Loading...
Ordinance No. 78-36 CITY OF TIG.NRD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 78- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION BY C&C CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, CHANGING THE ZONE DISTRICT OF A TRACT OF LAND ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SW BEEF BEND ROAD AT PACIFIC HIGHWAY AND DEPICTED ON WASHINGTON COUNTY "TAX MAP 2S1 1.0A AS TAX LOT 3900, FROM WASHINGTON COUNTY RU20 TO ("C-P") COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL AND ADOPTING EXHIBIT "A" AND "B" , GRANTING THE :APPLICATION AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: %`SECTION 1: Finding that the lands hereinafter described have been hereto- fore and are now classified as Washington County RU20 pursuant to the provisions of the City of Tigard's Zoning Ordinance and Tigard Ordinance No. 75-52, and further finding that pursuant to prescribed procedures, the abovestated application for a zoning map amendment was heard in a public hearing held by the Tigard Planning Commission on April 18, 1978, and all interested persons were there and then afforded an opportunity to be heard, and thereafter the Planning Commission filed its report and recommended approval with the City Recorder, a copy therefor hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof , -the Council adopts the following substantive findings: 1. There exists a public need to apply City of Tigard zoning to all parcels of land in City of Tigard in order to ease and consistently administer regulations throughout the City, and; 2. That the proposed C-P zoning is compatible with surrounding zoning and is consistent with the NPO #3 Commercial-Professional Plan designation. SECTION 2: THEREFORE, pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 18.88 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the applicant's request for an amendment of the Tigard Zoning Map of 1970 to zone those lands described in the attached Exhibit "A", for Commercial Professional("C-P") use is hereby approved, subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.40 (Commercial Professional Zone) of the Tigard Municipal Code so embodied in or ex- u hibited by the document submitted and identified as follows: Exhibit "A" ; - Legal description Exhibit "B Staff Report and further subject to the following conditions: 1. That 10 feet of additional right-of-way be dedicated along SW Beef Bend Road for the portion of the property where the r. existing right-of-way is only 40 feet , and that the ap plicant file with the City Recorder a non-remonstrance agree- ment against a future Local Improvement District (LID) for street improvements to SW Beef Bend 'load. ORDINANCE NO. 78- :: ZC 8-78 2. That no development occur on the site until adequate sanitary sewer service is available to the site. SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective on and after the 31st day after its passage by the Council and approval of the Mayor, i i s PASSED: By rjth*,& vote of all Council members present this /1;z' day of zl1978, after being read two times by number and title only. i /riL Recorder - City of igard r f r t i i APPROVED: By the Mayor this /- day of 1978. C Mayor - City of Tigard rt PAGE 2 ORDINANCE NO.78- 6 `. ZC 8-7$ Jtder 110. 2P _30I3 t : EXHIBIT "A" ; A tract of land in Section 10, Township 2 South, Range' 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows : Beginning at an iron at the center of said Section 10., 'and ►.:; running thence South 89°27' West 223 feet; thence North 0°05' West 414. 6 feet; thence North' 89°27' East 772.6 feet to a point on the West boundary of West Side Highway; thence. South l"42" West along said highway, 427.1. feet to a point in the South line of the Northeast. quarter of said Section...10,.,�? e»ce South 89'27' West 447. 7 feet to the place of beginning: f : SAVE AND EXCEPT a tract of land in Section 10, Township .2 ' South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Neridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows:. E 'p Beginning at an iron at the center of said Section 10, gunning thence North .W27' East 447.7 feet, more or less, to a .point on the Westerly boundary of the West Side Highway, which point is the true place of beginning of the tract herein to be de- scribed; running thence North 13'42' East along the 1400' terly j boundary of the West Side highway, 427.1 feet; thence South 89°27' West 210.13 feet; thence South 13°42' West par_,}, lel with. the Westerly boundary of the West Side Highway, 427.1 feet; thence North 89°27 ' East 210. 13 feet to the true place. of be- ginning of the tract herein described. 