-:-4 , .'' ;., ++.4.' '1,..,,,,,l'" i 4 „„',/,',.:„IiiiiiIFFI:gill,„,i, ,„,,,,',,, „.,,,, ,•'..??: \\.\\.. '+'•F tr) ................,,,,,!......, ...... „,.. .„ ,„ 1 '.. I ' - ' 1■11.1 1 MASONRY CAP ''' ' + . . + - + ' ' ''' P.° CN ,.5,:v , i 1 . . ...............„....i......,.... . .......... . `Ii- \Y . . .....J................„1„„...........„:„............... .... - ' ...... . - .- • ... ,_ --'-:--,•:-:. -.:v., ..-+- '-++._. - • • -: ',,,..„ • 'n. f,:n„,),. 1 •." -', ..7.,....-,*-',II- , li..:;:.:4.::::: :.34*.mq.:..g,..,... ..,....:. -... u : . . , : . a 4-, '''•-+-,- + + • + " ' " ' ..' 1, _ (J,oc rif II 0_ -17,- 1 Q2,,H-N ...... .- . . ...-... _... ................ -.. .. _ - . . .. ..... ... ; .... . .....................;;;;;;;;;;;;;-......,;;+++:.:..,;:.:;:,....,......- .....,.. , ,,, „. ;. . .. . ‹,,11.1f... ., -,* ;. . . 1 + ', + + + . +,, C,..) . ,..,',„%, MINIIII*.nj C1C 1 ..c.,0›..a.,.! 1 , I 1C3C a : : ,:,,....,,,, ,, .......„.,„„. , .... , CNI .''' ,.. .„.„....... • tilligi++.+.+. .4''4 4:',+4:.:,'-':.:.„:;,,,,',' .:1 I ,,,, 8 ii ,..„., ll eA .4.400---,,, 1 -c,..1 '14......? .• k..3,„, 4 '. 41"" 0 0 010 = .. ' ''.. .... .'....'...... ....... ... .. ...."...... ... ...... .: ..........:++- . ' ,... . ....:. .. . ..... .... • .. . ..: . „„• ....,, .... , .... •11'.•• . . .....+-..1-- - ' '''''+'+':'' ' '•.1. .. r''' ' I'd •;,•1 ... ' (--- 0 ' 313 !. 3 ,r, . , . . ... . . ... , „ .,. . ..-. , , „ 1 N,_ I .r..°4 1 ,;;; :; .,;; • ' ''''""••••• ' .' ;;;'' III. ••'I'''.' ;1 . ;;::: ::.. ;: ';,.: .; :n::':.; . ... ......::: ; ;; ., ;.;;;, . ..;;; .. . .;;.I.; : ;;;;;;;.; ,.,..... .;;... I'......;;;.....;;;;; ;;; ;;;; ;;;;; i ' 1 I , 1 * • I ! ' -na • ,... CA • • ,,,,, 4 + , 4 4 + + '' 4 '''' ,,,f.' 4'.. .,,„ ..,.,, i 1 i 1 1 0 : '' ..., ,,,,' ; 1 1 1 (...,.. 1 ...) t.1),,..." ifs ° ICC I I L---ij lir i I tr‘ I C C C L' IC C CIO ! , _ ‘,...., a a . .:ii,;. ::: ms-+6,7:.1:01:5 1L+1,..'A.NL,rt:),,FR1 F'IY:.E. ...; v+;+,, ,,* ;;:::1;:14,,:-/'i'',(t+;1.,i'-+ i;.6;5' \,..........i I s.., II., , : - V V >La.. * * :4: ..,..., ., ''43 a Ci- , 3 .4\\ 4.2•11:5 ,,,,,,.,,.'P .\cA" --;';•:',.,„,,,,,,+i'.,,,,i,'..„:1;.,,...:i*''..' 1,,11 : . ........-.......,....:-. ...;:,.............::-......,.....................-.................... .. ..... .. . . . .. .,.... ...„-:„...:-::,--•,...•:.7-1,....-..,•;i:•-..:,•. • ,.....r....'.----..:1-:::•••. ,;,..„; , i',i-tle, 44... '-'3). ‘....,- >- ;} (-\( ;14°""" ife.arst c) , s .." 57.---------. •t\-) 12 '''.;;;3 ,,-- -a" -11 , 3 3 i 0 I ° , . 10. -II4I:;---.;;•- '7'...;',7"",-- ..... ,,,... : . . . . ....,. . . „ .. •--.4,- ,,,, - . . .„... . .... .,„ . . ., . 