Ordinance No. 79-88 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 79- 8
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION BY MADELINE T.
COCHRAN FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, CHANGING
THE ZONE DISTRICT FOR A TRACT OF LAND AT 10695 S.W. N. DAKOTA, AND DEPICTED
ON WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX MAP 1S1 34DA, TAX LOT 1600, FROM CITY OF TIGARD
"R-7" TO CITY OF TIGARD "R-5" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (5,000 SQUARE: FOOT
RESIDENTIAL) AND ADOPTING EXHIBITS "A", "B", & "C" 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 heretofore
and are now classified as City of Tigard "R-7" and further
findings that pursuant to prescribed procedures, the above-stated application
for a zoning map amendment was heard in a public hearing held by the Tigard
Planning Commission on August 7, 1979, 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 therefore hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, the
Council adopts the following substantive findings:
A. That the applicant is in conformance with the Urban Low Density
Residential designation of NPO #7 Plan, and
B. That the proposed zoning is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
SECTION 2: THEREFORE, pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 18.88 of
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 Single Family Residential (5,000 square foot residential) -
(R-5) use is hereby approved subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.20
(Single Family Residential Zones) of the Tigard Municipal Code as embodied
in or exhibited by the documents submitted and identified as follows:
Exhibit "A": - Legal Description
Exhibit "B": - Staff Report
Exhibit "C": - Site Plan
And further subject to the following conditions:
1. That the applicant dedicate ten feet of right-of-way along S.W.
North Dakota Street with half-street improvements to collector
-+-reef- standards prior to issuance of building permits or after
performance bond for improvements have been approved.
2. That construction and drainage plans be approved by the Engineering
and Building Departments prior to issuance of permits. -
3. No Occupancy Permits shall be issued until all conditions have
been satisfied and approved by the Planning Director and final
inspections have been `made by the Building Official.
4. No Minor Land Partitions shall be made in reference to this
project unless formal application is made to the City of Tigard
Planning Department and the Minor Land Partition is approved.
5, No changes will be made to approved plans or specifications
unless formal application is made to the appropriate department
and changes are approved by that department. Application for.
changes will be made in writing and shall include applicable
drawings, engineering specifications and other details requested
by the department. No con5tructi0ii shall take place in these
instances until after the changes have been approved. Any
deviation from this condition will result in the immediate
posting of a stop work order on the project or any portion of
the project.
SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective on and after the 31st day
after its passage by the Council and approval of the Mayor.
PASSED: By (jn n�rt,o„ vote of all Council members present
this Q2g day of S Pipi�ev
�n , 1979, after being read two
times by number and title only.
Recorder - City of Tig
APPROVED: By ,the Mayor this y day of 1979.
Mayor City of T igard
Page 2
ORDINANCE NO, 79-
2-;28-79
°` Attachments
J t
ORDER NO, 47-7674
EMM Al "A"
DESCRIPTION
A parcel of land in the NE h of the SE of Section 34, Township 1
South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washingtcan County, Oregon,
described as follows:
Beginning at the SW corner of the Clifford 0. Gunderson tract as
described in dead recorded in Book 383, Page 742, said point of
beginning also being on the North line of the John L. Hicklin DLc
and in the centerline of SW North Dakota Avenue North 89045' West
602®5 feet and South 0°33' West 528.9 feet from the PTE corner of the
SE of Section 34; thence North 0033' East, along the West line of
the said Gunderson tract, 150,0 feet; thence South 89° East
to the said North line of the Hicklin DLC, 134.3 feet to a point on
the asst line of that certain tract of land conveyed to Cheaters L.
Robinson, et a1, by need recor3ed in Book 471, Page 385; thence
South 0033' West,. along the West line of said Robinson tract, 150.0
feet to the Sal corner thereof, said SW corner also being on the Nort.M
line of the said Hicklin DLC:. thence North 890 West, 134.3 feet to
the point: of beginning,
TOGETHER WXM a non-exclusive easement for .rights of ingress and egress
from the above described
parcel, over and across ..
feet of the above said Robinson tract the Southerly 150.®
A
C
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA 5.4
TIGARD PLANNING COrLMISSION
August 7, 1979 7:30 P.M.
Fowler Junior High - Lecture Room
10865 S.W. Walnut - Tigard, Oregon
t
g
r
rXDCKE.T: Zone Change ZC, 28-79 -
APPLICANT; Mr. and Mrs. William Cockran OWNER: same
9650 S.W. 47th Ave
Portland, Oregon 97219
APPLICATION DATE: July 2, 1979 E
A
SITE LOCATION; 10695 S.W. North Dakota (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 34DA, Tax Lot 1600)
S
REQUEST: For a zone map amendment from City of Tigard R-7 "Single Family Residen-
tial" to City of Tigard R-5 (5,000 square foot residential) on a .40
acre'parcel.
I. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The site is designated "Urban Low Density" on the NPO #7 Plan permitting t'
six single family dwelling units per gross acre. .
2. Applicable NPO #7 Plan policies
for residential development are as
follows:
Public service impro-cements - Policies 2 and 3 (page 3)
3. The applicants are requesting the rezoning of the .40 acre site in
accordance with Section 18.20.030 of the Tigard Municipal Code and
in compliance with the City of Tigard Housing Implementation policy
adopted on May 21, 1979.
4. There is.a single family unit on the southern portion of the site front-
ing S.W. North Dakota Street. The site is generally flat with.a slight
declining grade to the north.
The entire surrounding land uses are single family units. The properties
to the south, east and west are in the county. The subdivision adjacent
to the north is in the City.
5. The site at the corner of S.W. 106th (a City street) and S.W. North
Dakota which is a county road: S.W. 106th fronting the eastern, pgrtion
of the site is fully improved to City standards. S.W. North Dakota is
designated as a collector street on the NPO #7 Plan. It presently
in substandard condition having inadequate paving and right-of-;:ay
width with no curbs or sidewalks.
6. Sewer service is available to the site from the line off S.W. 106th.
Water service is also available.
i
r
STkU'F REPORT , }
B
AGENDA 5.4
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
August 7, 1979
ZC 28-79 f
Page 2 f
II. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS;
1. The request is in conformance to the Housing Implementation Policy:
2. Sewer and water are available to the site.
3. Street improvement along S.W. North Dakota are required, 4
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the R-5 zone change subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the applicant dedicate ten feet of dedication along S.W.. North
Dakota Street with half-street improvements to collector street standards
prior to issuance of building permits or after performance bond for improve-
ments have been approved.
2. That construction and drainage plans be approved by the Engineering
and Building Departments prior to issuance of permits.
r 3. No Occupancy Permits shall be issued until all conditions have been satis-
fied and approved by the Planning Director and final inspections have
been made by the Building Official.
4. No, Minor Land Partitions shall be made in reference to this project unless
formal application is made to the City of Tigard Planning Department and
the Minor Land Partition is approved.
5. No changes will be made to approved plans or specifications unless formal
application is made to the appropriate department and changes are approved
by that department. Application for changes will be made in writing and
shall include applicable drawings, engineering specifications and other
details requested by the department. No construction shall take place in
these instances until after the changes have been approved. Any deviation
from this condition will result in the immediate posting of a stop work
order on the project or any portion of the project.
Report,prepared by KenS y Report reviewed by:' Al 3 Howard
Assoc. -ie� City Plannerirector
r
�y
�/ -- ►to4s E
y o ^I
60
NH9°45' 900 02.45 {000 �. ^ 1't!IAL
1ss.2 1700 i --- W :t� 200 i 1
IBOO r._ _
]00 .96AC. :96AC. N, Z.00AC. l
yZ.9t,"• 134.3 z �1•���
a 1100 W Boo s I
•i _ `=a 1
` 1200
700 �� I
i}
�L, R 9 `
1300 4 L,
C
_ V00 a
t! 10
' � N 140® .5 -�. to �� w
N I ® 500
1500 b i
6 ,
. e 1
o_ t 400
j 12
1600 f
�Lt6�CC f 300 I
13a.28 1 559016'E
60
J64.9
5090 62.43 I /b�(OTA
�3
65.2
�y t'01 1
C.R. N0. 45F2�' UNE
1.325CH NORTH
87 sr 40.60 2_65CH so�► 3000 3100
3 $x34 2800 2900
2400 2500 2.600 2700 .96AC. .92AC.
:00 2300 t26Ac. 96ac.
'A C. .96AC. .37AC 37AC. !.lBAC. 66RC.
N
M
N m, P
Ntv
T N
ewe 8
N
z i
u u
u
n67 67 P� i24.9 N P
ai �n a
� 1.00A r,
7p
di
co N
Kt
2.65 CH. ►.325CH: 174.63
3.97CH. 2.650
`11?.34 ►74.68 "" � '
R Y 3,1979.
Tigard Planning Commission
Tigard, Oregon
Following is the written narrative requested for zone change
D.
1. The property is prematly zoned R7. We are asking for R5 (residential).
2. This property has been approved by the Tigard Planning Connnission_for
the above change.
3. According to the Commission ,"new single-family homes in Tigard are priced
out of the income range of the average city household. To help remedy the ,_
situation and provide more affordable housing, the commission approved a
policy which called for 20 to 40 percent of new developable land to be
zoned for 5,000 square foot lots. Current city minimum size is 7,500 square
feet." This was taken fom an article published in the Oregon Journal.