1 • STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.3 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 18, 1978 Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room 10865 S.W. Walnut Street - Tigard, Oregon Docket: Zone Change ZC 8-78 Request: For a zone map amendment from County RU-20 to City C-P, "Commercial Professional" for a 4.35 acre parcel. Location:- North side of S.W. Beef Bend' Road at Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 10A, Tax Lot 3900) . Applicant: C & C Construction Company 1 . Findings of Fact: I. The site is designated "Commercial -Professional" on the NPO #3 Plan and is currently zoned RU-20 (county urban medium residential) . 4 2. The applicant is requesting the application of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance to a recently annexed (2/8/78) 4. 35 acre parcel 3. The site is currently vacant, except for a single family residence situated on the southwest corner of the property. Surrounding land uses are single family -to the west and north and King City to the south. To the east the property abuts the frontage road and further east, across Pacific ' Highway, are two single family homes. 4.. The NPO #3 Plan states as follows: "Development will coincide with the provisions of public streets, water and sewerage facilities. These facilities sha.11 'be (a) capable of adequately serving all intervening properties as well as the proposed development, and (b) designed to meet City or County standards". 5. Water service is available to the site from the Tigard Water District via a 12 inch line in Pacific Highway and a 12 inch line in Beef Bend Road. 6. The existing house is on a septic tank system. Sanitary sewer service is currently not available to the site. Sewer is available to the north, at Bull Mountain Road, but due to the terrain, a pump station would be required. On previous occasions the Unified Sewerage Agency has not approved pump stations for multiple unit developments. Sewer service to the south could be ;provided by the King City line, however, this system is currently over capacity and will remain so until the lower Tualatin Interceptor } has been constructed. y STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.3 April 18, 1978 TIGARD PLANNING COi:JIMISSION Page 2 7.. SN Pacific Highway is designated an arterial street (NPO #3) requiring 80-120 feet of right of way. There is currently 270 feet of right of way on Pacific Highway, including the frontage road. SIV Beef Bead Road is designated a collector street (NPO ##3) requiring 60 feet of right of way. For approximately the first 360 feet, west of the frontage road, there is currently 60 feet of right of way on SW Beef Bend Road. For the remaining 120 feet (west) only 40 feet of right of way exists. Therefore, an additional 10 feet of right of way is required along the western portion of parcel abutting Beef Bend Road. II . Conclusionary Findings: 1. There exists a-public need to :apply City of Tigard zoning to all parcels of land in the City of Tigard in order to ease and consistently administer land use regulations throughout the city. 2. The proposed C-P zoning is compatible with the surround- ing zoning and is consistent with the NPO #3 Commercial Professional Plan designation. 3. At the time of this writing the availability of adequate . sanitary service has not been determined. III . Staff Recommendations: Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusionary Findings, staff recommends approval, subject to. the following conditions: 1. That 10 feet of additional right of way be dedicated along SAY Beef Bend Road for the portion of the property where the existing right of way is only 40 feet, and that the applicant file with the city recorder a non-remonstrance agreement against a future Local Improvement District (LID) for street improvements to SSV Beef Bend Road. 2. That no development occur on the site until adequate sanitary , sewer service is available to the site. 1( 6 ell CD O C C- 6 -all J o ° ' I o �• en M �-- WON ry cT 433 £I6L '' In Q".r �\ F Q •� �ql. t ? E Nin ^ 1, 7 .9 165. 6 0Ay 5 �o 92e£ co z-ztz Minos < `•�•R• OF/s •.'f L.. 41'E 796.5co 4c 1N0 Ste. •� , :� o � food o, cr • ,ty o M,IOeOM OC'690• �• - ��r N S8•B91 CIJ ¢ Q• i rA iDw P C _ N ----' 39 ti 'u 8£•962 - �Sa iJ _ '' t' 3 locos or N� m O �• ® ao O `• (� OS-O91 2 Q 907 P 'Ooh 000S N? 1,L90Z e Cfj k`i� a CQe J, aN''�,,+ t Na �) J ,9" 3.ZO ON 99'£Z6 NLOOS raj e NARRATIVr,' ADDRESSING THE "FASANO" REQUIREMENTS 1. Nature of the proposal and the reason for requesting the par ticular action: A zoning change from County RU 20 to City CP, and a .conditional use permit, as well as height variance is re- ' quired for construction of the proposed facility. 