0 • /-1;IiI•••••••+''+'''IIIIII+++. - ..1.3 '.''.4 -- - - -t i:II;I:I. 4'. , .. • , . , . , .. ... .. . Try lt 8 ;;;;::t- , . 0 1 3 Df10,;"1---7 i .,,,, ,,; . 1 . 11 3 01;9; 3. 3 1:1:s g' TYR , 1 a - EN EN # ....-i. ,..) • .i.t..1:0..++4' +.:.:. '' .., ,..1..,.g,..,K ,1/4-11-1,,) .411 1 , %. i C C CICI i IC C CIC , • i 1 II - ' - • - . , . . ... ....,.......,„... .. 0 4•.!...I.I.r..., ...'„'„*„*„...-„"„-,--, -,..r..,,• '•7',....*.z...i„. .k.4)...„.4'.!..,,i....,,;.,..---- „ . , t„ I ! ' cc , c : Li , : 1 1 •il U E # ON E . .... . .......... ,,,....... „ 111:111.- IC) CC. *, i i '.:It..' Affe....C-3-)rj 0_ © +41..... II= a TYP. 9' TYP. +1-,-,,, 1 if SADDLE TAN„ 1- ....-f ...... j, ,....._- glkoilrgt , CN i .., • - • +,. • ,. • , . . ..,.. ..;-_ .,,, * C;) ,, SIGN AREA PROPOSED PER FACE: 66 SF Lu _.)t.. ...... 1.0 (1-3\ ....-10- SIGN AREA ALLOWED PER FACE: 70 SF Li..../ - , . . ..... . . „ .,, *'‘ ..„ ,,,, , .•§,14 . , - ;.' 313 3 3' II 11 3 ° 31'C'43 . •38' 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111-1""111111- '''''' l'' ° 3 3 .1: D-li 3 31-). 31.13-1-3:21-31-72.1-- --1.1.--11".. ic...._.G iiztio N : *-16...1.** 47- '''11'.'.. '''.1.1-. '14::.'+' .' . ' -44.":444447III 0 CtIII ;II-ti. 8$ INTEGRAL COLOR CMU -. .,......,- i . . ••irtml•s•ingot ...._._.._....2a_......1".________,...,„,„,... (/) .--..- ,..,+:„:,-,.....,...,+*:.+.++ ,. ,•,-. „_, //i---; . ayli:if,„,f i .P. 1 , allnllallirMilMiiiiillIll IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIIIII 0 „ + , + + + .+ + 4,4''4 4.+„+.4, •. „, .'i, . 1 i / / 'tg?' C C C 1 0 I C Iliiiiiill Z- 1 , . r;;; ;C IC 1 ; ; 11111111111 1 .4..,,, ,e; ;`#0,,,,s't„ I--- '.-• : + .*:.. .'+',-;' ..,- i a_ i 1 1 1 bil 1 At 4,, 'wily a . 4hEr"" :111:111 :::::::::"1::: ',:';---,•:.:4 _ 10141., .... , k'._, ..... ... , ...„ I 7- F- *11111"""." .'..4 • • is) ® ....410- Inl I I. L .r 41., . . . . .,., ..,,,,..... .,„4, __._ . .-Nk\A. '% \ air , c,„ . .... .................. ...,....., =ma ,::;,,,,,,,,...., 11111111111111E=111 ....:-, .- - 0 ,....• ; 11.11MIIIIIII a I--- 711.,,.„;, ,,e. .,..,.1$,., :0,,I i -',-,..:',1/4.s,'.7.,ti 4.,.1.,;:,-,,,,::5.V;.i's,-.7•,...-,,,e,!;::,.:c:i7,, ,:.=?*..,1 4.4,,:t.,.,i,,,....„,_ IL.,' '„;i.:,,,z1-.-■ No4., ‘6 7 , .'''.., 1 \7; - ' \\ !amain's: - : ,. ..., • i 1 1 gp, i Iola i : 1 " Joii I .,..3. : I ; I 6.• ' .;:.!..:+6111r::::: -:::::::::+::':::::::11::+::11,,,_ '+ :• +:''',..„..a...., r ..., . .:++..-:-:++,:..-._,-,r4.-. s..1.-• _,-,-.„.. „..„,....„.... ..!,. ...,.....:,,4, .., ,...,,,,-,,,,,..,•-•:.:-..„,,,,,,,,,,,,,. , , ..,..:.,..v,-,,=t9.,:-.4„, ,.