Ordinance No. 08-12 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE NO. 08 Q,
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING CON PREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, CPA 2008-00004, AND
ZONE CHANGE, ZON 2008-00001,TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS
AND ZONING MAP CLASSIFICATIONS FOR TWO LOTS TOTALING 1.18 ACRES FROM
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-12) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-G) SUBJECT TO A
CONDITION OF APPROVAL LIMITING THE TRIP GENERATION RATE TO THAT ALLOWED
OUTRIGHT UNDER THE EXISTING R-12 ZONING.
WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires
quasi-judicial zoning map amendments to be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed
by Section 18.390.05,0, using standards of approval contained in Subsection 18.380.030.B;and
WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.x1 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires the
Conuruission to male a recommendation to the Council on a zone change application which also involves a
concurrent application for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment; and
WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.x1 of the City, of Tigard Community Development Code requires the
Council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Section 18.390; and
WHERE AS, Section 18.380.030. B.1 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code,requires
demonstration of compliance with all applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and map designations; and
WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.B.2 of the Tigard Development Community Development Code requires
demonstration of compliance With all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable
implementing ordinance;and
WIEREAS, Section 18.380.030.3.3 of the City of Tigard Coirununity Development Code requires evidence of
change in the neighborhood or community, or a mistake or inconsistency in the Comprehensive Plan or
Zoning Map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application;and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18.390.060G of the Tigard Development Code, a reconunenndation by the
Commission, and a decision by the Council, shall be based on consideration of Statewide Planning Goals and
Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statues; any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable;
any applicable METRO regulations;and
WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Conunission held a public healing on Jule 21, 2008, and reconrunended
approval of CPA2008-00004, ZON2008-00001 by motion with a unanimous vote in favor;and
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hewing on August 26, 2008, to consider the request for a
quasi-judicial Comprehensive Plan Amendnnent and Zone Change and deterinined that the amendments will
not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets all applicable review criteria.
ORDINANCE No. 081
121
Page 1
NOW,THERE FORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPA2008-00004, and Zone Change, ZON2008-00001,
are hereby approved by the City Council.
SECTION 2: The attached findings are hereby adopted ill ex-phination of the Council's decision.
SECTION 3: The Comprehensive Plan map and Zoning Map shall be amended to represent the
approved changes.
SECTION 4: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by d-ie
Mayor,and posting by the City Recorder.
PASSED: By unammott.6 vote of all Council members present after being read by number
and title only, dnis,2&4 day of ,200S.
Catherine Wheatley,Cit} Recorder
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this.2;— day 12008.
f
Craig irlcsen,Mayor
Approved as to form:
J
City AiL/--
Date
ORDINANCE No. 08-
Page 2 I
ATTACHMENT 2
Agenda Item: 5.1
Heating Date:July 21,2008 Time: 7:00 PM
STAFF REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON .
120 DAYS = NA
SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY
FILE NAME: JIVANJEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONE MAP AMENDMENT
FILE NOS.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 2008-00004
Zone Change ZON2008-00001
PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning
Map Amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Designations and Zoning Map
Classifications for two lots totaling 1.18 acres from Medium Density Residential (R-
12) to General Commercial (C-G). The lots are bounded by SW Hall Blvd. on the
west, Hwy. 217 on the east,property zoned C-G on the south and property zoned C-
P on the north.
APPLICANT Jivanjee Circosta Architecture OWNER: Henry Louie
9055 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy 13665 SW 130di Place
Portland, OR 97225 Tigard, OR 97223
OWNER: Gerald C. Cach Credit Shelter Trust
Lisa Cach Heideger
6003 4th Ave. NE
Seattle,WA 98115
LOCATION: The site is bounded by SW Hall Blvd on the west and Hwy 217 on the east at
11580 and 11600 SW Hall Blvd.; Washington Count Tax Map 1S135DD, Tax Lots
100 and 1600.
CURRENT ZONE/
COMP PLAN
DESIGNATION: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to
accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square
feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally.
5'1'rll l ]Zi 'OR"I T'O"I'E IL's PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC 1-11-AllING
CPA2008-00004/JIVANJHE COMPRlE1 IENSIVE PLAN AMENDMI3N'r
Z0N200B-00001/JIVANJEE ZONE CI IANGE PAGE 1 OF 11
PROPOSED ZONE/
COMP PLAN
DESIGNATION: 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.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive
Plan Policies 1, 8, 9, 10 and 12; applicable Statewide Planning Goals and
Administrative Rules, and applicable Metro statues or regulations.
SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL to City Council of the
proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change subject to proposed conditions of approvaL
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Site History
Staff reviewed the zoning history of the subject property utilizing old zoning maps and City records. The
1977 Existing Land Use Map shows Tax Lot 100 as vacant and fax Lot 1600 developed widl multi-family
dwellings. The 1983 Comprehensive PIan and Zoning Map shotes the subject lots designated "MED,"
medium density residential. All subsequent versions of the City's Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning
Classification show the subject lots designated R-12.
Tax Lot 100 was developed in 1960 with a small single-family dwelling. Tax Lot 1600 was developed in
1963 with the ten-unit Silver Creek apartment building. In 2004 the City approved a Lot Line Adjustment
(MIS2004-00017) between the two lots.
Vicinity Information
The subject site is bordered by Hall Blvd on the west and Htvy 217 on d1e east. The 1.18 acre site is part of
an approximately 7-acre, 15-lot triangle area north of Hwy 99 zoned C-G on the south (11 lots), R-12
(subject 2 lots), and C-P (2 lots) to the north. The subject lots are separated froin adjacent R-12 lots by
Hall Blvd on the west. Other R-12 zoned lots are located to the north across Hwy 217.
The subject lots are bordered by apartments to the north and single-family residences and a storage unit
complex under construction on the south.
Site Information and Proposal Description
Tax Lot 100 takes access from SW Half Blvd. and is primarily covered in lawn wits some trees clustered
around the single-family dwelling. Tax Lot 1600 also takes access from SW Hall Blvd. and contains the
Tebuilding, parking lot, and landscaping. The density of the apartments at 10 units/.44 acres exceeds
the 12 units /acre allowed in the existing R-12 zone. C-G zoning allows new multi-family dwellings wide the
planned development review process and standards.