2 How the proposed'use is in conformance with Tigard's adopted Comprehensive Plan: The proposed use of the facility for a "Home for the Aged" is compatible with other uses made of ad- jacent property, and compatible with the land use plan which shows this area as a commercial-professional area. 3. Community need and/or public benefit derived from the propos- ed action: The "Home for the Aged" offers an alternative to traditional nursing home care. There is a need for these fac- ilities in the area, as a less costly, more flexible alterna- tive for individuals not requiring nursing care. 4. Any Changes in environmental, economic or social conditions and/or changes in availability of public services, or access, and/or any other aspect of community development directly af- fecting .the subject site that would justify the reuested ae- tion: Population studies show that the age group 5 years of age and older is increasing in the Tigard area. This propos- ed development is in response to the need. 5. Why the proposed location for yoir proposed land use is more suitable than other locations in the City zoned to allow the proposed use? not applicable for conditional use permit,: Not Applicable. 6. The impact or effect the proposed development, use, or acti- vit7l will have on adjacent sites, occupants; or activities and on the immediate neighborhood. The intensity of traffic and impact of the development is negligible. Careful attention is being given to landscaping and storm/cater runoff. Appro- priate soil berms, combined with a water collection basin will be utilized as necessary. ,j :u A AIW Page 2 "Fasano" Requirements 7. The types of public services necessitated by your proposed development and the impact that your project may have on these public services. (Examples of such public services ray be fire protection, police protection, water and sewer ser- vice, schools, parks, streets, roads, public transportation and/or utilities.): The site is presently adequately served by public bus transportation which may be utilized by employ- ees of the home or visiting relatives. Routine fire and po- lice protection will be needed. There will be no additional requirements for schools or roads.. Utilities to service the site are available at the junction of Bull Mountain Road and S.W. Pacific Hwy., Tigard. These will be extended to the site as required. r , . MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING CONUISSION April 18, 1978 Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room 10365 S.W. Walnut St. Tigard, Oregon 1, Call to Order: Meeting was called to order 7:40 PM 2. Roll Call : t _ 1. Present: Tepedino, Popp, Quimby, Wood, Rossman, Brian Sakata 'Excused Absence: Corliss 3.- Approval of Minutes: The minutes of April 4, 1978 were approved with the following corrections: Tepedino stated at the top of page 6 "intelligence or put something over"; Wood added two additional comments under the discussion of the Church of God sign - 1) the commission concurred that the church 's proposed new sign was acceptable and there was no need to review it prior to construction and 2) they also agreed that all such signs (new to replace previously approved ones) should be looked at by the Planning Commission members. 4. Communications: Staff stated there were none at this' time. 5. PublicHearings: 5.1 ZONE CHANGE ZC 5-77 (Wedgewood) NPO 7 A request by Wedgewood Homes for a preliminary plan and program review for a Planned Unit Development including 48 multiplex units, 68 attached units and 232 detached units for a total of 348 units, and a zone map amendment from Washington County RS-1 to City R7 PD, "Single Family Residential" Planned Development on a 65.31 acre parcel at the corner of SW 135th and Walnut Streets (Wash. Co. Tax ITap 1S1 33D, Tax Lot 700 and 2S1. 4A, Tax Lot 700). A. Staff Report: Read by Laws B. Applicant's Presentation: Gene Ginther, stated he has a close working relationship with staff, and that this plan is intended for general concept approval and the next step (plan and program) would provide all details stated as missing by staff. Ile explained major traffice circulation plan and modification ;.k MINUTES - TIGARD PLANNINGCiNIIIISSION April 18, 1978 Page 2 John Cline, Pres. of Wedgewood Homes stated that all .units proposed will be for sale and no rentals, referring to a previous development -on Murray . Blvd. ds examples of '.the quality of their homes. He explained the location of townhouses to relate. to Greenway and also to provide indoor-outdoor pool to compensate for higher density. He presented slides of the types