4. The only change in environmental, economic or social conditions would be
a great improvement to the area . Two new horses on this corner would be in
in line with new homes on the street and provide a much more attractive,Area,
5. The proposed location for our proposed land use is as suitable , we feel, as
any location in the city.
6. The impact or effect the proposed developiemt would have on adjacent sites,
occupants or activities and on the immediate neighborhood is, that it would be
to the advantage of all being an attractive addition of tiro new homes An& in
place of a neglecte4 vacant corner lot...
7. _All_pubUc services are now available,to this proposed site (fire_protection,.._.._.__.
police protection, water and sewer service, schools, parks,streets, roads,
public _transportation and/or..utilitiesz )
K
E :
t
FOOM No.$10 "ANDY PA®
Stav�ns-Nass Low Pu6Gshim Ca
PorNa"d.0. qqn 9nO4
MINUTES <..
TIGARD PLANNING COMMIS( -)N
August 7, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room
( 10865 S.W. Walnut Street - Tigard, Oregon
President Tepedino OPENED the meeting at 7:35 P.M. He asked, in view of
the apparent number of persons wishing to speak, for brevity and non-
repetitiveness in public testimony.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Bonn, Funk, Helmer, Herron, Smith, Speaker, Tepedino,
Wood (who arrived at 7:55 P.M.)
Absent: Kolleas
Staff: Selby, Howard
The MINUTES of the July 17 meeting were considered. Speaker asked for
correction of page 7, pointing out that Recommendation 7 as written was correctly
handled in Recommendation 5, and therefore should be deleted; and that
Recommendation 8 should therefore be ren;.mibered 7. With this correction it was
moved, seconded ,and carried that these minutes as submitted and corrected be
approved.
The President opened the PUBLIC HEARING by reading a statement indicating
the authority for the meeting and the procedure to be followed.
5.1 ZONE CHANGE ZC 26-78 (Mackenzie/Saito & Associates) NPO 42
A request by Mackenzie/Saito & Associates for a zone map amendment with
General Plan and Program Review from Wash. Co. MA-1 "Limited
Manufacturing/Production" District to City of Tigard M-4 "Industrial Park
zone on a 44.46 acre site, south of Scholls Ferry Road (Wash. Co. Tax Map
lSl 34AA, Tax Lots 100,200,300, and 400 and Tax Map 1S1 358, Tax Lot 1700) .
Selby read the STAFF REPORT and STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, correcting
Recommendation 2 to call for " . . . . installation and maintenance to collector
street standards . . . ." (rather than 'local); and correcting Recommendation 9 to
read " . . . .apply for and receive approval of a subdivision plat
(rather than if). He then read letters as follows: from Fire District No. 1,
dated July 24, indicating approval of the plan as submitted; from the District
Engineer of the Oregon Department of Transportation detailing progress to date
in planning for S.W. Scholls Ferry Road at this point, which is complicated by
the impending development of the Southern Pacific Company's industrial park
across the road from the Koll development; and a letter received August 3 from
Donald R. Jarman, a resident of the neighboring Inglewood subdivision, commending
Koll's relations with the neighborhood and stating his approval of the project
as planned.
The APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION was rade by Eric Saito, Architect of Mackenzie/
Saito & tissOCI-atcti., r:'pn,—. -2i..`,i. y t(Au nUSizless Celli=er. Fl ltvtz doc:ed several
others from Koll Company and their consultants who would be available to answer
questions. He presented clarification of six items:
1. In the last line of page 1 of the staff report, the word "cause"
should be "allow" so as to read, "This action would allow the developer
to construct the project in phases."
2. The applicant is agreeable to working out a mutually satisfactory
arrangement for dedication and maintenance of greenway and streets, r
but pointed out Koll could grant only the rights it had under a
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISS. _J
August 7, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Page 2
long-term lease from the owners of the land.
3. He called attention to pp. 40-41 of the narrative submitted where the
request for additional conditional use for repair was defined and
explained.
4. He felt It important that all l`.he ZiV11u11.1V1141 uoco be .^.......+
Koll for tenants without a time limitation in order to avoid the
necessity for appearing repeatedly before the Planning Commission for
approval of these uses as suitable tenants can be found.
5. The project is divided into five distinct parcels of land with metes
and bounds descriptions: (1) open space; (2) access roads; (3) and
(4) Parcel A as described in the narrative, being the first phase;
(5) Parcel B, being the second phase of the project.
6. He called attention to the obvious errors in the DEQ Indirect Source
Construction Permit, reproduced on page 59, which indicates the source
site as Tigard, Washington, and the County as Multnomah.