The applicant is requestin a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment to
change the Comprehensive Plan Designations and Zoning Map Classifications for two lots totaling 1.18 acres
from Medium Density Residential (R-12) to General Commercial (C-G).
'UAFF 131-1101U TO TI IE PLANNING COMMISSION .JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC I[LARING
CPA2008-00004/JRIANJI-E- CONWREI IENSIVL PLAN AMISNDMEN'r
ZON2008-00001/JTVANJEE ZONE,CHANGE PAGE 2 OF 11
SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 18.380:
18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map
Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC
procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in
Subsection B below.
A. The Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council on a zone change application
which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The
Council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Section 18.390.
The proposed zone change application to change the zoning on the subject lots from R-12 to C-G also
involves a comprehensive plan map amendment. Therefore, the Planning Commission shall make a
recommendation to Council on the proposed zone change application and comprehensive plan snap
amendment.
B. Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve,
approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based
on all of the following standards:
18.380.030. B.1
Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map
designations;
COMPREHENSWE PLAN POLICIES
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate
in all phases of the planning process.
The applicant's representative sent out notices to surrounding property owners and neighborhood
representatives, posted a sign on the property, and held a neighborhood meeting on February 28, 2008 in
accordance with the Cityof Tigard's neighborhood meeting notification process. According to the
minutes of the neighborhood meeting, 10 people attended. Discussion related to transportation issues on
Highway 99 and Hall Blvd., future development of the lots,and the zone change process.
In addition, the City has mailed notice of the Planning Commission hearingg to property, owners within 500
feet of the subject site, interested citizens, and agencies,published notice of the hearing and posted the site
pursuant to TDC 18.390.050 for Type III Procedures.
With these public involvement provisions and the applicant's documented participation, the proposed
zone change is consistent with applicable Citizen Involvement policies.
STAFF REPORT TO TM71 PLANNING COMMISSION _JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC I II-ARING
CPA2008-00004/JIVANJI3E COMPRI FILNSNI:PLAN ANf1-NDMI:NT
%0N2008-00001/_11VANJI3r ZONE CI IANGI PAGE 3 OF 11
GENERAL POLICIES
Policy 1.1.1.x: The city shall ensure that this comprehensive plan and all future legislative
changes are consistent with the statewide planning goals adopted by the Land Conservation and
Development Commission, the Regional Plan adopted by the Metropolitan Service District;
The City has an acknowledged Comprehensive Plan consistent widi the statewide planning goals. The
applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies are addressed in this section of d-le staff report.
The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) OAR 660-012-0060 is a state statute applicable to flus
application and is addressed under the Transportation goal,below.
Two state and Metro requirements help determine housing capacities on buildable land within die
Portland Metropolitan Area — the state Metropolitan Housing Rule and Tide 1 of Metro's Urban Growth
Management Functional Plan (Functional Plan). These requirements are applicable to flus application and
are addressed under the Housing goal, below.
TRANSPORTATION SYETEM
The 2001 Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) updates die comprehensive plan and policies.
However, it does not fully replace all elements of the comprehensive plan adopted prior to die 2001 TSP.
Goal #4,Policy #1 of the Tigard TSP correlates to die following comprehensive plan policy:
Policy 8.1.4: Set and maintain transportation performance measures that set a minimum
intersection level of service standard for the city of Tigard and requires all public facilities to be
designed to meet this standard.
The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) submitted the following comment letter to the file
for d-le proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change:
For zone changes and comprehensive plan amendments local governments must make
fundings that the proposed amendment complies with d-le Transpportation Planning Rule
(TPR) OAR 660-012-0060. There must be substantial evidence in the record to either make
the finding of"no significant effect" on the transportation system, or if there is a significant
effect assurance that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function,
capacity, and performance standard of the transportation facility within the plan horizon of
die local Transportation System Plan or 15 years whichever is greater.
OAR 660-012-0060
1) Vhelr an anlendnlent to a flalctional Iasi, an acknowledged covpvbensivelan, or a land use re
glllatiolr
1v0111d J78n ficanty meet an eaZsling or planned t%C nipodatton facihl v, the loca),go1)e171n7ent Shall put hif late
Ineasules as pron ed in section (2) of this nile to assw-o that allowed land uses ane consistent lviM the
identified function, capacity, and perfonvance standards(e.g. level of service, volume to capaciy ration, etc.) of
the facility.
A plan or land use regulation alvendnient significantly a�ects a trappoltation facility if it would
(c)As pleasured at the end of the planning pe�7od identified in the adopted transpor tatlon systein plan:
(C) Volsen the performance of an existllrg or planned t%ansporlatlon facility that is o1benvise pinjected to
perfoiw below the Ilnniviuni acceptable pel onvance standard identified in the TSP o%coplpl-ehensive plan.
STAMP RPI'OR'I"1'0'1'1 IIs PLANNING COMMISSION JULY'21,2008 PUBLIC I II:AluNG
CPA2008-00004/jIVANJEE COMPREIII NS11rE PLAN AMENDMIN,I.
ZON2008-00001/IIVANJEI,'ZONE CI IANG1s PAGF 4 01;11
According to the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP , Hall Blvd is classified a District Urban
highway and OR 99W is classified as' a Statewide Highway. OHP Table 7: Maximum
Volume to Capacity Ratios Within Portland Metropolitan Region identifies OR 99W
from I-5 to Tualatin Road as an "_Area of Special Concern" with a ma_Yunum volume to
capacity ration of 0.95. According to the traffic impact analysis prepared by Robert Morast
ofCTSand dated April 17, 2008 for the 2025 analysis for existing and proposed zoning the
intersection of OR 99W and Hall Blvd is projected to perform below the .95 v/c ratio
mobility standard. Therefore, forpolioses of evaluating land use regulations subject to OAR
660-12-060 the performance standard is to avoid further degradation (OHP Action 1F.6).