of units that were proposed and stated the intent of the frontage road was to provide privacy -and . eliminate back yards on major streets. He also pointed out their attempt to blend this development with the natural environment . *Wood questioned the impact on the schools stating that Single Family would be the same as Single Family Attached. *Ginther 'stated his comments were based on several studies' (Reedville, Beaverton School District, Lake Oswego) *Wood asked why the school children generated by Single Family Attached are the same as -Single Family and and if there was any reason not to assume the proposed larger attached units would not generate the same children and traffic as the Single Family. *Quimby questioned control of the storm water detention system and whether someone would be paid to control the water release Gordon PlcPherson, stated that the system is a passive system and acts like a catch basin and doesn't require manual control; he showed a diagram and explained hole the system worked. *Quimby asked where the overflow water would go. *McPherson responded the water would be chanelled to the natural watercourse from detention ponds. Road system would also have catch basins which will follow minor natural watercourse. *Tepedino asked if the road run-off would be directed up or downstream from the detention ponds. *McPherson stated the system was designed to provide for maximum control - the flow depends on the terrain. *Sakata questioned the statement of no rentals *Applicant stated that he could not stop the individual from renting after he purchased it. *Wood asked if there was any scrt of control which could be exerted over the con-.Rion of sale to eliminate the " rental problem *The applicant stated they will only sell one unit per individual. C. Public Testimony: a. Proponent's Reuben Dacklin, representing Sunamoto 's asked that consideration be given to property owner's right to self for the highest and best use. MINUTES TIGARD PLHNNING ,1T^•IISSION April 18, 1975 Page 3 b. Opponent ' s Mr. and Airs. Schrauger submitteli a letter for the Planning Commission registering their opposition to the. placement of multi-units citing increased traffic problems. Mr. Selliken also _submitted a letter of opposition. ' Richard Bodyfelt, acting for Bonnie Owens, Chairwom n of NPO #7, submitted a statement in opposition to the proposal because the NPO #7 plan has not pet been adopted. Lavelle Helm, 13280 SW Walnut asked what would be across from her home, expressed opposition to multi-plex.units, asked what type of entrance and where would it be from Walnut, ;asked how many 10,000 square foot lots there would be. . Laws pointed out where multi-plex units would .be and where access would be. Applicant could not say at this time the number and size of all of the lots and stated that .would be addressed in the general plan and program. Richard Bodyfelt , questioned the ability of Valnut to handle the increased traffic and cited dangerous access to Walnut due to terrain. He also questioned the placement . of multiplexes in a Single Family corner, and stated he would prefer locating them more centrally in the , development . He submitted a petition representing 52 residents of the area in opposition. Bibianne Scheckla, 10980 SW Fairhaven Way, opposed multi- family units abutting existing single family units and added that the development was not sensitive to existing backyards of residents. John Overbill, 13320 SW Walnut, was concerned over the impact of the development in relation to the extension of 135th. D. Staff Recommendations: Based on staff finding-sand conclusionary findings, staff recommends approval of the preliminary plan and program and that the general plan and program address the following points when submitted. 1. A half street improvement to county collector standards (44 ' pavement 8 foot sidewalks be provided along the 135th street frontage. ) MINUTES , . TIGARD ANNING .�JAIISSION April 18, 1978 Page 4 2. A half street improvement 'to county collector•standards (40' pavement 8 foot sidewalk or an equivalent improvement per 'Wash. Co. Public Works Department) . approval be provided along the Walnut Street frontage. 3, A landscape architect (with acceptable expertise) be included on the design team for the planned development,;.;:; 4.- A detailed landscape plan be submitted paging particular attention to drainage areas, the-buffer on SW 135th and-:;.M,• SW Walnut, street trees, sidewalk locations and landscape islands within the cul -de-sac streets. `r? 5. The street tree and sidewalk plan for_ M 130th..bP. co— ordinated with the Summer Lake Planned Development. 