Mr. Saito reiterated that the Washington County Fire District has approved
the circulation patterns, that Koll is working with the ODOT on the Scholls
Ferry Road intersection, and that letters from the three property owners along
Scholls Ferry--Southern Pacific, Koll, and the Robinsons--expressing agreement
as to the alignment of the intersection with Scholls Ferry Road, will shortly
be forthcoming.
There was no PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Smith asked if the public street would be dedicated. Saito replied the
streets would be dedicated--such an agreement had been reached with the lessor.
However, nothing similar has been arranged with respect to the greenway.
Bonn asked about the increased building coverage in this plan as compared
to the earlier proposal. Saito stated there is a substantial reduction in the
length of the road, and that space was saved in the realignment of the inter-
section with Scholls Ferry and by making a building two stories instead of one.
Floor elevations as indicated were questioned by Funk in relation to the
floodplain. It was pointed out there is about a three-foot difference in
elevation.of. Fanno Creek as it passes by the project. Jerry Palmer, an
engineer, acknowledged the indicated floor elevationeas in error: it was the
intention to have the floor elevation two to three feet above the floodplain
(well above the 111 feet specified in the ordinance) , and this would be
corrected. Speaker inquired the effect of a changed city ordinance, for instance,
in conne-t.i,on with Koll.'s guarantee of a tenant's ability to continue operation
(pp 18-19 of the narrative) . Bill Cox, attorney for Koll, responded that
subsequent tenants would of course have to abide by the current ordinance. It
was unclear, in discussion on the Commission, what the effect on tenants
operating under provisions of a superseded ordinance might be.
The President then closed the public hearing on this item.
MLTNUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMIS SON `
August 7, 1979 - 7.30 P.M.
Page 3
COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Since no further questions from
Commissioners appeared to be forthcoming, Speaker MOVED approval of Zone
Change ZC 26-78 PD, based on staff findings and staff recommendations, with
the two slight corrections to Recommendations 2 and 9 already noted; and that
repairs related to industrial and business equipment be added to the list of
appra\i ed conditional uses as found on pp. 40-41 of the narrative. Bonn
seconded. Smith asked staff if they were coitifortable with the drive-through
parking lots as access to the long cul-de-sac. Selby replied the plans had
been revie*abed by both the Fire District and the Public people, and neither
raised objections. Smith questioned the permitted site coverage, which staff
stated is in accordance with the previous floodplain ordinance which governs
this project. He raised the questions of adequacy of parking spaces in
relation to the increased building square footage, which Selby stated had r.it
been recalculated because the original plan had excess parking spaces. Smith
asked that a Recommendation 10 be included as follows: That the number of
parking spaces provided shall comply with the current ordinance. Speaker
added this provision to the motion, and it was agreed to by Bonn, the second.
Smith questioned whether access by large semis, for instance, would be adec•uate.
Selby pointed to Recommendation 5 which requires all such site characteristics
to be approved in the site design review process.
The motion as amended was then carried, with Wood abstaining because of an
apparent conflict of interest Wood then took the occasion to compliment the
applicant on the quality of his presentation, and especially for the candid
and factual treatment of the property tax impact of the development on Tigard
and its citizens. Mr. Saito then asked about the time limitation on the
permitted conditional uses. After discussion with the staff, it was agreed
they were inherent in the approval of the project as submitted and approved by
the City Council, and would not lapse at the end of one year if not used in
that period.
5.2 SUBDIVISION S 13-77 (Kneeland Estates) NPO #6
A request by Donald E. Pollock Investments for review of preliminary
plans for Kneeland Estates on 18.65 acre parcel, located at S.W. 92nd
Avenue near Durham Road (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 14A, Tax Lots 700,800,
and 801)
Howard stated the staff ,report submitted with the packets was that
prepared for administrative approval in June, 1977. Since substantial
construction has not been commenced within one year, the applicant must
request permission to proceed with the development at this time. The major
obstacle has been sewer service, which is just now becoming practical for
this azaa.. Avuilabil.ity "'F _e%-,!-:' service was a condition of the original
application (Recommendation 8, which did not permit recording of the final
plat until such time as public sewer service is available to the lots) . The
only change of substance is the addition of five lots along Durham Road.
Donald E. Pollock in the APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION stated simply the
development had not been pursued because of unavailability of sewer prior
to this time.
There was no PUBLIC TESTIMONY:
(
MINUTES k_n
TIGARD PLANNING COMMIS .Is
August 7, 1979 - 7;30 P.M.
Page 4
COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Howard reported that a road problem
which arose in a recent hearing on a land partition request by Ken Bouman
has been resolved in this plan for Kneeland Estates. Spaaker inquired whether
dedication of right of way for Durham Road had been required on Lot 500, which I
fronts on Durham. Staff stated this was a condition of the subdivison.
speaker also asked if there would be access by the subdivision onto Durham
Rr+ad. The answer was no.