•.......,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„,„...., ,,..._. „.,,,,,„,.,,,....,,,,,,. ....„..,.. .., .111.2.1111111mininirm.......illia - ,,....._;....2.8'...''....4,1 ,,,,, c, ,ii.,.;.c,./...,"_::,i,...,:2,,:_,+:4+\,,. ,„..\'14+, .,:r.;,....11:+..iii!",:ii.. m:,,,1 i j, NI „......:'. C•., ;4...........-..+,.' *.'"-'..--.:....-...,..,..-0. i 1 1 : linionsi 1 11111MINEIMIE i., -.+-•'••.+- a. .„'„,•':Ii__ -•- u . sitt..40.. 1 r i C N:3-, . ' ' NEM! •-• c C 45-.• (S. (1S-&S.. 4.' (S., allir 6,,,,N ■ ,. . MMO. 1 , - ... * (• iffe++. -.- .+.+.+•..+•,•' •:.: •----- • I -. :- • \\.\\\._ illinle IN 1111111111111111111111111111111 : !' , i :+:+' +':*:.':•: ::::4:. 41*..... 9' TYP. . 1--- () \ 11131110 . 1_,* 1 L,[ii 0 g!:-.-...- ir*•••••+-,::%,p-, . -,--1! . • --00.\,•::„ I . 1 . ...": 6-:+:-.. + '4...- ........444. ; c;-.., \ \ Ilia, 1 ,,i 1 :: cO c3:11[;;w; il; ' : , , i 1 . I I , 0 3 11-1 , . -Thisk;\\\\:\\;\ ' aria!anlillilliammos 30' 1141.° ,\ I L1-1 ,...; :,:;‘,..+"?ilf..÷..1f,..-+•+;.;i:;•;{;411! -,,, .- ... , + . + . . .. • ' a 0 , -:+:+::..;.1";:,..:1''..:;:+1+ n--/117 i LIMIT OF EXISTING ....i'..:111::',„.:*•4- +,"•;-;;-"-;-.-'.--='- ;;- _ i 1 1 , : ; !Manilla : • • 4 .i...- 4 -+ , + * i' t• ".'• .{• A • . . • BUFFER d''''.....1.:::'+'...'++ .'+'..:.:..,:-.„-'::::ift , . , . 1 . : ,...,..._. i' --- cic miliiiii R Fri-A 1 3 , • ENHANCEMENT ,;-,+-;,,,, J . (.-__-; ,a ; . . 11111aia ,,,,,_ t_. ,,,, + • c7"--Th 1 ---11•-1* ei.•,_-1- .® .44-- 1110EINIIIII1 ' "-- -7 900 SFI •4+.- --...---'+'-'-++----* • 40- 40- .4- • ...- .,.. -...: , ,. + ++;-,..,_ ,....:... 111111111111111L- -0. (D ...... ,-• (C)Cs.1 I 01 11_11RMINS111 ' " ON ' + +'9' (KA 'X'11-ri a 1 -1.- 1 •,.. laullillialill FFE = j80.0 • ,....", . .,..,-..+.,.•...........+.. ., 4- .. ._......,. .,,,,•%5•7.'•;'•I'ti4 1 I I . I 1 I FIIIII\is ,;;;JEw I , 1 I ; ; r ' i \ 111111111g111 1111 . (.. 0 -' R' , • ... ''''"Nt - " %., -..'" ' " +Ai,,.......„,.....1 : 1 1 •... . _ ... ..,. ..„...., •,,,,,,,,,,„....:,,,,,":„.,.,-7,,,,,..,....,x.,,,,,i,,,,,,:4„..•A•p~:,-1--",•-:',-4'.:-.••;.V.,0--,'"'• 261Met , aim A::: ..,,,,•..? sums . • . , • •--t •,-,„--„,„.:;.%++:.,,...,....•.. 4•-/...:,....,:-4t,:i ;.;;'' 41. •:-'•:::••?:.;;:•.1*;;?;;;',..`1.;',,s4-Fe"1",,-4.'.1".*-e--',"'*"--*--"`- . ',-- . - ... ,, 0 1'..4- :, aiiiitev4.4feg .. v-:- • '''' . t.•.!, ,,-. -•,, ''' * '''' itar- 06** . . t.c, i OM 4 et. :A.,.....w ..,,,-,i,, . ., ,......., , ., .„.. ...v.,e.1-.. - -.... . . ,.:,. ..,,,,,;:cf,,- „,,,,,.2,,,::,,,,,,,,7:...,,,r4f..:kfr,!:Cty41,!, , k,/ •(=:(,tx;!1.::, kr- I':=.t.' .- ' t la I I ' i ■ t 1 I j t 1 ' ' 1 ` NI Ell i , ..1 111 illa , - I....,...,: . - , _ ,cz) ...;..}...,„,hi,„ -4-.