6. The .units along SAY 135th and Walnut Streets be allowed a minimum of 12 feet frontyard setback for the house and 20 feet yard setback for the garages. 7. The applicant work with staff to .enlarge the width of the buffer strip wherever possible. 8. An 8 foot wide asphalt pedestrian path be provided through the "greenway". 9. The number of attached single family units, approximate lot areas and proposed setbacks and access points be shown. 10. That Phase II be subject to Planning Commission review. REBUTTAL: Ginther, Applicants Engineer, was agreeable to staff recommendation and addressed some of the concerns raised in opposition- concerning multi-plexes in which he referred to the NPO 7 plan and framework plan and he _also addressed the problems on Walnut. Scheckla spoke for the people on 129th, having been asked by %1r. Al lori E. Commission Discussion: Wood questioned the validity of the data on school and traffic impacts based on proposed types of attached units. He felt there was no reason not to expect similar impact as detached units; he felt allowing the full 348 units as proposed was a serious question; questioned the 2-story units.backing up to single story; recommended reducing density back or near the "underlying zone and increasing the size of detention ponds (5070 error factor) to ensure sufficient capacity. Other than that, he was generally in favor. MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 18, 1978 Page 5 Rossman• opposed- based. on the NPO 7 opposition and statement of surrounding residents, Brian favored the general concept but saw the need for reducing density and additional open recreation sp4ce:_ Sakata questioned the density and the very small 3000 square foot lots for multiplex units; also was concerned by_ the impact on Beaverton School District and referred to a letter from Walt White. Quimby expressed concern for school impact; the multiplex E lots were too small; and stated there was not enough play area for' children within the development.. Tepedino stated all of his concerns had been expressed. Popp expressed concern for density and up/down units; impact on the surrounding single family area; favored common wall units but more single family style area, not the typical area for multi--units; favored the basic concept but should be lowered density and more recreation area, more single family character and there was a need to address a detailed detention system as part of the final ' plan approval. Wood moved for approval based on staff findings and ree commendations and adding the following conditions: 11) That construction abutting 129th and 200 feet north of Walnut Street be limited to single family attached or detached units. 12) The overall density of the project be more closely brought in compliance with the underlying R-7 zone. 13) The applicant must show justification for' a higher density than the R-7 zone, but in no case more than 300 units. 14) That the reduction in the multiplex density be used to expand the open space area within the development for both active and passive recreation. 15) That storm water detention be designed to 15010 of the 100 year flood limits. Brian second the motion It was approved 5-2 Sakata and Rossman voting no. 5.2 ZONE CHANGE ZC 4-78 (Harley Adams) NPO 2 A request by Harley Adams for a general plan and program review of an industrial planned development and a zone map amendment from R 7 "Single Family Residential" to M-4 PD "Industrial Park" Planned Development on a .61 acre parcel at the intersection of SSS Katherine and Tigard Streets (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2BB, Tax Lot 100) MMUTES, TIGARD PLANNING 'mMISS . .d April 18, I978 Page 6 A. Staff Report: Read by Laws B. Applicant 's Presentation: Tom Hamman,. Project• Archi•tect, spoke to changes from the preliminary plan and t-he modified shape of the building with a better and more flexible design' about 200 feet less floor area which was much lower than the original. C. Public Tbstimony: None D. Staff Recommendations: f Based on staff findings of fact and conclusionary findings staff recommends approval of the general plan and program I and zone map amendment from R-7 to M-4 PD with the .following conditions: 1. If substantial construction or development has not taken place within one (1) year of the effective date of this I zone change the property shall revert back to the present &-7 zone. 2. A half street improvement to local street standards be provided along the Katherine Street frontage (to include meandering sidewalks and, if necessary, curb to protect the existing trees) . 