OHP Action 1F.6 states: For purposes of evaluating amendments to transportation
system plans, acknowledged comprehensive plans and land use regulations subject
to OAR 660-12-060, in situations where the volume to capacity ratio for a highway
segment, intersection or interchange is above the standards in Table 6 or Table 7, or
those otherwise approved by die Commission, and transportation improvements
are not planned within the planning horizon to bring performance to standard, the
performance standard is to avoid further degradation. IF an amendment to a
transportation system plan, acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use
regulation increases the vol-Lune to capacity ratio further, it will significantly affect
the facility.
Doug Baumgartner, ODOT Traffic Analyst has reviewed the traffic impact study prepared
by Robert Morast of CTS and dated April 17, 2008. The studyprepared two versions of the
2025 analysis comparing tie "worst case" traffic generation under the existing zoning to the
"worst case" traffic generation under the proposed zoning. Tables 6a and 7a are based on
projecting rate traffic that have not been seasonally adjusted as required by ODOT's adopted
methodology. According to adopted methodology, all traffic volumes must be seasonally
adjusted to represent 30th Highest Hour Volumes (30HV). The 30HV adjustment was
correct applied to the PM peak hour for tie 99W/SW Hall Blvd intersection in Tables 6b
and 7b.This data was used by ODOT for determining whether or not the proposed zone
change would have a"significant effect" on State highway facilites.
The "worst case" traffic generation for die PMpeak hour for die 99W/SW Hall Blvd
intersection 2025 Full Buildout Zoning scenarios shows an increase in the v/c (volume to
capacity) ratio from 1.01 with die 'sting R12 zoning to 1.02 with the proposed C-G
Zoning (Table 6b and 7b, CTS). Therefore, die zone change will worsen the performance of
a facility (OR 99W) that is projected to perform below the acceptable performance standard
and will have a significant effect on the facility (OHP Action 1F.6).
In order to snake a finding of "no significant effect" for addressing OAR 660-012-0060,
ODOT recommends that the City condition the zone change such that a trip cap be placed
on die site equivalent to the land use with die highest tri generation rate allowed outright
under the existing 12 zoning or 153 daily trips as identified in the CTS study. This cap will
allow uses under die proposed zoning while preventing a significant effect to die highwa
ODOT and the applicant have discussed tie potential trip cap and die applicant is amenable
to die idea and expressed their support for the propposed cap. It is important that any
proposal to allow more trips be addressed in die Plan Amendiment process and will trigger a
new evaluation of TPR compatibility at that time to determine whether die limit can be
revised or removed.
As recommended in the ODOT comment letter, limiting trip generation to that allowed under die existing
R-12 zone (153 daily trips) would avoid a significant effect finding. Therefore, to approve the proposed
comprehensive plan amendment and zone change, staff recommends the Planning Commission condition
the approval to apply die trip cap at the time of site development review for any proposed development
on the subject site.
STAIN'RI-TORT TO THI:PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC I-111AmNG
CPA2008-00004/JnTANJEE CONIPIZC.FIENSTVE PLAN AMENDMI_;N1'
/.ON2008-00001/JIVANJEE ZONE CI UNGE PAGE-5 OF 11
ECONOMY
Goal 9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy.
Policy 3: The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to
promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made
available.
The applicant proposes a change in the zoning of the subject site to allow cominercial development. The
standards in TDC 18.830 provide for amendments to the comprehensive plan and zoning map. Provided
the standards for a map amendment can be met, and the required infrastructure is available as indicated in
the transportation findings above, the commercial use may be accommodated, thereby promoting the
anticipated commercial development allowed by the comprehensive plan and zoning map amendment.
HOUSING
Goal 10.1 Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of
current and future City residents.
Policy 5: The City shall provide for high and medium density housing in the areas such as town
centers (Downtown), regional centers (Washington Square) and along transit corridors where
employment opportunities, commercial services, transit, and other public services necessary to
support higher population densities are either present or planned for in the future.
Two state and Metro requirements help determine housing capacities on buildable land within
the Portland Metropolitan Area — the state Metropolitan Housing Rule and Title 1 of Metro's Urban
Growth Management Functional Plan (Functional Plan). Both focus on increasing jurisdictions' housing
capacity in order to use land within dze UGB efficiently.
The Metropolitan Housing Rule (OAR 660-007/Division 7) established regional residential density and
mix standards for communities within the Metro UGB. It set minimum residential density standards for
new construction by jurisdiction. Tigard must provide for an overall density opportunity of 10 or more
dwelling units per net buildable acre, as well as designate sufficient buildable land to provide the
opportunity for at least 50% of new residential units to be attached
housing (either single-family or multiple-family.)
Metro implements Goal 10 through Title 1. To meet Tide 1, each jurisdiction was required to determine its
housing capacity and adopt minimum density requirements. Tigard adopted an 809/0 of minimum density
requirement for development in 1998, which means that a development must build 80% of the maximum
units allowed by die zoning designation.
The City has a committed to providing the development opportunity for an additional 6,308 dwelling units
between 1998 — 2017. This number shows Tigard's zoned capacity for additional dwelling units. It is an
estimate based on the minimum number of dwelling units allowed in each residential zoning district,
assuming minimum density requirements.
The City of Tigard maintains an up-to-date buildable lands inventory, a permit tracking system for
development, as well as complying with Metro's Functional Plan. The City is responsible for monitoring
residential development. All of these tools aid the City in monitoring its progress toward the above goals,
and deternimm if die opportunity remains for current and future residents
to have diverse ousing choices.
STAFF'RLPORY TO THE-'PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC I IE,ARING
CIIA2008-00004/J]VANJLE COMI'RL'I IENSIVL PLAN AMI:ND.MT_N'I'
ZON2008-00001/JIVANJEll'GONE, CHANGE PAGE G OF 11
The applicant's Impact Statement discusses the loss of 1.18 acres of residential land as a consequence of
the proposed rezone and concludes that there would be no negative effect on die City's progress towards
meeting the Metro Functional Plan, Title 1 goal. Using residential development information provided by
die City, die applicant calculates that Wid-i 370 acres of residentially-zoned buildable lands (2008) Xvitlun
the City limits, and a progress to capacity (6,308) of 56.5%, the additional 2,743 units required can be
accommodated with an average density of 7.4 units/acre. The applicant observes that since the average
density of projects constructed since 2000 is 8.26, and has been increasing over time, it is reasonable to
assume the City can meet its Title 1 obligation without the subject 1.18 R-12-zoned acres.
