Ordinance No. 81-38A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, DENYING
APPLICATIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE (CU 14-80) AND VARIANCE (V 15-80) .
This matter came before the City Council for a decision at
the meeting of April 27, 1981. At that time the City Council had before
it minutes and transcripts of Planning Commission meetings at which the
subject applications were considered. The Council had also heard argu-
ment concerning this appeal at an earlier City Council meeting. At that
previous meeting (February 23, 1981) the Council voted four to one to
affirm the Planning Commission. At that time the Council made no explicit
findings, and, except for the minutes of the meeting, the decision was
not reduced to a written form. The applicant, through counsel, asked
that consideration of his appeal be reopened on two grounds:
First, his notice of appeal and a supporting exhibit had not
been made available to the City Council prior to the hearing, and copies
were not available for the members of the Council at the time of the
hearing.
Second, he regarded the failure to make explicit findings
and the failure to reduce the decision to a written form as prejudicial
to him.
When the Council was informed of the applicant's position
with regard to its initial hearing of his appeal it agreed to reconsider
its former position, and to give the applicant another opportunity to
argue his position before the City Council, and the Council further
agreed that findings would be made and that its decision would be made
in writing.
At the April 27, 1981 meeting Mr. Church, the applicant, pre-
sented his argument. The Council at that time had before it all of the
documents identified above, including the notice of appeal and supporting
documents.
NOW, THEREFORE, being fully advised as to the issues on this
appeal, and after full discussion of the facts, the City of Tigard does
ordain as follows:
Section 1. The City Council finds the following:
(1) The proposal which is the subject of this appeal provides
for inadequate access to the subject property, given the proposed use.
(2) The access is poor in terms of traffic safety, fire pro-
tection and police protection, and on account of the burden unposed on
properties lying between the subject property and S+3 Grant Avenue.
r
Ordinance No. 81-
Page 2
(3) The subject property is not appropriate for more than one
dwelling unit.
Section 2. Under the criteria of the conditional use ordinance of
the Cit' y aT Tigard the findings of poor access and the inappropriateness
of the use support denial of the conditional use application.
Section 3. It is not necessary to rule on the variance application.
The decision of the Planning Commission is affirmed, and the
application for conditional use is denied.
PASSED: Byarr.� vote of the City Council
this19 day--t5f Ma7, 1981.
<a
Recorder, City of and
APPROVED: This f ' day of May, 1981.
Mayor, City of Tigard
"�Fk,