3. Five feet. of right of way be dedicated along the Katherine Street frontage for street improvement purposes. The improvements will be designed to .protect the large oak tree at the intersection of SW Katherine and Tigard Streets. 4. That offices will be the primary use, with secondary uses ancillary to the office uses and subject to the following criteria: a. Low traffic generators. b. Low generators of noise. c. Non-labor intensive. d. Uses confined to storage rather than manufacturing assembly and processing. 5. .That the developer agree to provide joint access with Tax r Lot 200 at such time as that lot is developed by the Planned Development. Lanscaping would be placed within the area on Tax Lot 100 where the access width is to occur. In order to assure future joint access a joint access agreement shall be recorded with the deed of Tax Lot 100. 6. That zero setback be required along the west property line and five (5) foot setbacks along the south and east property lines. E. Commission Discussion: ....... ....... r MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING C01I1ISSION April 18, 1978 Page 7 Brian moved for- approval based on staff recommendations and findings. ; {Mood seconded and the vote for approval was unanimous. 5.3 ZONE CHANGE 2C 8-78 (C & C Construction Co. ) NPO 3 A request by C & C Construction Co. for a zone.map amendment from Washington County RU-20 to city CP: "Commercial/Professional on a 4. 35 acre parcel at the intersection of Beef Bend Rd, and Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 10A, Tax Lot 3900) . Popp asked for clarification on annexation status. Laws clarified 'the Boundary Commission action if final unless conditioned to _voter approval; the Boundary Comm. on 2/8/78 did not condition approval therefore constitutes final action. A. Staff Report:- Laws read. B. Applicant 's Presentation: • Lester Marty, representing C & C Mountain Park Health Care, stated that prior to construction a pump station would be approved and installed to pump sewer to a city line when a gravity system is available. Becky Mansfield, 16325 Bull Mountain Rd. , administrator of King City Convalescent Home, stated the need for such a facility. Popp explained that testimony would be appropriate for the second hearing item on the Conditional Use. Fred Anderson, 11550 Bull Mtn. Road, questioned the - status of the NPO plan and if proposal was to bring into conformance. Laws stated yes. C. Public Testimony: None " D. Staff Recommendations: I r Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusionary Findings, staff recommends approval, subject to the following conditions: - MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 18, 1978 Page 8 1 . That 10 fent of additional right of way be dedicated along SSP Beef Bend Road for the portion . of the property '.where the existing right of way is only 40 feet; and that the applicant file* with the city recorder a non-remonstrance agreement against a future Local Improvement District (LID) for street improvements to SLY Beef Bend Road'. 2. That no development occur on the site until adequate\ sanitary sewer service is available to the site. E. Commission Discussion: Quimby made a motion for denial citing the lack of sewer services available at this time and in the near ` future. Tepedino seconded the motion. Wood disagreed with the motion stated ther I had been addressed by staff recommendations and ecan be handled as part of the development proposal. The motion failed, with Quimby voting yes, f Wood made a motion for approval based on staff findings, and recommendations. Rossman seconded The motion passed 6-1 with Quimby voting no. 5.4 CONDITIONAL USE CU 8-78 (C & C Const. Co. ) NPO 3 A request by C & C Const. Co. for a conditional use r permit to construct a Home for the Aged in a Medium 4 High Density (Washington County. RU 20 Zone) on a 4. 35 acre parcel at the intersection of SW Beef Bend Road and Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 10A, Tax ° Lot 3900) . ' Laws recommended tabling the proposal pending resolution of sanitary sewer service and asked commissioners whether 'they wished to hear the staff report or table. "F Applicant wished to have the item heard anyway. r ' Brian nYoved to table the item. i Quimby seconded. Tepedino was generally opposed to tabling saying the applicant presents the case and takes a chance on denial t and would like to hear the evidence. 