The City's Long Range Planning department maintains annual buildable lands inventory data. According
to this data, 1% (.44 acres/44.18 acres) of buildable lands zoned R-12 (2008) is contained on the subject
site. At 12 units/acre, the proposed rezone would reduce residential capacity by 5 units. The City's
buildable lands inventory analysis found die City can expect additional capacity of 3456 to 3925 new
dwelling units. A reduction of 5 units would leave the City with a minimum capacity of 3451 new dwelling
units. As of Jan 1, 2007, the City had met 53.58% (3380 units) of its target capacity number of 6308.
Therefore, the proposed zone change would not adversely affect the City's capacity to meet its housing
density obligation under Title 1.
Additionally, the City anticipates increased housing capacity with the Downtown Improvement Plan
recently accepted by Council. Currently, the CBD zone allows for, but does not require, single- mily
housing at 12 unifa
ts/acre and multifamily housing at 32 units/acre. In 2005, only 10% of downtown
acreage was used for housing (Downtown Improvement Plan, September 2005). It is likely that the plan
will result in greater residential density estimated at 40 unit/acre on a greater percent of downtown acreage
(up to 80%) estimated to yield approximately 1,200 units. Furthermore, pre-application conferences with
developers have shown interest in rezoiung industrial lands to medium and high density residential uses.
Aldiough these changes are not yet assured, they represent a general trend toward increased residential use
and density in Tigard.
Goal 10.2 Maintain a high level of residential livability.
Policy 8: The City shall require measures to mitigate the adverse impacts from differing or more
intense land uses on residential living environments, such as:
A. orderly transitions from one residential density to another;
B. protection of existing vegetation, natural resources and provision of open space areas; and
C. installation of landscaping and effective buffering and screening.
The provisions of flus policy bear on the possibility that there is an inconsistency in the comprehensive
plan or zoning map as it relates to the subject property. The policy requires measures to mitigate adverse
impacts from more intense land uses on residential living environments. In this case the R-12 residential
zone is a wedge between two commercial zones, C-P on the north and C-G on the south. Other areas
zoned C-P to die east and west of the subject site are adjacent to G-G zoned lands. This arrangement is
consistent with the description of the C-P zone in TDC 18.520.020.D which states that "development in
the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-mtensive
commercial and industrial areas."
As the applicant's narrative points out, the current zoning arrangement makes it "very difficult to protect
residentiaf development from loss of privacy, noise, lights and glare. It also places an extra burden
[buffering and screening] on surrounding commercial property that would not be necessary if the subject
parcels were zoned C-G."
In addition, as shown in die findings below, the subject lots meet the Locational Criteria for general
coni mercial areas.
STAFF REI'OR'f TO TI IE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC 1-IF"ARING
CPA2008-00004/Jn'ANJI;r:C0Nf111?J-l-1ENSNE PLAN AAIENDMI3NI'
ZON2008-00001/JIVANJEL:ZONE CI IANGF PAGE- 7 OF 11
LOCATIONAL CRITERIA:
12.2 COMMERCIAL
Policy 12.2.1: The City shall:
a. Provide for commercial development based on the type of use, its size and required
trade area.
b. Apply all applicable plan policies.
c. Apply the appropriate locational criteria applicable to the scale of the project.
2. General Commercial
General Commercial areas are intended to provide for major retail goods and services. The uses
classified as general commercial may involve drive-in services, large space users, a combination of
retail, service, wholesale and repair services or provide services to the traveling public. The uses
range from automobile repair and services, supply and equipment stores, vehicle sales, drive-in
restaurants to laundry establishments. It is intended that these uses be adjacent to an arterial or
major collector street.
A. Scale
1) Trade Area.Varies.
2) Site Size. Depends on development.
3 Gross Leasable Area. Varies.
B. Locational Criteria
(1) Spacing and Location
(a) The commercial area is not surrounded by residential districts on more than two
sides.
(2) Access
(a) The proposed area or expansion of an existing area shall not create traffic
congestion or a traffic safety problem. Such a determination shall be based on
street capacity, existing and projected traffic volumes, the speed limit, number of
turning movements and the traffic generating characteristics of the various types
of uses.
(b) The site shall have direct access from a major collector or arterial street.
(c) Public transportation shall be available to the site or general area.
(3) Site Characteristics
(a) The site shall be of a size which can accommodate present and projected uses.
(b) The site shall have high visibility.
(4) Impact Assessment
(a) The scale of the project shall be compatible with the surrounding uses.
(b) The site configuration and characteristics shall be such that the privacy of
adjacent non-commercial uses can be maintained.
(c) It shall be possible to incorporate the unique site features into the site design
and development plan.
(d) The associated lights, noise and activities shall not interfere with adjoining non-
residential uses.
The existing R-12 zone reflects the Medium Density Residential locational determinants contained in
Policy 12.1.1, including areas which 1) are not committed to low density development, 2) have direct
access from a collector or arterial street, 3) are not subject to development limitation, 4) where the existin
facilities have capacity for additional developinent, 5) are within '/Z anile of public transportation, and 65
which can be buffered from low density residential areas.
However, as indicated in the locational criteria for the General Commercial areas, above, the proposed
zone change and comp plan amendment is also consistent with die general commercial criteria: the subject
area is not surrounded by residential districts on more than two sides, would not create traffic congestion
based on the proposed ODOT trip cap, has direct access to either Hall Blvd or Htvy 99 (via Warner
Avenue), is of a size to accommodate the projected (storage facility) use, is highly visible from Hwy 217
and Hall Blvd., could be compatible with surrounding commercial uses, could maintain the privacy of
S'I'AI 11ZI 1'OR"1"1'O'1'F1E.PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC I-M-AlUNG
C11A2008-00004/JIVANJLE COMPREUENSIVE'PLAN AMENDMENT
ZON2008-00001/JIV.,\NJEI:ZONI-CHANGE PAGE 8 OI'11
adjacent residential uses through application of the buffering and screening standards, could incorporate
unique site features in the site design and development plan, and could mitigate associated light, noise and
activities from adjoining non-residential uses.