Wood moved for approval of an extension of time on Subdivision S 13=77
based on staff findings that the conditions have not changed materially
since the original approval. The motion was seconded by Herron and
unanimously carried.
5.3a - 5,3d ZONE CHANGE ZC 15-79, ZC 16-79, ZC 17-79 & ZC 18-79
(City of Tigard)
Selby explained that when this came before the Commission previously,
eight tax lots were omitted because of only quarterly posting of the
information onto the data used by the Staff. The parcels are all annexed to
the City, developed to County standards, and are considered fully developed.
The STAFF REPORT was not read.
t
There was no PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: It was determined this is strictly an
administrative matter. Smith moved approval of Zone Changes ZC15-79 through
ZC 18-79 based on Staff Findings and Pe commendations. The motion was seconded
by Bonn and carried unanimously.
5.4 ZONE CHANGE ZC 28-79 (William A. Cochran) NPO #7
A request by Mr. & Mrs. William A. Cochran for a zone map amendment
from City of Tigard R-7 "Single Family Residential" to City of
Tigard R-5 on a .40 acre parcel, located at 10695 S.W. North Dakota
(Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S7 34D, Tax Lot 402) .
Howard read the STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Selby reported a
conversation with the developer of the lots on 106th Avenue in whichit was
suggested the applicant provide half-street improvements to 106th.
Mrs. Cochran, one of the applicants, had nothing in addition to the
staff report to offer in the APPLICM'.VS PRESENTATION.
There was no PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: There was considerable discussion as
to whether the applicant should k:e required to provide half-street improve-
ments along 106th Avenue. The background of a controversy between developers
in the area was related. It was estimated that the cost to the applicant of
improving both 106th and S.W. North Dakota would be $18,000. Smith stated as
a developer he would be quite agreeable to decalopment costs of $6,000 per lot,
feeling it not unreasonable. Staff gave reasons for not requiring the applicants
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING CObIMISSION
August 7, 1979 -.7:30 P.M.
Page 5
to provide the improvements along 106th. The President complimented Staff for
bringing out aspects of development which could be expensive for the applicant
without her realization of the fact. The consensus was the applicant should not
have to provide half-street improvements to 106th.
Thereupon Wood MOVED approval of Zone Change ZC 28-79 based on staff
Findings and Recommendations. The motion was seconded by Helmer and carried
unaniscusly.
At 8:55 P.M. the President declared a five-minute recess.
4
5.5 ZONE CHANGE ZC 27-79 (Fred Meyer, Inc.) NPO #4
A request by Fred Meyer, Inc. , for a zone map amendment from City of
Tigard R-7 "Single Family Residential" to City of Tigard C-3 "General
Commercial" zone on a 0.93+ acre parcel, located at 7410 S.W. spruce
Street (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 36AC, Tax Lots 3500, 3600, & 3700) .
The STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS were read by Howard.
Norman Krause of architects for Fred Meyer made the APPLICANT'S
PRESENTATION. He stated applicant accepts the recommendations and that
the street is already in. However, it was pointed out it was built to County
standards, which do not require a sidewalk, and that the street would have to
be brought up to City standards.
There was no PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Speaker received confirmation that
this action is that mandated in previous hearing on the enlargement of the
Garden Center in the Fred Meyer complex. He commented on the disparity of
the landscaping in the older Tigard complex as compared to the new Beaverton
complex now under construction, but acknowledged- requiring upgrading of the
whole complex on the strength of this request for a zone change affecting
only three lots was not really justified: It was agreed, however, that
the site design review called for in Recommendation 3 would require land-
scaping of these three lots in accordance with present ordinances.
Speaker MOVED approval of Zone Change ZC 27-79 based on Staff Findings
and Recommendations. The motion was seconded by Smith and carried, with
Wood abstaining because of possible conflict of interest.
5.6 CONDITIONAL USE CU 14-79 (Trademark Homes, Inc.) NPO #5
A request by TradeiTiafic. Homes, Inc. , for a condition use permit to
place a steel tank underground for diesel fuel in a M-^= "Industrial
Park" zone on a 2.76 acre parcel, located at 72nd Avenue and
Sandburg Streets (Wash, Co. Tax Map 2S1 1DC, Tax Lot 3700) -
R
)
f
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
August 7, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Pago 6
Selby stated this item is postponed until September 4 because the
applicant's request is being amended to include a zone change, for which
public notice must be given.