1.11 MUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 18, 1978 Page 9 Wood wished to hear the item and make a decision on the basis of the evidence presented. Popp felt the applicant was entitled to hear and be r able to address all the issue not just sewer. Motionfailed 473, Tepedino, Popp and Wood voting no, Brian, Sakata, Quimby, Rossman voting yes. A. Staff Report: Read by Laws who also distributed ' letters received from the Mayor of King City. Sakata asked if there was a need for a similar use inter- pretation prior to acting on the Conditional Use. Wood asked what zone a health care facility would be in.' It was the consensus of the Commission that it was a similar use. ! B. Applicant 's Presentation: Lester Marty, C & C Const. Co. , and Mountain Park Health Care, explained what the proposal consisted of; limited supervision home for the aged, not a, hospital, not actually an apartment but provides an intermediate step in housing for the aged at lesser cost than a• convalescent home. He explained what they are willing. to do to solve the sewer issue; provide and maintain a pump station on an approved basis; they will also provide any necessary plans to handle drainage. !' C. Public Testimony: a. Proponent 's (. Norman Glen, Owner of Property, stated that .they were under the impression that sewer can be provided by pump station and annexed to the city to obtain sewer. b• Opponent's Estell Cook, 11510 SIV Crown Dr. , King City, stated the applicant has not adequately addressed sewer and ` drainage problems. r Beverly Froudy, SW Bull Mtn. Rd. , Chairman of County Planning Organization for Bull Mountain, expressed � concern over the Road and a major safety problem at Frontage Road and Pac Hwy. AW MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April. 18, 1978 Page 10 Fred Anderson, .11550 Stix Bull Ntn. Rd. , stated he was speaking for the neighborhood. Popp asked if he had written permission to represent them and if not he could only speak for himself. . Andersop objected to that ruling but said he was here for himself anyway and showed slides to explain traffic. problems at Frontage Road and Pac Hwy. and Beef..Bend; also was concerned over the provision of sewer.services as related to NPO Policy 21 (provision of adequate services) including storm drainage; he also questioned .the height of proposed structures in relation to surrounding low density residential; opposed to piece-meal approach to solving, of problems. Dan Forest, 8989 SSV McDonald, was not opposed to the general concept was just concerned about transportation issues and protection of possible residents (pedestrians) and they needed more details to adequately judge the proposal. D. Staff Recommendations: 1. Since the provision of sanitary sewer to the site has not been resolved, staff recommends tabling the request until adequate sewer service has been guaranteed. r 2. The sanitary sewer service is determined not to be available, staff recommends denial . 3. If sanitary sewer service is determined to be available and a lift station is approved, based on the findings of fact and conclusionary findings, staff recommends approval, subject to the following conditions k a. That a detailed site and design plan be submitted for Design Review approval,- to include access, parking, landscaping, pedestrian pathways , on-site k recreational facilities (geared to the needs of the residents) and a signing program. b. That, prior to submission for Design Review, the applicant show proof that storm water out-fall will be accepted by the appropriate agency and/ . or adjacent properties, and that the applicant submit a detailed storm drainage detention plan for approval by the Building and Engineering Departments. f r MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMiNIISSION r April 18, 1978' Page 11 c. That a half street improvement be made, to collector street standards (60 feet of right of way and 44 feet of pavement), on Beef Bend Road; and that a street improvement , to State Highway Department standards, be made to the Frontage Road. A` 'Popp entered letter from Mayor-King City - not- opposed to project, only concerned over sewer and. drainage. Rebuttal : - Bob Dietrick - Architect, addressed concerns raised in opposition concerning storm drainage can and 'will be controlled not to exceed natural rate, not' high traffic generator, sewer problem has been addressed at length and is now a political issue as to the ultimate solution, and building designed to take advantage of terrain. Rossman moved for approval with staff- recommendation m 3. Motion failed for a lack of second. ' Wood concerned over traffic problems also height limitation without knowledge of visual effects. Favored tabling. Tepedino stated that Commission must make decision on evidence presented and should not defer decision because of lack of adequate submission - sewer, drainage, traffic, safety, height of structure all not adequately addressed. Tepedino