FINDING: As demonstrated above, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change
comply, or can be conditioned to comply with the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies.
The applicant proposes a change to die comprehensive plan and zoning snap designation
from R-12 to CU Therefore, compliance with the map designation is not applicable in
this case.
18.380.030.B.2
Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other
applicable implementing ordinance; and
For the purposes of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change, the applicant has
satisfactorily addressed the applicable Sections of Chapter 18.380, Zoning Map and Text Amendments, of
die Tigard Development Code. The standards of Chapter 18.390.050 for Type III-PC procedures is
applicable to this proposal, as identified in18.380.030. The applicant has submitted an Impact Statement as
required under 18.390.050.B.e. Potential impacts to the transportation system have been addressed under
die Transportation goal, above.
The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change do not include a specific development
proposal. However, the applicant has indicated that he would propose a storage facility similar to die one
currently under construction on the adjacent property to the south off of Warner Avenue. Any proposed
development will be required to meet all of the current applicable Tigard Development Code standards.
FINDING: The proposal is consistent tvidh the applicable standards of Tigard Development Code.
18.380.030.B.3
Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the
comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the
development application.
The applicant's narrative states that die existing R-12 designation is an inconsistency in die comprehensive
plan as it sandwiches 1.18 acres of R-12 zoning between two large commercial zoned areas. As shown
above in d-le findings for the Housing and Locational Criteria goals, staff supports die applicant's
contention that the subject R-12 zone is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan policies and would be
appropriately rezoned as C-G with a Comprehensive Plan designation of general commercial.
FINDING: The proposal demonstrates that there may be an inconsistencyin die comprehensive plan
and zoning map as it relates to die subject property.
C. Conditions of approval. A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial, approval, or approval with
conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050.A legislative decision may be approved or denied.
FINDING: The land use action requested is quasi-judicial as it is limited to specific parcels and does not
apply generally across d-le City. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommendation to
Council may be for denial, approval, or approval widi conditions.
ST.AE-C'RFPOR'1"1'O T']IIs P].ANNiNG COMMISSION JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC I1L'•ARING
CPA2008-00004/JR!ANJEF COMPRETIENSBIE PLAN AMP"NDMENT
/_ON2008-00001/JIVANJ131--_ZONI CHANGF PAGE 9()F 11
SECTION V. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF AND OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS
The City of Tigard's Long Range PIanning Department reviewed the proposal and provided
information,which is included in findings for the Housing Goal section of the staff report.
The City of Tigard Arborist reviewed the proposal and has no objection to it.
Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue reviewed the proposal and had no comment.
Clean Water Services reviewed the proposal and recommended that all of the relevant provisions of the
IGA between die City and CWS be followed and that a site certification will be required prior to
development of the subject parcels.
SECTION VI. STAFF ANALYSIS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION
ANALYSIS:
Theapplicant's proposal to change die zone on 1.18 acres from R-12 to C-G could result in additional
trips to Hwy 99, a state facility that is already not meeting service levels. ODOT has corm-nacres
dlat with
a trip cap, this issue could satisfactorily be addressed to meet the provisions of the state TPR.
The proposal would reduce the City's capacity for residential density required under Metro' Tide 1 and the
City's Housing goalsand policies. However, the 1% reduction 'in buildable lands would not be significant
because the City's existing capacity, based on its buildable lands inventory, is substantially in excess of the
minimum requirement.
The proposal may affect existing residential development in the vicinity. However, the locational criteria
for conunercial areas is met and is arguably more suitable for die subject lots than die existing residential
zone. Other areas zoned C-P to die east and west of die subject site are adjacent to C-G zoned lands
without residential zoned lands between, as is the case with die subject lots. The proposed zone change
would be consistent with die description of die C-P zone in TDC 18.520.020.D which states that
"developments in die C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and
more-Intensive commercial and industrial areas." In addition, the density of the existing apartments at 10
units/.44 acres exceeds the 12 units /acre allowed in die existing R-12 zone. C-G zoning allows new multi-
family dwellings widi the planned development review process and standards which does not include a
minimum lot size or density requirement.
CONCLUSION:
Based on d-le foregoing fundings and analysis, staff finds drat die proposed Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with applicable provisions of the Tigard comprehensive plan,
statewide planning goals and rules, Metro Regional Functional Plan, Tigard Development code, and
provides evidence of inconsistency in the comprehensive plan and zoning map as it relates to the property
which is tie subject of die development application.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of die proposed
comprehensive plan amendment and zone change with dle following condition of approval:
Condition of Approval
A trip cap shall be placed on die site equivalent to die land use wits the lhighest trip generation rate
allowed outright under the e2' R-12 zoning or 153 daily trips, as identified in tie applicant's CTS
study.
The trip cap shall be implemented as a condition of approval on subsequent land use pernnits for proposed
development and will be listed as a condition of approval in the ordinance adopting the zone change, if
approved by the City Council.
STAFF REPORT TO'1"1-ffi'PI.ANNING COMMISSION JULY 21,200B PUBLIC HEARING
CPA2008-00004/JNANJEIs COMPREIILNSNI?PLAN AMENI)I•iLNI'
ZON2008-00001/Jrt'ANJEE%ONE CHANGE' PAGE 10 OF 11
_ july 14, 2008
PREPARED BY: Gary Pagenstecher DATE
Associate Planner
July 14, 2008
APPROVED BY: Dick Bewersdorff DATE
Planning Manager
is\cuxpin\gaq•\CPA\Iivnnjce"Lone Change(ZON2008-00004)\ZON2008-00004 stiff report
, IFAIIf'REPORT"I'O THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 21,2008 PUBLIC HEARING
CPA2008-00004/IIVANJI-LIs COMPIU-11I17,NSIV1s PLAN AMRNDNfl NT
ZON2008-00001/JWANJ1'F ZONE CHANGE' PAGI3 11 OF 11
ATTACHMENT 3
DRAFT
CITY OF TIGARD
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
July 21, 2008
1. CALL TO ORDER
President Irunan called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard
Citric Center, Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Bled.