5.7 VARIANCE V 5-79 (Creekside Park) NPO #3
A rc;:est by Ed Gause for a variance for a sidewalk located next to
the curb in a R-10 "Single Family residential-' zone on a 5.20 acre
parcel, located at S.W. 119th and Gaarde (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 3CD,
Tax Lots 3700,3900 & 4000) .
.4
Howard read the STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
The applicant, Ed Gause, made the APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. He objected
to Recommendation 1 which calls for a 10-foot emergency easement from this
development to the Terrace Trails Subdivision cul-de-sac. He stated he would
withdraw the request for variance and build according to City Code if this
easement remained a condition.
The only PUBLIC TESTIMONY was offered by Linda Anderson, 11805 S.W.
Gaarde Street. She complained that the information which she was able to
acquire spoke only to the variance in the sidewalk, and not at all to the 10-
foot emergency easement. She felt if such an easement existed it would be used
by others--something to which she was vigorously opposed. She did not care
particularly where the sidewalk (the occasion for the variance request) was
located.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION & ACTION: Wood questioned the circumstances
surrounding the two long cul-de-sacs. The physical characteristics of the
emergency easement were described by staff. The efforts of the Fire District
to get a second access in the area were mentioned. In ensuing discussion
Mr. Gause objected strenuously to the last-minute imposition of this condition,
Which puts the burden on his development for something that has been thoroughly
considered and passed by City Council due to pressure from the people of the
neighborhood. Mr. Gause explained the reason for his variance request,
pointing out it is principally on the fill portion of the street where this is
of much significance. It was apparent the request for variance would be
abandoned before the developer would sacrifice approximately 3,000 square feet
among four lots in order to provide the desired easement.
After further discussion, Smith MOVED approval of Variance V 5-79 based
on staff Report, but including only Staff Recommendations 2 and 3, and with the
variance limited to the fill area only. The motion was seconded by Bonn.
>�ot: c:r r4yse d fii eonvivtian elle co- cern& of ihe. Staff and the Fire Marshall
arra very legitimate and are not to be minimized, but the desires of the Terrace
Trails resb3ents and the promise made to them by the City Council that there would
be no access between the two cul-de-sacs wag overruling. The motion then passed
unanimously.
5.8 MISCELLANEOUS
A request by Mrs. Ima Scott for a review of the Canterbury Woods Development.
Howard introduced this agenda item with the statement there was no formal
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
August 7, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Page 7
Staff Report. .Mrs. Ima Scott had requested the item be placed on the agenda
for consideration by the Commission. Howard readily acknowledged the City
rightly owes Mrs. Scott "a debt of gratitude" for her efforts on this project
for the response of staff in properly taking "harder looks" at other projects.
He recognized the action taken here tonight may not completely satisfy her, but
at the very least she can know she has effectively helped others.
Howard outlined issues as he saw them based on many long conversations with
Mrs. Scott a_�d others in the past. These, he said, may or may not be issued to
be brought up tonight.
4
1. Basements and lofts: Mr. Walden, Building Official met with the State
Fire Marshall in Salem today. Together they worked out a press release and a
letter to Mr. Hoffman, the developer, signed by the State Fire Marshall. The
press release stated simply that the fire, life and safety code would be met
when the buildings are ready for occupancy. The letter to Mr. Hoffman stipulated
four conditions with respect to the lofts, and three with respect to the
basements which were to be met before occupancy.
2. Chimney chases : FIoward stated there is nothing in the Code requiring
chimneys to be enclosed by chases. However, the original drawings submitted
on the project did show chases on the chimneys. Alternatives to chases would
be either painted or unpainted metal chimneys.
At this point Speaker raised the question whether this should be determined
at the level of the Planning Commission or Site Design Review. Howard stated
the issues he is bringing tonight are those he perceives as the principal
controversies between the developer and the neighbors, and that hopefully the
Commission, after hearing both sides, can present a reasonable resolution to the
conflicting views.
3. Parking area: The Fire District took equipment to the project and found
problems with movement of the equipment as originally planned. They prescribed
certain changes which will be made by the developer before occupancy.
4. Landscaping This is a long and involved story, spanning changes in City
staff which destroyed continuity. The landscape design originally submitted
was not done by a landscape architect. It had problems at the site design review
level, but apparently was ,.pproved and filed. The' developer bought a sewer ease-
ment from the Calaway Hill Homeowners, and part of the consideration, which was
duly noted on the approved landscape plan, was construction by the developer of a
'hot less than 5-foot site-obscuring fence" along the east property line. Some time
later when Howard asked Une developer for a copy of the landscape plan, he was
given a completely different plan which had been prepared by a registered !an,dsc_aye
architect subsequent to the approval of the original_ Howard stated that
approximately one-third of the landscaping according to the new plan has been
installed by the developer around units he is showing to prospective purchasers..