moved for denial, motion seconded by Quimby. hood concerned over denial because most of the testimony was not in opposition only addressed concerns for items that could be conditions of approval. Popp favors tabling to allow addressing all issues . Motion defeated 4-3 (No) (Yes) Popp Tepedino Wood Quimby Brian Sakata Rossman Brian moved to table pending the resolution of MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 18, 1978 Page 12 sanitary sewer and the- submission by the applicant of a storm water detention plan. . Popp seconded. - Wood requested that the motion be amended to include an assessment of traffic impacts and- •a drawing be submitted reflecting the visual effects of the height of the buildings to. adjacent properties. Motion was approved 4-3 (No) (Yes) i Tepedino Wood Quimby Popp Sakata Brian Rossman 6. Other Business: Similar use interpretation on item 5.5. Staff " requested of the Commission to determine if a retail sales and rental store being proposed at the .intersection of Canterbury Square and Gaarde Street was a similar use as a hardware or department which are permitted uses in a C4 Zone. Herb Jandt explained proposed project, that it would be considerably smaller than typical rental operation 3,000 4,000 square feet as opposed to 20,000 square feet - combined retail/rental. One area devoted strictly to ski rental and sales, plus complete hardware/department store. Quimby stated she was not sure if it was similar in use. Sakata stated it should be a conditional use because she was not sure. Brian, Wood and Popp felt the use was similar to a hardware or department store. Brian moved and Wood second the motion that the proposed use be interpreted as being a similar permitted use in the C4 Zone. The vote was unanimously approved. 6. 1 BELLWOOD REVIEW A. Staff Report: Laws memo from Edwards CDP. MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 18, 1978 Page 13 B. Applicant 's- Presentation: ' Bill McMonagle, 8905 S.W. Commercial Street, problem because development approval is so old. Referred to ; Item 9 of minutes from August 20, 1968 Planning Commission. They feel the proposal is justified and only with a .clarification on -density all other items can be handled in Design Review. Ray Bartel, 10952 S.W. 21st Milwaukie, Architect, presented plan showing how staff concerns will be addressed. Plan, based on 12 units/acre as .stated by staff. Density proposed is not out of line with intent of approved Planned Development that the density review did not necessarily mean . a reduced density. The proposal is compatible with surrounding residents. i C. Staff Recommendation: The applicant prepare a justification for a specific density, based upon a more thorough consideration of existing natural features, adopted city policies and with attention to the issue of compatibility between single family and multi-family residential- uses. G This proposal to be reviewed by the Planning. Commission,. Rebuttal: McMonagle questioned carrying capacity of -land present A2 density allowing 12/acre this is less than allowed in 1968. He felt apartments should be intermingled not segregated - does not. see any reasons for judging incompatible. D. Commission Action: Popp asked what proposed density is 11.4/ac. Te edino saw main issue related to zo ing/plan nang not being static New plans/policies have been developed. The question is who assumes the burden q of the change in policies. 4 Brian saw considerable difference in applicant's proposal (1968) with a 2-3 projected time schedule as opposed to 10 years that the developer assumes the risk that things will change over time. Sakata saw need to apply new regulations. Quimby felt City should not be held to an agreement or decision made 10 years ago. b1I N UT FS TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 18, 1078 Page 14 Wood stated prior Commission action does not specify overall density .calls for third phase density -review. Applicant assumes risk over 10 years that. things will change. Aust consider in light of existing plans. Popp .stated he was not opposed to review, Would like to see greenway continued. Applicant should work to todays allowable densities. 1 Brian moved for approval of staff recommendation and motion was seconded -by Tepedino. Passed unanimously. 8.2 ASSEMBLY OF GOD free standing sign on S.W. Gaarde Street. ' Staff informed the Commission that the Assembly of God Church on S.W. Gaarde is proposing to erect an internally illuminated free standing sign.. The Commission directed staff to inform the applicant that he must make application for a conditional use permit. Meeting was adjourned at 1:00 A.M. 1 ''