- .- .. -----____ .„ . At-- - © I 11E11 ..., - 0 . -.C* 9' TYF. . 45,., a „ 4,, _ . ,,,,,..... 10 ct) , 2 0 mivi,t+R. i I+ ; '---M 01".* \CUNN,A.FE_ • ,,..:.•t...,...,9.-..04::•-•,„, , ...... c„.,t_i_ . : , 1..-÷ 1 ,t,..0,...„.. 7 '4.4 ;; -...t,t,;;; .;;;;;;, ; ,..."..............'. . ,,,,° , 1- 11 044::t:.:::':i:+1,i+.:+++:::'...... 10........i.,;:, -44. 1 , . 4. 4- ..4,,,+,,'' , ..4504 44.,...,..._*1'" '4'11;0,1 . ,..., ,. , ,,,, ', .. s •''•-.4"),R'4Vr)'''':'512216 Pft,,tifyllti, ***' - +4f.+•4. ++ ''•t. ' 4.` .4.--7.V.4.4 '''''''X,i'''' " *'").12,4;*'.2"X., ' 1.1 SIN MII NEI NAll _...vis...„,:i ,:+01.: • , pi--••-• -40,00•••*4.4,..„,t,,,,,,‘„ .„,0:. t.t.v•O:.:1;047:. A., ...-....?,......„. 44.. ,, ig.i. ++:. ......'.... :' +.'-',.", -....... "...,N.,i'.4 =--' i:,,,....:5,.. ,...... . . .. .. ...0..i`. , . . +..,.'.i:,,,,,,+...:::,,,,,,.',1_,,,+:1.i:::.:+.:"....::a,+E;::",.:.,.::::i:•+.:i v it:.,:,„It,'lrle:::i4i:: :::::,,r,r',1 L.'is.1.,,r,,. r 1 t\(.,..IL..1,.,:*11.s.41i.:,.,.,,:1::1,0,..r,:,,';,.1, , ,,1 4;5..';: ......0 0,,..4 II*"": , ,r,.,.j, 1.)aC:)...''''":C 21'"''''>...1 S,1 71!1.,.,.,'; ‘,.,.i..1,,,,,,,.: ,, .*.,''t!„, :Ccoa;5,..),E.:......1L'.:....1,..,›..cCo II,0 Co'i''' r„)(DCoj ../40,,:,.,,,,i, c)E,9)(2)'. til, 1.4....:so...1:1 1 11;3 .. 3 In'M!IIIII 1111 1160.1 I I I I I l:Ns il I I I I I II I I I II I I I I I I I irmiiirlia II Ill 111111 I I I II I:III I ill I '+'..'.! ..,. (i\ ....41110. ; ....• r'' + -•• Tf.... . '. -:' ..:.:, ..I . + .4. . ' t.• 444.4 ++••••• '+' 't• ,..',',. .‘••• ''.'it'i g ..... .•,,, .,, ... . . + .4 + .9 ,,,,: +1;***.tl , ,.... ... . . , . . , 1,-, ., , , t1' * 4 4 4 At + +. , „ .„ , .1' tt?'... . . + , 4+ + + , , ••,; + ,- ,- '. • ,--- . .,.... +_......, ,... .., , rm-7- A . 1 `;'...-..1'.4:. 10111.•• • 0 iMMEi . ■,...., „ ''''':....4.'•• ' '14a MM.* ../''. .. 1 01/.00,` i I , 4 •• •■• , - 1 ■ - .., + + .., . A, . ... .., . ) .. , 1111b, 1 ,,46tW '' + " . . .2 000 SF:r-... 0„, co , _, c-,1 t L„,-) I in I .- " - - - " - . , , „ , . . , .. I 1 . 3 313 31 , . , ... + . + .... , ,.... ., . , . , „ ,.., L•'• + ••• •• .f. + -4 . + v ..7.+„+. 4 . , „ „ , ,, . .. ' '4 :k+-••1,2'+'''''+' '',.....::.' ..., ..,,,,ff„ , ' „,„ „, „ „ '• . 4 1„ , , „ „ „ a 4 4 4 , . B5OL:FWEERLAND a'' - ' ' ' - v ' ++ ' - " t + - FFE = 1'76 114‘4oktbgirit.v.,42.4eaisk17\ ■ 1 I : • 4 4' .. 4 a -I- 4..4.. 4 . , , , .„ „ , 4 „ , -' '. ' . 4 ' 4. 4 4 4 + + 4 4,4 + + ,•*, 't;',...-44,. / IF.I'...4'. -- ill I .. .„- „ .,...,„„+„„,,,, .., - - . ' * * . „ , . i ••••.'.. : „ , + + 4 4 4 4 , ' ' " ' " ' + 4. + 4. + 4 + +++ 4•,,, , Nt:,-- "f•:..!: ;Aga I 1 , 1 ,01 i I 4\ +.. ,-,e0,1por- v, „,,,,, i r Mal % .... • „ 4.