2. ROLL CALL
Cominissioners Present: President Inman, ColTunissioners: Anderson, Fishel, Hasman,
IVluldoon,Vermilyea, and Walsh
Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Caffall and Doherty
Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Assistant Cominunity Development Director; Dick Bewersdorff,
Planning Manager; Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner; Darren Wyss, Senior Planner;
Marissa Daniels, Assistant Planner;Jerree Lewis, Executive Assistant
3. COMMUNICATIONS
None
4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES
There was a motion by Commissioner Muldoon, seconded by Commissioner Walsh, to
approve the June 16, 2008 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Anderson, Inman, Muldoon, Walsh
NAYS: None
ABSTENTIONS: Fishel, Hasman,Verna lyea
EXCUSED: Caffall, Doherty
PUBLIC HEARING
5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT —JIVANJEE ZONE CHANGE
(CPA) 2008-00004/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2008-00001
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval fora Comprehensive Plan Map
Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan
PLANNING COMMISSION_MELTING MINUTES—Jule 31,3008—Page 1
i:\0 KILN\6-\1', t,r!l 1rzsI.,! t\,-P.4ariguru4 Glvanjee)\Planning Comm-nisslon inallutes 7-21-08 (2) DRAFT.docx
Designations and Zoning Map Classifications for two lots totaling 1.18 acres from
Medium-Density Residential (R-12) to General-Commercial (C-G). LOCATION:
11580 and 11600 SW Hall Boulevard; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map
1S135DD, Tax Lots 100 and 1600. The site is bounded by SW hall Blvd. on the
west, Hwy. 217 on the cast, property zoned C-G on the south, and property zoned
C-P on the north. CURRENT ZONING: R-12: Medium-Density= Residential
District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of
housing types ata minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and
institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. CURRENT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: 2\1edium-Density Residential.
PROPOSED ZONING: 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. IJxcept 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
entertaimnent, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities,
heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are
permmitted conditionally. PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DESIGNATION: General Commercial. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA:
Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan
Goals #8 (Transportation) and #12 (Locational Criteria); and any applicable
Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines, and any Federal, State, or Metro statues or
regulations.
Commissioners Muldoon and Anderson reported site visits.
STAFF REPORT
Associate Planner Gary Pagenstecher presented the staff report on behalf of the Cite. He
advised that the applicant is currently developing property to the south as a self storage
project. The applicant is thinking about applying this same kind of development to the
subject site. That use is not allowed in the R-12 zone, but would be allowed in the CG
(General Commercial) zone as a conditional use. Staff believes the CG zone is appropriate
for the site and supports the zone change Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Pagenstecher noted that Warner Avenue, which connects to Ivy. 99W, would be the sole
access to the property; the Hall Blvd. access would be closed. Currently, there is an
apartment house abutting this property.
APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION
Saj Jivanjee,Jivanjee Circosta Arclitecture, 9055 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy., Portland,
OR 97225, spoke about dealing with the inconsistencies in the Comprehensive Plan, the
PLANNING CoNLAIISSION.NfEETING MINUTES-July 21,2008-Page 2
IWIR111.11W,r, ,;,:,,rri..:, „„„a,,,,:,,,rr a,a,,..n 0ivanjee)\Planning Commission minutes 7-21-08 (2) DR.dFT.docxi
process for dealing with it, and the cost implications for the applicant. The applicant has to
pay the instigation costs for something that was planned by the City. He thinks there should
be a 2 tier system and wonders how many inconsistencies there are in the Comprehensive
Plan. Should it be the responsibility of the City to pay for instigation costs or should the
applicant have to pay?
With regard to connecting to Warner Road,Jivanjee said that there is an elisting entrance
there and the implication is that there won't be a shortcut through Warner Road to Hall
Blvd. to miss the traffic control system on 99W. He said he might have to have some kind
of emergency access to Hall Blvd. Even though there is no traffic impact, there are still
Issues about keeping the through road as a private road and if they can have access to Hall
Blvd. It was advised that Hall Blvd. is under ODOT's control.
President Inman noted that staff has recommended a condition of approval for limiting
trips. Jivanjee said tris is a non-issue. The only problem lie may lia%,c would be denial of
access to Hall Blvd. if he needs an emergency access. He said this issue will addressed as
part of the planning process for the conditional use of the property.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Henry Louie, 13665 SW 130r" Place, Tigard, OR 97223, signed up to speak, but chose not
to testify.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Cominissioner Muldoon said the area isn't well-suited for residential development and
doesn't have any community connectivity aspects. He supports the zone change.
President Inman agrees and also supports the addition of the traffic trip generation
limitation.
Coininissioner Anderson also supports the application.
Motion by Commissioner Verinilyea, seconded by Commissioner Muldoon, to recommend
approval to City Council of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPA 2008-
00004, and Zone Change, ZON 2008-00001, subject to proposed conditions of approval as
laid out in the staff report. The motion passed unanimously.
AYES: Anderson, rishel, I Iasman, Ininan, Muldoon,Veimilyea, Walsh
NAYS: None
ABSTENTIONS: None
EXCUSED: Caffall, Doherty
PLANNING COAMIISSION MEETING MINUTES—July 31,3008—Page 3
terri,,,.W-,fin,,,IV-1•.\3i.N-r....+ Uivanjee)\Plannuig Conunission minutes 7-21-08 (2) DRAPI.docsi
5.2 WORKSHOP — GOAL 14: URBANIZATION
POLICY INTEREST TEAM
Senior Planner Darren Wyss advised that the objective of the meeting was to garner input on
the issues of Goal 14, Urbatuzation and how to custo;nize the language to fit Tigard's needs.
The draft language is broken into 3 goals: providing quality services to City residents; the
City's approach to annexation; and promoting Tigard's interests in urban growth
management decisions. Wyss noted that Commissioner Dougherty provided earlier
colnrnents regarding the commentary and had a few issues with the policy language. Her
cornrnents are reflected in the draft language.
Lisa Hamilton-Treick, Bull Mountain resident, participated in the discussion. She asked how
the interests of-unincorporated Bull Mountain and Metzger are taken into consideration; has
there been representation by those people? Wyss noted that this is Commission's first look
at the language. The colninunity is welcome to discuss the language, but this is the City of
Tigard's Comprehensive Plan, so it must represent the interests of the City residents.