He offered as alternatives to the Commission, approval of the original plan;
approval of the revised plan; or approval of a plan with modifications which he
would suggest. He pointed out that a large earthen berm has been installed in the
northern and eastern part of the project which affords a degree of privacy, which :
is an issue with the adjoining residents. Large trees on this berm would enhance
the privacy desired.
t
KIN0TES
TIGARJ PLANNING COMMISSION
August 7, 1979 - 7:30 F.M.
Page 8
n
5. Vegetation, woods trail: The original plan contemplated a small detention
pond for storm runoff. This has been eliminated in favor of underground drainage,
because such ponds are a breeding ground for mosquitos. Paths through the woods
are eliminated in the interest of maintaining native vegetation intact so far as
possible.
With this introduction Howard Suyyested the Commission follow the usual format
of a public hearing.
The equivalent of an APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION was made by Joe Van Lom,
architect for the project. He first discussed the landscaping plan originally
submitted, which had a number of problems with it. The submitted plan was
rejected. It was his understanding a plan was never approved. He quoted a
passage from the design approval in. design review which(in effect)deferred final
approval until after the buildings were in place, because, it was indicated,
"better plan can be designed after the buildings are in place, since it will
coincide with vegetation loss due to construction activity." Van Lom stated
the owner was required on no less than four occasions to stake out the buildings
on the groi.uid to evaluate both the outlook and the impace on the numerous trees
in the area. He stated the idea was to formulate the final landscaping plan
after it was known what trees would be in the courtyards, etc. The plan designed
by the landscape architect was done during construction when the impact of
construction on the original setting was known. Van Lom characterized it as a
good plan, which was followed on units readied for display to prospective
buyers in the development.
Van Lom explained about the chimney chases. The original plan showed chases
about half way up. However, after viewing early construction in its envrionmentj
it was felt the "chimneys looked better without the chases and with the chimneys
exposed in that particular environment. Hence the suggestion chases be omitted
in areas where lack of them would not be vei%j'noticeable. He,thereupon.,
showed a number of slides of the project from various points, including a number
of aerial shots. Included were views of short lengths of the fence called for,
and of the berm and its buffering effect, and of chimneys with and without chases.
There was no PUBLIC TESTIMONY in favor of the project.
Speaking in opposition were:
Richard Geisert, attorney representing Mrs. Elizabeth Anderson, a resident
to the west of the project. He protested changes in the original plans
submitted for public consideration without adequate justification (presumably
subject to input frog: and approval by the public) . He protested the "save-a-tree"
philosophv as =justification for elimination of the park in the light of the
removal of trees in the half-street dedication which may or may not be further
improved ':or some years. Ue opined the bean was of little consequence in the
privacy issue when there is a vei.w from Canterbury Woods balconies looking
into Calaway Hills living rooms (applause from audience). upon being asked by
Commissioner Smith, he stated the developer should be required to build the
project in strict conformity with the plans as originally approved, even though
that requires disassembly of a variation therefrom. He felt the neighborhood
.G,
MINUTES {4
TIGARI) PLANNING COiNZIISSION
August 7, 1979 - 700 P.M.
Page 9
should have been included in the authorization process for any change, Speaker
questioned whether the removal of the trees in the half-street dedication was
required by the City. The answer given was no.
Mark Feichtinger, attorney representing the Calaway Hill Homeowners Association '
through its board of directors, asked the mei-,lbars of the Association in the p
audience to stand (pe_haps 20 to 25). He stated the Homeowners Association I.
was not in favor of dismantling the project. He called attention to the height
disparity of the buildings, which are separated by only 40 or 50 feet. He dwelt
on the function of a "good neighbor" fence. He stated his clients concerns were
limited to: (1) fir trees to afford privacy, and (2) the fence. These should be 4
installed before certificates of occupancy are issued.
Marge Davenport protested removal of trees which permitted a view from the
new buildings into her swimming pool and hot tub. She asked for 20-foot
fir trees; a fence along the south property line; replanting of trees removed
in the half-street dedication of 109th Avenue; and a fence along the west side
also.
Sandra Stewart, 14923 S.W. 106th, presented a petition bearing 72 signatures
demanding a five-foot fence and fir trees as required by the landscaping plan
approved February 23, 1978.
Forrest Hall, 14911 S.W. 106th, protested the bare chimneys and the view
afforded from the balconies into his patio and bedroom. With respect to the
landscaping, he was not particularly concerned with the changes in the interior,
but he is concerned about changes in the fir trees contemplated in the original
plan.
CROSS EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL: Mr. Van Lom stated emphatically the fence
would be built along the east side as shown on the plan (which shows it proceeding
southward until encountering significant native vegetation) . He called attention
to the fact that under the original R-7 zoning, a one-story house could be built to
within five feet of the property line, or a two-story house within seven feet.