- 4 .. -•-,4-..\ • i . ' +++. . ..°-.+....+:-'.'. , • - ,,-,,, 9,,*.: ; . * + ' ' '' ' ' .)....'' .. . . .. . 4 4 ;......4::;), 1.74140. '14114.,, + + + 4• 4. 4 „ * I. + 4 4 + 4.,.i`n.' ........ k..6 .,, -,-,0) -;44":;---...*:*+++::`..*:... . • . . - - • . . EXiSTING , ....;.. r--) ,,,,;;;`! . -' - . . . ... .. . - .. • . • • • . . . 1,44.111111 . -, ... . p.=„, CO /4, 4 .. „ „ „ „ .,.. + . - - -1---- ' 4 4 4 + 4 4 + + + ,. ,. , ''.....:,:„ 4 + 4 + -4 4 + 4 + WETLAND CV , 4- 4 + + + + + • 4 + + 4 BOUNDARY - „ . , „ 4 4 4 ,4 rr,+„ „. , ..„;-, .5.!.'•71'.., g '1.... " ' .'" + ++ .4 + + '41• ''. '''''. ,( .4144" 3 3 a 31 ''''' 3 3 Q 3 313_1_3 N''''''''."7-.-.--- . z,,,,,... .....,..1„1„, . . , „ „, . „ „,, , ,„ ..„ ., ,. .... , + t tiFf .ttrt++ + " + • , tt. +'.'*.+ * " . . ''*-i.'...4..4'....+ .. ... , \4.** • + + + + 1 .556 t3.' t... .*:.*:'1 0 ‘..dada "..'''''''4.*:'''. }it.'.'*; . , "' . ' .* Thtte.,a",2,..4?k,* .**dii:td**' ",+, +. , , + tt ....' 1.71? '1114''. i Pit tr,, 4 F , 1. + i • „ + 3 ':''''*''.+++' . '4.+.., ++': .., 0 .414164‘''*4'*.ia'111;$1.1111" .....';''. *;'.. .*. i, .0.,..A'':AgOtil‘W i'''''.... „. .„ + -*" + I. ., + '''' ,++4 .. ?. ..,1.\..,7*'.4):•-••''''...,;:***, Itt-*:,ffer%•7A:II.44' - ...C.,,, •1t4 . , ' ' ' + ' ' . ' . + ' ''' ' ' ''' ' + ' . . +4 '' . 4 . ' * ' . ' ' '1 * + + + 4 4 + + + + , , „ „„ ,,,, „ + 4, + 4. +„.„ „ . ,, „ . „ , „ „ . 4. „ . ., „. „ , , . „ + ,, ,, , , * , , .,. „ , , ,..„:„. . of . . + „. + ,,,,,o , ,„ .„, _ - ,,,,,,,?z,,-77-.,:.":"L,2,':.:-. ' ' ' '' ' .1: ' .. . ':/8'4611"* j:',...... . - ' * ;'.1 laseningsmnismom 1 '-tWast ' ...1,f.....ggi„, itlii:ig11;.............:..a*A!-'161° a ' '." )E,INSTP,NC BUFFil-R \. .„ ......„,.......,+ .„„,, ,,:./.": „,.„,..„.L,!„ ,,,,,4„,,„,,,,t+411,7„.._ ,?...7,712..,/,:iffi ,,,,,,+:,..:. ,s%+,..;,,,,,,,, . ......... ,..., :,......,,,,,,„,,,,,,.....„ „......r, 41, ..,...„,,,,,::,,,,,,,,, :„...... ,...,,!,.„ ... ,,,,............„.,:,,, „..1 .„..... „.„....._.......,_..., EIIHITAN°CFEME . . • - • • •+.......t.......;.. - .; .;;;;;:. ;;; ;;;;; ; Ci.0 D'i--0-- P T RETAIL 3 ACRUST Pacific Realty Assocates, LP. August 05, 2010 MONUMENT SIGN PLAN Tigard, Oregon .41111■11114r 4 Not to Scale REPRESENTATION ONLY, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION: All images shown are a representation of the design intent and may not portray the exact scale, colors, materials, or construction that could occur due to material availability and final architectural modifications. All information contained in this document is confidential and may not be reproduced without permission.