Ialnilton-Treick said this is a big issue with the Urbanization Forum. She's an appointed
member of the West Bull Mountain stakeholder's work group and she's a founder of the
Friends of Bull Mountain. She would like to see those affected included in a balanced,
unbiased discussion about this. President Inman advised that there has been an outreach
effort for this and one of the reasons this discussion has been delayed was to gather more
information.
Hamilton-Treick noticed that the staff report refers to the Tigard Urban Services Agreement
as being updated in July, 2006. Her understanding was that this agreement was terminated.
Staff advised that the intergovernmental agreement was terminated; the Tigard Urban
Services Agreement (TUS_,-�) is still in effect.
She asked if Areas 63 and 64 have been formally included in the TUSA. Staff advised that
both areas are outside the of the urban service area boundaries. She believes that if this
process was handled in an unbiased way, it could help the City's goal to bring
unincorporated Bull Mountain into the City. There should be a thorough, unbiased,
verifiable assessment as to where subsidies are occurring and to what degree.
Commissioner VerlT lyea had a different opinion. I Ie asked, subsidies or not, to what extent
the City has an obligation to sel\,e people who don't live inside the City limits. He doesn't
believe the City should be providing services to properties outside the City limits. Harnilton-
Treick agreed that the City does not have an obligation to go beyond its borders without
being compensated. The question is, is the City being compensated to the extent that the
services are being used by the people outside the City limits. For example, City residents pay
more for the library, but it was only City residents who voted for the bond to build the
library.
PLANNING CO\LIIISSION-MEETING MINUTES—July 21,2008—Page 4
Qivanjee)`Plan17ing Comm usslon 111111utes 7-21-08 (2) DRAFT.docx,
Commissioner Verinilyea said it sounds like there's not much disagreement. The City is
currently making determinations, less on the issues surrounding Bull Mountain and more on
how rhe County as a whole is going to be able to support 187,000 people living outside of
the City limits. They all need services; will it fall on the City to provide them? His
perception is that the City is going to focus on what's best for its citizens and will not be
providing services beyond our own borders. Tigard needs to figure out how best to manage
growth within our own City and focus our resources on services that benefit our citizens.
Hamilton-Treick encouraged language to be put into the Comp Plan that addresses the need
to respect the interests of people who live in unincorporated areas and male a concerted
effort to build a relationship with the people Tigard wants to govern. She's hearing the City
advocating for strong legislation to force these people into the City's boundary. Ron Bunch
advised that Council has affirmed that it's tune for the City to move on and to consider the
interests of its own citizens and develop policies for urbanization. He said that Council's
current policy is to do only voluntary annexations. I-Ie agreed that a cost incidence study is
something that should probably be done on a Countywide basis, as well as a fiscal
sustainability study to determine how long the County can continue to provide services.
Hamilton-Treick wonders if it might be better to loot: at other options for getting urbanized
unincorporated Bull Mountain and West Bull Mountain into a city and maybe it doesn't have
to be Tigard. Commissioner Verinilyea said this is beyond the scope of what the
Commission is trying to do with the Comp Plan amendment, which is to look at what's the
best way to address the urbanization issue within the context of planning within the City
limits of Tigard. 1 Ie thinks there are some big picture policy questions that need to be
addressed— fiscal issues, who is the best service provider, Areas 63 and 64— but, for now,
Tigard will continue with voluntary annexations, and for those already in the City limits,
providing services according to this Comp Plan amendment.
Hamilton-Treick noted that parks and planning are the 2 biggest issues in unincorporated
Bull Mountain; cost is not the biggest factor. She said that another big issue is the way that
the Bull Mountain Community Plan has been replaced with Tigard's Comp Plan as these
piecemeal annexations have happened. Tigard has never included Bull Mountain in its
comprehensive planning process; however, they are peeling off the Bull Mountain
Corrununity Plan and applying a plan that applies to a much different topography. She
hopes that Tigard will address this as it moves forward with piecemeal annexations.
Hamilton-Treick advised that she is a strong supporter of service districts. Why would the
City oppose a service district if people are paying for the services they receive? Bull
Mountain is pari: deficient. If expanding a service district into that area did away with the
argument of folks having to come into Tigard to get more parks, then what is the motivation
for not supporting expansion of service districts?
PLANNING CONIMIISSION:HEFTING-MINUTES—.July 21,2008—Page 5
r :rxri.u;n „„p a,,.t„ ,im,,,rr.0 n-n+.n Uivan)ee)\Planning Commission minutes 7-21-08 (2) DRA T.docxi
President Inman said the code language is more awned at opposing formation of service
districts outside of the City and holding the view that cities are the best provider of services.
For instance, if a seivice district was proposed for parks on West Bull Mountain, the City
would oppose it because it's perpetuating the County providing those services instead of a
city. Hamilton-Treick questioned, if it's going to be years or decades before that area comes
into Tigard, what is better— let that area pay for parks if the people are willing or continue to
point the finger and say they're using our parks and not paying for them when you're
preventing them from having a vehicle to pay for them.
Commissioner Vermilyea said it's less about the money and more about governance and
planning for urban seii ices in that area. If special districts come into play and overlay that
area, it could create more conflict. Given that Tigard has a mandate to be the service
provider in that area, it necessarily wants to oppose special districts that would conflict with
that mandate. I Iamilton-Treick questioned if that's a responsible land use thing to do.
Darren Wyss remarked that, in his view of the language, if Tualatin Hills Part. and
Recreation District (THPRD), Washington County, and the City got together and decided
that the unincorporated area would be better served by THPRD, the policy language is
flexible enough to allow us to re-sign the Urban Services Agreement to let THPRD have it.
Ron Bunch reminded the Commission that Areas 63 and 64 are outside of the Urban
Services Area, so if THPRD wants to continue its policy of bringing in lands into their
district, the City would not oppose that for those areas. However, in accordance with the
TUSH, we have agreed to provide sei v ices for areas inside the Urban Services Area.