He pointed out there is no shielding on the Calaway P_:meowners' properties, and
reiterated the fence would be built in accordance with the private agreement with s
the landowners. He asked for resolution by the Commission of the chimney chase
issue. He assured fir trees would be planted in the area.
Mr. Feichti.nger highly approved the assurance the fence would be installed,
asking that it extend along the entire east property line. He asked for tall fir
I
trees . at a density at least equal to the original plan. He commended a request I`
in a letter of July 16 from Mr. Howard to Mr. Hoffman for a six-foot sight-
.bobseuring fence, and 1.5 large Douglas fir trees as beings asically compatible )
with our needs". On questioning by Speaker as to the number of trees requested,
he referred to the original plan ..rich shows eleven. He agreed to more if the
staff felt necessary, but a minimum of eleven. Marge Davenport urged planting cf
substantial trees to afford privacy in the southwest corner and along the south
line.
{h{
f}
Y ',
MINUTES F
TIGARD PLANNING CQMMIS� ,N
r
August 7, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Page 10
Mr, Richard Geisert approved Mrs. Davenport's views, asserting the removal
of many trees along the southwestern boundary and in the 109th Avenue right of
way has caused a surface drainage problem and a privacy problem, and asserted
planting of additional trees is called for.
COM.^tISSION DISCUSSION XND ACTION: Hoaard reported that Mrs. Anderson has
sued the City in connection with this project, and that the case would probably
come to trial in November,
The Commission discussed with Staff various aspects of the chimney issue, the
fence issue, and the tree issue. Howard felt the landscaping plan as submitted by
the landscape architect would be satisfactory with the addition of fir trees along
the east and north boundaries. Smith, speaking as a developer, stressed the
importance of the placing of such trees to assure the maximum screening effect,
and suggested the developer, the Staff and the homeowners agree on the specific
location to secure the desired effect. Helmer felt that since the original plan
called for chases, they should be installed. Speaker advocated specifying a —
faxed number of trees, since what might be considered adequate to one person
might be quite inadequate to another. Howard felt this was almost mandatory under
the circumstances.
Thereupon Speaker MOVED the Commission approve: (1) chases on the chimneys,
in accordance with the original plan; (2) that a not-less-than five-foot sight-
obscuring fence be constructed, and installed along the entire east boundary so
as not to destroy significant vegetation; and (3) that eleven 20-foot fir trees
be installed on the eastern boundary, plus four on the north boundary. The
motion was seconded by Herron. Wood suggested the Commission consider the
assertions of the western and southern neighbors as to removal beyond the original
plan of trees affording privacy, and questioning whether the developer should be
required to replace some or all of them. Discussion on the Commission indicated
this was not felt practical. Speaker commented that privacy in a city cannot be
the same as in a rural setting, and suggested the opposition to this project was
perhaps in part the pains of urbanization of a previously rural environment. Smith
suggested the exposed portion of the chimneys be painted. Speaker agreed to add
this to his motion, with the consent- of the second. Thereupon the motion as :.
amended carried, with Wood abstaining.
The President then closed the public hearing portion of the meeting.
There was no OLD BUSINESS:
Under NEW BUSINESS President Tepedino read a letter of resignation from the
Planning Commission from Marc Wood. Tepedino and others expressed appreciation
for his service on the Commission. The President expressed a need for a Vice
Pre:cident, and sngaested Commissioner Speaker for the spot. This suggestion was
favorably received as a nomination, and Speaker was nar;ed Vice President.
There was discussion of apparently illegal fill in the floodplain south of
Bonita Road, and steps being taken by the City to have it removed.
It was determined the next Commission meeting would be August 21, and that
the August 14 study session as tentative planned would not be held.
. MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
August 7, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Page 11
Representative of Robert Randall Company appeared seeking guidance of the
Commission in developing the street intersection from their (Robert Randall
Apartments) development with Bonita Road in the area of S.W. 79th Avenue.
Howard rocited past histo—r and illustrated possibilities, the best of which
are not precluded by reason of development of apartments in one area, and a
grove of large ty--cs xid ruggn 3 topography in others. One problem is that
the City has no control over the property on the south side of Bonita, since
it is in the .County.
After considerable discussion, and input from Mr. Diez of
•
consultants to the Randall Company, it was the consensus the PlanningCommission
would look favorably on the proposal that the intersection of S.W. 79th Avenue
be moved to the west to line up with the proposed street from the Randall
development on the north side of Bonita, even though the angle of intersection
with Bonita is different from 90 degrees.
The President then adjourned the meeting at 12:05 A.M.