Hamilton-Treick noted that there's such an emphasis on Bull Mountain and she wonders
about the Metzger area. She suggests adding language about this to avoid the appearance of
"cherry-picking." Commissioner Vermilyea believes the reason Bull Mountain is mentioned
more often is because expanding westward is the only way the City can grow— that's where
the land is. With regard to the language, VeriT lyea thinks the language should remain
neutral.
Hamilton-Treick does not like the fact that the Bull Mountain Community Plan has been
ignored as areas have been annexed into the City. She doesn't see anything that prevents
that from continuing to occur. She advised that the Bull Mountain Community Plan is their
Comprehensive Plan that was adopted in 1953 and it's the only Comprehensive Pian for
unincorporated Bull Mountain as a part of the County structure. She noted that the
County's policy is not to update any of the County Coininunity Plans at this time. There
was a unanimous request by the stakeholders workgroup for Areas 63 and 64 that the
planning for that area include a sister process that would update the Bull Mountain
Community Plan to create more of a complete community concept for the whole area. The
Board of Commissioners denied the request.
PL..-INNING Co)�\1.\IISSIo)N NILE--PING:IIINUTUS-July 31,3008-Page G
I\C11114N\(.,.,-\C111111.uiu
,.i::,�:,�1:n_:,:\rr�:,x�H-ixroa Qivanjee)\Planng Commission minutes 7-21-00 (2) DRr1FT.doc1,
Staff advised that as areas are annexed into the City, the City's development code standards
and Comp Plan goals and policies apply. This update to the City's Comprehensive Plan will
be much more sensitive to these kinds of issues.
Hamilton-Treick said that one thing that could help this process is to recognize the need
people have for their colrimuizity to not lose their identity, e.g., the Pearl District, the
HaNvthorne District, and Sellwood. Those are all areas of Portland where concerted effort
was made to allow them to be identified as part of a larger city. It's an affordable thing to
offer people to encourage them to avant to be a part of a bigger government.
The Commissioners reviewed the draft language and made the following changes:
Goal 14.1— Change the Y-esidents to citizens
Policy 1. —The City shall ae-t only approve the extension of City services e-xeept:
(rest of policy does not change)
Policy 2. — Change reeagni2es to recognize
Policy 3. —No changes
Policy 4. — New wording: The City shall protect the existing and future delivery of
City services and oppose formation of anv new district or expansion of existing
districts within the Tigard Urban Services area.
Policy 5. — No changes
Action Measures —No changes
Goal 14.2—New wording: The City shall talc all reasonable and necessary steps to
implement the Tigard Urban Services _agreement, including annexation of unincorporared
properties as appropriate.
Policy 1. — No changes
Policy 2. — No changes
Policy 3. — No changes
Policy 4. —Staff advised that this policy currently is being reviewed by the City
Attorney. The Commissioners will review the draft language for this policy at a later
date.
PLANNING COALVISSION MEETING MINUTES—july 21,200S—Page 7
(]ivanjee)\PlanningComi fission inulutes 7-21-OS (2) DR FT.docx,
Policy 5. —New wording: The City shall periodically update and/or amend its
Public Facility Plan to ensure the
predictable and logical provision of urban services for areas anticipated to be within
the City Limits.
Action Measures:
ii. —Utilize and communicate incentives, as appropriate, to encourage owners of
unincorporated properties to annex to the City.
iii. — Since this measure is related to Policy #4, the language will be reviewed at a later
date.
The Commissioners decided to postpone review of the rest of the language until the next
meeting.
G. OTHER BUSINESS
Staff advised that die urban forest section of the Comp Plan was approved by Council and
that there has been an intent to appeal filed by the Home Builders association. The
Commission requested that they be notified earlier in the process when things life this
happen. Also, they would Elie to know ahead of time about significant new development
coining into the City (e.g., the new Target Store in the Triangle).
Colrunissioners Inman, Muldoon, and Walsh will not be at the august 4t1' meeting.
Corrunissioner Verinilyea will chair the meeting that night.
Staff advised that the Transportation Chapter of the Comp Plan will be updated alongside
the Transportation System Plan update that is just now being started. It will come to the
Planning Commission sometime next year. In the meantime, Cotrunissioner Verinilyea
requested a primer on transportation issues in the Triangle. He believes transportation will
be the main issue in the Target application.
Commissioner Muldoon asked about Council's idea that planning could loot: at the highest
best use for the Tigard Triangle and then leave the burden for meeting the requirements of
that best use on regional groups such as ODOT or Metro. Staff said this is a regional issue
that needs to be worked out with other jurisdictions because of ODOT's application of its
mobility standards to the freeway system. Ron Bunch advised that staff will be working on
the Transportation System Plan and that the Tigard Triangle will be looked at specifically.
7. ADJOURNMENT
President Inman adjourned the meeting at 9:47 p.m.
PUNNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES-July 31,3008-Page 8
a,a,,,_>>nrrs_+n..,. alvanjee)\PlannlIIg ComiTuisston Minutes 7-21-05 (2) DRAFT.docx,
J erree Lewis, Planning Commission Secretary
ATTEST: President Jodie Inman
PL LIMN G COMMISSION MEETING\MINUTES—July 3I,3008—Page 9
IV:I ri", n(:r.kzAk8.111- Qivanjee)\Planning Conrunission minutes 7-21-08 (2) DRA1"T.docx,
L1.1 e
O i r
�==
too
I - 1 • __ _ -Y I' ,Its ICY - — I
A - �•� .� a R-
t'
• a i. :h
arvzs_.
7� "r. ', n. i - �� .ham, .F�.�•Il z -
ff. t7n
1010,
FF
•fir—"'} ��M' •1 � • .11 A* _ _
�- .. f .4 _ _ �.� . �`t-�. . • /'rte \_. ._- i
n .n
1 endf'• « \
HI-06
•~ ' 1=€
M 3
CIO
W "1-
Ln
LLS
IL
rk
ONZ8_
Pot-
t 'h..+ ,fit _ :,.�, •��. I� - „i��• __ _ y_�
_ j j ti PFL a r }
lb
.`41#y,. _ •rte .t
rr
"art . I.� _♦ _!r t �I ,r - t� or.
Ir
•. � �, - � r c Ali
`3� � i�- Wit•'* :L' 4. .� \\
and H106
om